Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Here we go again. A tyranny is an oppressive government. When the government continues to grow in unrestricted size do people not get oppressed? Are freedoms and liberties not at stake? Remember a massive expanse of government with the DHS and NSA during the Bush years and how things like the Patriot Act, TSA crotch grabbing and Guantanamo Bay rose to the surface? I remember you screaming about two of those things from the highest mountain... but now you're going to take what Weena said and read what you want; "Weena thinks we're going to be ruled by one person and he's going to kick down our doors and steal our gold teeth."

More government isn't always a good thing. A flourishing government isn't always good, either. A successful government might be good, but few of us on this board know what that actually is.

Are you arguing with me or with Weena?

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

You.

You quoted Weena. I explain what Weena meant (as best as I understand). I even talk about your government stealing gold teeth quote (which was in the middle of page 5... a page which is clearly dead to you now) and I reference things that you've had problems with (Patriot Act) in the past.

Just do us all a favor and don't bother returning until your reading comprehension exceeds that of an elementary school student.

You do know his question was rhetorical and/or sarcastic... right?

[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]

We're talking about economic policy, not civil rights. The money was spent on Iraq; all the DHS/NSA got was a green light, not more money.

What about big business - when it grows in unrestricted size, do people not get oppressed? Why is business less of a threat than government when it has more power over people's day-to-day lives?

What freedoms and liberties do you believe are currently at stake?

How much does North Korea or Iraq or Libya or the USSR or China or any other oppressive government that is or has existed spend on welfare, domestic development and other forms of government spending and activity not related to holding onto power through terror?

What's your basis for associating proactive government with tyranny?

(interrogative/non-rhetorical questions in bold)

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Whether you misstate what someone is saying by just plain misstating it (Dvergar) or by way of semantics (Mayo), you're still ignoring what the person is really saying and arguing about what you want to believe they're saying. Granted the idea wasn't communicated well, but it's still arguing about something that no one is really suggesting.

As for Aestu's regular wall o'text...if all this horseshit they're doing elsewhere is so fucking grand, what's holding you guys here? Go lay under one of those buses instead of insisting that we follow you underneath the wheels of the newly purchased Greyhound that's got your interest.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

This country doesn't belong to you or your ideas.

I was born here, and this is my country right or wrong. This country has been wrong before, and with tenacity, ideas that were initially unpopular gained broad acceptance, and many of popular but wrong ideas were gradually corrected.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Oh aestu, the paragon of staying on topic.

Aren't most of these countries that are the pinnacle of human achievement doing even worse economically than the big bad USA?

Depends on how you measure "the economy".

In terms of sheer GDP or per capita income, yeah, the EU's numbers aren't as high as ours. But are GDP and per capita income really the measure of a society? Or is it the capacity of a country to make a better life for its citizens, to build a more stable and equitable society? Which country, in the final analysis, really has the better quality of life for most of its people?

I haven't said America is "big and bad". Actually, what I said is that our system of government and law, although flawed, is one of the best in the world. What I said is that the main problem is how campaign donations and complex social problems undermine that system. Flawed does not mean worthless, and improved does not mean perfect.

The EU owes its existence, not just materially, but ideologically, culturally, to the United States, just as we owe our existence to Rome and the British Empire. They took a lot of our ideas and made some adjustments and improvements (while also adding a bunch of uniquely European flaws). The Romans didn't have all the answers, neither do we, and nor does the EU.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Smiles don't create jobs, put food on tables and keep people in homes.

When I think of the economy one factor I never consider is 'Happiness Indices' or other meaningless and seemingly arbitrary scales. Generally, I think of trade, budgets, GDP, employment and debt. If your model country has a boatload of debt, decades of outrageous budget deficits, high unemployment, stalling GDP growth (or one that has negative growth) and a society that is shipping jobs elsewhere, is moving towards a wholy service-based economy and has poor trade agreements... then I'd say the countries economy isn't doing so well. That countries government can only buy happiness and smiles through handouts and entitlements (purchased with borrowed money) for so long. As Jubber stated, a country like that is living beyond its means.

All those figures you name are cumulative. The overwhelming majority of the population can be homeless and destitute and those figures will still be fine and dandy. Insofar as that's true here, it's even more true in China and India.

None of those can create jobs (in the sense that having a job means a living wage and reasonable life stability), put food on tables or keep people in homes if the gains are realized by only a few.

The EU is doing all that, and more sustainably.

Again, if sheer productivity was the issue, everyone would be fed and clothed even with Iron Age technology. Here we are two thousand years later and problems that are social and economic still haven't been solved because sheer production isn't the issue.

The purpose of the economy is to serve man. Arguing that accounting is more important than what the economy does for people is madness.



Are you referring to the US or EU?

And what do you see as the driving force in what you describe?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

1) I wasn't saying GDP growth will create jobs (although it's likely to be an indicator of job creation), but I thought you were trying to allude that there are other factors which we can gauge the economy, like happiness... which I disagree with.

2) US, EU or any other that the shoe fits. The point was if an economy is faltering like the one I described then that economy isn't doing well.

