All Things Econ

[The Liberated Territories]

I never said I never taken a course in econ, I said I do not specialize in econ.

But lo, the dismal science strikes again.

Well all you've talking down to me and being dismissive. Why should I treat you any differently, then you treat me?

Because I know for a fact that because you responded in such a manner, you earn my respect, since a lot of people have responded to me similarly and have gotten away with it, and it has almost become second nature to strike first. But I apologize.

[Bojikami]

I'd like to know how much people's views on economics have shifted over time. Originally, I was a social "liberal", but gradually shifted towards conservatism and then eventually to libertarianism. My views still change, though, if I come across new information.

I used to be a nationalist stratocrat. Now, I am an anarcho-communist.

[The Liberated Territories]

I'd like to know how much people's views on economics have shifted over time. Originally, I was a social "liberal", but gradually shifted towards conservatism and then eventually to libertarianism. My views still change, though, if I come across new information.

I used to be a nationalist stratocrat. Now, I am an anarcho-communist.

What's a stratocrat? Ruler of the stratosphere?

[Neo Rome Republic]

Well all you've talking down to me and being dismissive. Why should I treat you any differently, then you treat me?

Because I know for a fact that because you responded in such a manner, you earn my respect, since a lot of people have responded to me similarly and have gotten away with it, and it has almost become second nature to strike first. But I apologize.

Alright then. Since you've retracted, I can forgive you. I admit I wasn't prepared for a strike, so I got jumpy, this didn't seem like one of those "I'm right you're wrong" debates. It seemed more like one of those where people simply state their beliefs.
Ill try to be more prepared for ninjas like you in the future.

[Neo Rome Republic]

I used to be a nationalist stratocrat. Now, I am an anarcho-communist.

What's a stratocrat? Ruler of the stratosphere?

A belief that the Government should be run by the Military.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratocracy

[The Liberated Territories]

Because I know for a fact that because you responded in such a manner, you earn my respect, since a lot of people have responded to me similarly and have gotten away with it, and it has almost become second nature to strike first. But I apologize.

Alright then. Since you've retracted, I can forgive you. I admit I wasn't prepared for a strike, so I got jumpy, this didn't seem like one of those "I'm right you're wrong" debates, it seemed more like one of those where people simply state their beliefs. Seeing as all the Socialists were able to state their opinions without much strikes, it came as a surprise that you'd strike me.

Thank you. Ditto.

Syndicalist corporatism, right? Do you believe that joining a syndic should be apart of the contract (like health insurance in America is now) regardless of consent? Or would these syndics be operated differently or seperate?

What's a stratocrat? Ruler of the stratosphere?

A belief that the Government should be run by the Military.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratocracy

So like a military junta ala Pinochet?

[Communal Ecotopia]

Syndicalism. It's possible with voluntary consensus. I don't know how you can't understand that.

It because those two words are radically different.

Are you in the US? Because, if you are, I can understand the confusion. But the original term libertarian originated on the Left to suggest a mode of socialism or communism that did not originate from, nor maintain itself with, a monopoly of state force or, indeed, with strong pressure from a state entity at all.

[Conscentia]

What's a stratocrat? Ruler of the stratosphere?

A belief that the Government should be run by the Military.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratocracy

Stratocrat would refer to someone who is a part of a stratocracy, in the same that a technocrat is a member of a technocracy.
Someone who advocates stratocracy would more properly be something along the lines of stratocratist.

[Communal Ecotopia]

Stop. Just stop. Democratic Communism? Fine. Anarcho-Communism? A little wired, fine. But Libertarian Communism?

Well, considering the first person ever to self identify as a libertarian, Joseph Déjacque, was a communist, it is the most sensible usage of the term.

Beat me to it. I should have known.

[The Liberated Territories]

Syndicalism. It's possible with voluntary consensus. I don't know how you can't understand that.

It because those two words are radically different.

