http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpo … re=related
please watch and comment. How can you argue against this?
please watch and comment. How can you argue against this?
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
I watched the whole thing also, and his arguments are pretty damn solid. I don't have much of a background in economics, but Friedman does explain things in a way that make sense to the layman. I watched a few other episodes of Donahue (with Ayn Rand, actually) and I wish there were shows like that on today--if there are, I don't know about them.lowing wrote:
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
Donahue, is a flaming liberal and is probably creaming himself at the thoughts of Obama in office. However I will give him credit for one thing. he damn sure knew when he was out matched and when to shut up. he knew there was no way he could defend his liberal ideology bullshit to Dr. Friedman. iwas quite impressed with the good Dr.SenorToenails wrote:
I watched the whole thing also, and his arguments are pretty damn solid. I don't have much of a background in economics, but Friedman does explain things in a way that make sense to the layman. I watched a few other episodes of Donahue (with Ayn Rand, actually) and I wish there were shows like that on today--if there are, I don't know about them.lowing wrote:
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
LOL 85 views and the liberals are stay in the shadows....Not much you say to counter this man is there?
Last edited by lowing (2010-08-10 19:10:43)
Friedman is completely wrong in one respect. He states that "the great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus." That's true except for one small problem..... NASA.
NASA is a government bureau that has actually spawned several technological advances and continues to do so.
In addition to this, a large portion of medical research is carried out by universities -- most of them public -- with government funding in addition to private funding.
So while Friedman is correct that advances are driven by greed and ambition via individuals, they certainly are not divorced from public funding or government bureaus.
NASA is a government bureau that has actually spawned several technological advances and continues to do so.
In addition to this, a large portion of medical research is carried out by universities -- most of them public -- with government funding in addition to private funding.
So while Friedman is correct that advances are driven by greed and ambition via individuals, they certainly are not divorced from public funding or government bureaus.
I meant more that I wish there were more shows that interview intelligent people and have Q&A sessions like Donahue seemed to have.lowing wrote:
Donahue, is a flaming liberal and is probably creaming himself at the thoughts of Obama in office. However I will give him credit for one thing. he damn sure knew when he was out matched and when to shut up. he knew there was no way he could defend his liberal ideology bullshit to Dr. Friedman. iwas quite impressed with the good Dr.SenorToenails wrote:
I watched the whole thing also, and his arguments are pretty damn solid. I don't have much of a background in economics, but Friedman does explain things in a way that make sense to the layman. I watched a few other episodes of Donahue (with Ayn Rand, actually) and I wish there were shows like that on today--if there are, I don't know about them.lowing wrote:
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
LOL 85 views and the liberals are stay in the shadows....Not much you say to counter this man is there?
I find it funny that most speakers of socialism has no economic backgrounds (eg Naomi Klein).
Not just medical research...Turquoise wrote:
Friedman is completely wrong in one respect. He states that "the great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus." That's true except for one small problem..... NASA.
NASA is a government bureau that has actually spawned several technological advances and continues to do so.
In addition to this, a large portion of medical research is carried out by universities -- most of them public -- with government funding in addition to private funding.
So while Friedman is correct that advances are driven by greed and ambition via individuals, they certainly are not divorced from public funding or government bureaus.
And I'd mention Manhattan in there as well. As important as NASA in terms of bringing revolutionary technology into the world (and I talk about more than just nukes)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Free trade could have been the best social system.
It's not, and you fucking know why.
It's not, and you fucking know why.
So what are the arguments?lowing wrote:
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
I don't have sound on my work computer and will prolly have forgotten this thread when I get home ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Get sound and watch this. It is probably the most single comprehensive argument regarding socialism, capitalism, "greed", govt. intervention, economics, free choice etc. that is to be seen. Not even the liberal talk show host Phill Donahue can argue against what this man says. He is completely shut down. To Donahue's credit however, he knows when to stay down.Varegg wrote:
So what are the arguments?lowing wrote:
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
I don't have sound on my work computer and will prolly have forgotten this thread when I get home ...
Nope you are wrong, the onlt thing NASA does is set a mission and push the launch button. The vehicles that fly, the equipment in the control rooms, the research carried to space are all private companies R and D. It was contractors that designed the rocket that put another contractors LEM on the moon. Contractors bid and present designs to the govt. ( NASA) for the building of whatever design perameters NASA has laid out.Turquoise wrote:
Friedman is completely wrong in one respect. He states that "the great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus." That's true except for one small problem..... NASA.
NASA is a government bureau that has actually spawned several technological advances and continues to do so.
In addition to this, a large portion of medical research is carried out by universities -- most of them public -- with government funding in addition to private funding.
So while Friedman is correct that advances are driven by greed and ambition via individuals, they certainly are not divorced from public funding or government bureaus.
Govt. did not build the weapons or airplanes or tanks that won WW2, nor did they build a thing that put us on the moon. Private companies did.
The plans, designs etc. are kind of important.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
They do not have plans, or designs the plans and designs are those of the contractors.Spark wrote:
The plans, designs etc. are kind of important.
Govt. has a desire, be it a space plane, a bridge, a building, a dam etc... and they hire out to the best contractor to fulfill that desire. ( I use the best contractor loosely, but you get what I mean.)
It's hardly "yeah build us a rocket that gets us to the moon" then walk away. I'm pretty sure NASA/NASA officials were very deeply involved in every stage of the process, to say the least (and there is much more one could say)lowing wrote:
They do not have plans, or designs the plans and designs are those of the contractors.Spark wrote:
The plans, designs etc. are kind of important.