You're looking to draw a total of three causal relationships:
1. Between GDP and employment
2. Between proactive government and economic stagnation
3. Between proactive government and tyranny

Well here in America, the GDP has gone up continuously almost every year, even adjusted for inflation, since World War II. Even during the first decade of the new millennium, GDP went up year after year even as employment fell.

We're no closer to full employment; in fact, the employment rate is lower now than it's been at any time since the Great Depression. Whatever you want to argue about government intervention, it certainly hasn't held the raw numbers back.

Suffice to say, though, we have enough evidence to break the causal relationship between GDP and employment that you want to draw.

Even more so since a major driving force in GDP increase is higher productivity, which means less people are needed to complete the same tasks. If we really wanted to maximize employment we would go back to tabulating numbers with slide rules, looking things up in card catalogues, and harvesting wheat with sickles. Employment would probably be near-full but GDP would go through the floor.

So having rejected the relationship between GDP and employment and general quality of life, what is your basis for arguing that the US's higher GDP necessarily results in a better life for most people than what the EU provides? Or do you not believe that's the point?

Onto proactive government and economic stagnation: again, evidence runs to the contrary since societies in both the here and now and recent and ancient past with less government have not done better; quite the contrary, in fact. The government's role in legislating the economy or day-to-day live in the Middle East, or Eastern Europe, or Africa, or any other undeveloped country, is extremely marginal, and those countries aren't doing well - quite the contrary. If what you say is true and that correlation were real, those countries would be rocketing past us in development.

So what evidence do you have to support correlation #2?

Proactive government and tyranny. I asked you what "freedoms and liberties" you thought were under threat by proactive government - you still haven't answered.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

"Proactive Government" is an Aestu term; I don't think anyone has ever used that as a legitimate term (I certainly haven't) and it could mean anything. Perhaps you should define it for us since it can have a million meanings.


This isn't true. The definition of a Recession (in economic terms) is two or more consecutive periods of Negative GDP Growth and that means the country's Product value (how much we've produced in dollars) is lower than the previous quarters. Since the great depression there have been many recessions lasting longer than a year, and several more lasting almost a year. Interestingly enough, and in contrast to what you've said, during the times of depression, unemployment rates have increased. (Use this link to follow along)

To illustrate this without jumping between pages, I pulled unemployment numbers and GDP (Nominal and Real) from Q2 2005 through Q2 2011. You'll see that during the increase in GDP, unemployment was lower.

As the GDP started to fall during the last recession, unemployment rates spiked. This chart isn't very shocking since the relationship can be seen with the information I linked in the previous paragraph.


Unemployment Since 1948


Not quite, but almost. We've had plenty of periods of low employment rates.

Ok.


Productivity is not the same as efficiency, but often times efficiency leads to greater productivity. To increase productivity, you can increase efficiency or workforce, but it'd be hard to argue that decreasing the workforce will lead to greater productivity. I'd actually think the opposite would happen - if every American was contributing to the GDP then the GDP is likely to be higher, not lower. Looking back at the graphs, during times of a stronger Real GDP our unemployment rate was lower.


I don't care much for what the EU does and I don't see them as a prime example of a strong economy since their GDP and employment rates are just as 'strong' as ours. Anyways, higher GDP in the US at current Tax rates can translate to more revenue for the government. Also, times of positive GDP growth show lower unemployment rates, meaning people have money to do things they want and buy essentials like food and health needs.


You said contrary three times in that paragraph. Anyways, assuming 'proactive government' means 'a government that likes to try to fix things', then I'd look at the bailouts of the banks (which didn't increase liquidity in the markets), the auto makers (which some are still struggling to find their footing), TARP (which didn't help the housing market), Stimulus Package (which didn't keep unemployment rates under 8% nor did it create the growth we were told it would create) and the Health Care Reform, which was said to be a giant cost-saving legislation that would let people keep their doctors... but it turns out that isn't the case since the CBO (last time I read a report) showed the cost savings to be almost nothing and my doctor stopped taking Madicare patients due to the legislation. I'd also throw in Dept. of Education not really making us smarter or our government intervention into foreign affairs aren't making us liked any more.


I was explaining what Weena said to Mayo (and others) since the message was clearly lost. My freedoms and liberties aren't knowingly infringed... well, maybe the Fourth Amendment is being infringed upon when I fly domestically. Maybe it's I don't care if a few of my liberties/freedoms are sidestepped - If the NSA want's to listen to me call my grandmother then let them waste their time - still an invasion of my privacy, right? The point that was being made (I think) is that the moment we start giving up some freedoms to the government (such as privacy in the name of security) then there isn't any knowing how far it'll go. Seriously, look at the TSA for an example; first they check your bags, then you need to take off your shoes, then it's frisking (without violating religious people but while violating everyone else), then it's electronically looking at your dick. Again, this is someone elses issue and less mine, but maybe if some of the resident monkeys didn't start acting like asses, we could've gotten an explanation from the source. All I can do is assume this is what he meant but I could be wrong.

Edit: Aetsu says 'lower employment' instead of 'higher unemployment'... edited a spot to reflect his statement.