In libertarian circles at least,

capital "L" Libertarianism refers to neo-classical liberalism, which may or may not be anarchistic and isn't socialist at the least, while smaller l libertarian means any ideology that trumps individual liberty over authoritarian rule.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Alright then. Since you've retracted, I can forgive you. I admit I wasn't prepared for a strike, so I got jumpy, this didn't seem like one of those "I'm right you're wrong" debates, it seemed more like one of those where people simply state their beliefs. Seeing as all the Socialists were able to state their opinions without much strikes, it came as a surprise that you'd strike me.

Thank you. Ditto.

Syndicalist corporatism, right? Do you believe that joining a syndic should be apart of the contract (like health insurance in America is now) regardless of consent? Or would these syndics be operated differently or seperate?

A belief that the Government should be run by the Military.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratocracy

So like a military junta ala Pinochet?

I simply call it "National Syndicalism". Since that is the most accurate name for it. I envisioned two groups of syndicates, ones that are run cooperatively run free enterprises, and ones that is given for public companies where it is able to work well, maybe even as an incentive prize for government workers.

[The Liberated Territories]

Well, considering the first person ever to self identify as a libertarian, Joseph Déjacque, was a communist, it is the most sensible usage of the term.

Beat me to it. I should have known.

The first use of the term was however used to proponents of free will.

And besides, it was Proudhon who first identified himself as a libertarian, not Joseph Dejacque.

[Arkolon]

Where on earth did you take that economics class?

I am not going to dignify you with an answer. I can clearly see I'm being talked down to. This is simply a discussion for people to introduce what their economics are, not a contest to see who's right and wrong.

Riiiiiight.

[Arkolon]

They weren't exactly wrong. The downfall of the Nordic welfare model hit its hardest in the 1990s, and when the rightist government came into power in Sweden in 2006 there were tax cuts as well as spending cuts, which is why their editorial on that wasn't totally wrong. The Nordic welfare state only really started progressing heavily in the 1970s, and they were then, and are now, comparably worse off than they used to be forty years ago. The Nordic countries maintain their large welfare states by pro-market trade and regulatory policies, which made them all the richer. The gargantuan welfare state began reversing that.

In the US, "Far left" means Progressive Democrat. On a worldwide scale, you might just be centre-right. I mean, I don't want to offend you if that's the problem at hand. You can call yourself whatever you want. What's your compass, by the way, if it isn't in your sig and I'm about to see it when I submit this post.

Well, I retook the test...and I have moved to the right.
.12 Right
-6.75 Libertarian

Not bad, not bad. Where were you before, do you know?

[Neo Rome Republic]

I am not going to dignify you with an answer. I can clearly see I'm being talked down to. This is simply a discussion for people to introduce what their economics are, not a contest to see who's right and wrong.

Riiiiiight.

Alright Ill ask simply, what is your problem with me?

[Conscentia]

It because those two words are radically different.

In libertarian circles at least,

capital "L" Libertarianism refers to neo-classical liberalism, which may or may not be anarchistic and isn't socialist at the least, while smaller l libertarian means any ideology that trumps individual liberty over authoritarian rule.

What? No.
In English, proper nouns are capitalised. Where one has "Libertarianism", it refers to a proper noun - ie. it refers to the platform/ideology of a Libertarian Party.
The lower case refers to the antonym of authoritarianism.

[Kelinfort]

Well, I retook the test...and I have moved to the right.
.12 Right
-6.75 Libertarian

Not bad, not bad. Where were you before, do you know?

Originally, my first ever test, I started at 5.5, 6, then a while later, I had moved to -4.8, -1. Then I moved to -1.75, -4.5. So I am moving closer to centre and I have always trended towards social libertarianism after my first test.

[The Liberated Territories]

Thank you. Ditto.

Syndicalist corporatism, right? Do you believe that joining a syndic should be apart of the contract (like health insurance in America is now) regardless of consent? Or would these syndics be operated differently or seperate?



So like a military junta ala Pinochet?

I simply call it "National Syndicalism". Since that is the most accurate name for it. I envisioned two groups of syndicates, ones that are run democratically run free enterprises, and ones that is given for public companies where it is able to work well, maybe even as an incentive prize for government workers.