Govt. has a desire, be it a space plane, a bridge, a building, a dam etc... and they hire out to the best contractor to fulfill that desire. ( I use the best contractor loosely, but you get what I mean.)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Simply put, that is exactly what they say....Granted, they are there approving designs, changing their minds on what they want as they go. but yes, build us a rocket that can go to the moon, build us a bomber that can pressurize, reach a ceiling of 35,000 ft, have a range of 2000 miles etc...Yes Spark, "build us "X" that can do "Y"" is exactly what the govt. does.Spark wrote:
It's hardly "yeah build us a rocket that gets us to the moon" then walk away. I'm pretty sure NASA/NASA officials were very deeply involved in every stage of the process, to say the least (and there is much more one could say)lowing wrote:
They do not have plans, or designs the plans and designs are those of the contractors.Spark wrote:
The plans, designs etc. are kind of important.
Govt. has a desire, be it a space plane, a bridge, a building, a dam etc... and they hire out to the best contractor to fulfill that desire. ( I use the best contractor loosely, but you get what I mean.)
If it's that comprehensive and the arguments so damn good you shouldn't have much of a problem to post a breif resume on the forum ... or?lowing wrote:
Get sound and watch this. It is probably the most single comprehensive argument regarding socialism, capitalism, "greed", govt. intervention, economics, free choice etc. that is to be seen. Not even the liberal talk show host Phill Donahue can argue against what this man says. He is completely shut down. To Donahue's credit however, he knows when to stay down.Varegg wrote:
So what are the arguments?lowing wrote:
I watched the whole thing and it is very interesting. Arguments that no liberal can defend. Probably why the liberal trash in this forum is avoiding addressing anything Dr. Friedman said. Actually it is best yuo don't even try. Just know you are wrong in your beliefs as Phill Donahue now does..
I don't have sound on my work computer and will prolly have forgotten this thread when I get home ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
I did...It is in the OP...if you want to watch the whole thing, see the next link Senortoenails provided.Varegg wrote:
If it's that comprehensive and the arguments so damn good you shouldn't have much of a problem to post a breif resume on the forum ... or?lowing wrote:
Get sound and watch this. It is probably the most single comprehensive argument regarding socialism, capitalism, "greed", govt. intervention, economics, free choice etc. that is to be seen. Not even the liberal talk show host Phill Donahue can argue against what this man says. He is completely shut down. To Donahue's credit however, he knows when to stay down.Varegg wrote:
So what are the arguments?
I don't have sound on my work computer and will prolly have forgotten this thread when I get home ...
Infact you didn't ... you have both posted a youtube link ... nothing more ... that's not a resume.lowing wrote:
I did...It is in the OP...if you want to watch the whole thing, see the next link Senortoenails provided.Varegg wrote:
If it's that comprehensive and the arguments so damn good you shouldn't have much of a problem to post a breif resume on the forum ... or?lowing wrote:
Get sound and watch this. It is probably the most single comprehensive argument regarding socialism, capitalism, "greed", govt. intervention, economics, free choice etc. that is to be seen. Not even the liberal talk show host Phill Donahue can argue against what this man says. He is completely shut down. To Donahue's credit however, he knows when to stay down.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
I gave you his name, if you really wanted know anything about him or his POV you would have looked him up.Varegg wrote:
Infact you didn't ... you have both posted a youtube link ... nothing more ... that's not a resume.lowing wrote:
I did...It is in the OP...if you want to watch the whole thing, see the next link Senortoenails provided.Varegg wrote:
If it's that comprehensive and the arguments so damn good you shouldn't have much of a problem to post a breif resume on the forum ... or?
He is right about greed existing in in socialism as well as capitalism, can he really deny that capitalism allows for greater exploitation than socialism?
"you know life is what we make it, and a chance is like a picture, it'd be nice if you just take it"
It doesn't matter who designed it, who built it, who used it. The money came directly from the Government. Governments are major financial backer for thousands of innovative projects all around the world, and the military is one of the greatest innovate institutions around, fully financed by the government and tax payers.lowing wrote:
Simply put, that is exactly what they say....Granted, they are there approving designs, changing their minds on what they want as they go. but yes, build us a rocket that can go to the moon, build us a bomber that can pressurize, reach a ceiling of 35,000 ft, have a range of 2000 miles etc...Yes Spark, "build us "X" that can do "Y"" is exactly what the govt. does.Spark wrote:
It's hardly "yeah build us a rocket that gets us to the moon" then walk away. I'm pretty sure NASA/NASA officials were very deeply involved in every stage of the process, to say the least (and there is much more one could say)lowing wrote:
They do not have plans, or designs the plans and designs are those of the contractors.
Govt. has a desire, be it a space plane, a bridge, a building, a dam etc... and they hire out to the best contractor to fulfill that desire. ( I use the best contractor loosely, but you get what I mean.)
His argument is it is that evil profit that society functions. and that capitalist societies, serve the general public and its quality of life far greater than any other society.d4rkst4r wrote:
He is right about greed existing in in socialism as well as capitalism, can he really deny that capitalism allows for greater exploitation than socialism?
Radar came from govt labs, jet engines were developed in govt labs, nuclear power from govt labs.Turquoise wrote:
Friedman is completely wrong in one respect. He states that "the great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus." That's true except for one small problem..... NASA.
NASA is a government bureau that has actually spawned several technological advances and continues to do so.
In addition to this, a large portion of medical research is carried out by universities -- most of them public -- with government funding in addition to private funding.
So while Friedman is correct that advances are driven by greed and ambition via individuals, they certainly are not divorced from public funding or government bureaus.
I could go on.
Fuck Israel