So these syndics would be created by the workers in a manner similar to feudal trade unions, correct?

Would almost everyone belong to either one of your syndicates, or only for corporations that prove essential for civilization? Is participation voluntary on both the workers and corporations end, or would participation and it's existence be propped up by the state? I say this because there are a lot of jobs that probably wouldn't fit well in democratic cooperatives, or it would be expensive to maintain such a monopoly unless it comes out naturally (e.g. it is most efficient to maintain). Plus, it would have to adhere to the laws of supply and demand like every system.

Also, what's the stance towards small business?

[Arkolon]

Riiiiiight.

Alright Ill ask simply, what is your problem with me?

You come in here saying Keynesiano-corporatism was the only idea possibly defended and acclaimed by taking an economics class, and when we ask why you shy away from us and consider us violent. You said something really controversial in a thread filled with people who took economics and who all espoused a somewhat more liberal economy, but you proposed its anathema without any backing at all. My problem with you is that you haven't actually contributed to the thread despite telling us we're all wrong.

[Arkolon]

Not bad, not bad. Where were you before, do you know?

Originally, my first ever test, I started at 5.5, 6, then a while later, I had moved to -4.8, -1. Then I moved to -1.75, -4.5. So I am moving closer to centre and I have always trended towards social libertarianism after my first test.

+6 social? Murkwood would have been proud. Think you'll ever drift further into the bottom-right quadrant?

[Threlizdun]

Well, considering the first person ever to self identify as a libertarian, Joseph Déjacque, was a communist, it is the most sensible usage of the term.

Beat me to it. I should have known.

If there is ever a time that I do not correct the usage of the term " libertarian", then there is clearly something terribly wrong with me that day and you should call for help immediately.

Beat me to it. I should have known.

The first use of the term was however used to proponents of free will.

Philosophically yes, it was first used as a term to refer to those who believed in free will over determinism (or later with hard incompatibilism). However, as a term to describe political ideology it was first used by Dejacque.

And besides, it was Proudhon who first identified himself as a libertarian, not Joseph Dejacque.

Nope
http://anarchopac.wordpress.com/2013/08 ... bertarian/
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ ... ibertarian

[Auroya]

I'm not actually terribly sure what I qualify as. I generally believe that a mixed economy is a good thing provided that the balance could be gotten right, support some inheritance tax, as little tax (if any) as possible for lower-income families/individuals, a progressive tax rate, and nationalized healthcare amongst other things. My views do change over time, though.

[America Libertaria]

I am a left wing Keynesian State Capitalist.

[Kelinfort]

Originally, my first ever test, I started at 5.5, 6, then a while later, I had moved to -4.8, -1. Then I moved to -1.75, -4.5. So I am moving closer to centre and I have always trended towards social libertarianism after my first test.

+6 social? Murkwood would have been proud. Think you'll ever drift further into the bottom-right quadrant?

Perhaps. Only time will tell.

[ArchDisae]

Hello all,

I recently decided on an issue for my nation and was somewhat surprised by the result, I want to know what others think.

The issue was regarding prisoners and I essentially chose that prisoners will be forced into slavery by corporation. I did this thinking that my nation's economy would be improved by this choice and civil rights would decrease. I was surprised to find that the economy did not increase at all, but civil rights plummeted a few grades as I thought may happen.

I'm just somewhat confused as to why having about 1% of the population (prisoners) being forced to do work did not improve the economy at all? They could at least improve the infrastructure.

The reasoning for my belief was as follows:

In the US (I don't know about other countries) it costs about 30000 to keep an inmate in prison. This cost would be virtually eliminated if the prisoner were to work in slave labor.

Some might believe that prisoners already are forced into labor, but how would this change the Civil Rights meter if they already are in prison? Then there would not be a change in the amount of civil rights a prisoner has.

Lastly, some say it doesn't make a change because it takes jobs away from others, but if a nation became more efficient at producing a given product, then other nations' customers would buy the more efficient product, thus sending more money into the nation that is competitive.