Ye Olde US Midterm Elections Thread (With Extra Vitimins)

[Caninope]

The Democrats have won the California Senate race.

With 1% reporting? I think not.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

You probably should consider toning your post down a bit, unless you really want to be get in trouble with the mods.

Why would a god worry about mods. I will smite them.

Kinky.

[Aubelland]

What if the Senate ends up 50/50?

It'll still be a lame-duck session.

[Serrland]

What if the Senate ends up 50/50?

Then we get some real excitement, as the VP actually becomes relevant for the first time in a long time.

[Greed and Death]

No it really doesn't. Corporatism doesn't mean business in the Fascist sense. If you had read my post you would know this. Again another fail.

You are aware that Mussolini reorganized the Italian government to establish twenty-two 'corporations' which would resolve all matters of economic importance and represent the political ideas of business owners, yes?

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

According to the sources I have sighted, Fascism is inherently a Corporatist or Corporatist-influence political and economic system. If you can provide an alternative source, please do. Also, am I to presume you have stopped accusing Reagan of Corporatism?

There is Mussolini's ranting against super capitalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapit ... Fascism%29

[Luciratus]

What if the Senate ends up 50/50?

It'll still be a lame-duck session.

The House would still maintain a Republican majority, and our president is a Democrat. Thus, it would merely increase grid-lock, not necessarily create a lame-duck session.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Crappers: The Republicans just changed spots with the Dems in California. Fiorina now leads Boxer.

[Panzerjaeger]

No it really doesn't. Corporatism doesn't mean business in the Fascist sense. If you had read my post you would know this. Again another fail.

You are aware that Mussolini reorganized the Italian government to establish twenty-two 'corporations' which would resolve all matters of economic importance and represent the political ideas of business owners, yes?

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

According to the sources I have sighted, Fascism is inherently a Corporatist or Corporatist-influence political and economic system. If you can provide an alternative source, please do. Also, am I to presume you have stopped accusing Reagan of Corporatism?

Do you have reading problems? You obviously do. Let me put this in all caps since you refuse to read what I type and are attacking a strawman. This is my last post before I just put you on ignore because your ignorance is giving me a headache.

CORPORATISM IN FASCISM IS NOT RULE BY WHAT YOU KNOW AS CORPORATIONS. CORPORATIONS IN THE FASCIST SENSE IS NOTHING MORE THEN A RULING COUNCIL COMPOSED OF LEADING UNION LEADERS AND OWNERS OF VARIOUS INDUSTRIES THAT WORK TOGETHER TO COME TO DECISIONS IN REGARDS TO THE INDUSTRY. THEY ARE AND I REPEAT ARE NOT A BUSINESS THEY ARE A GOVERNING COUNCIL. CORPUS = BODY HENCE THE TERM CORPORATION WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BUSINESSES AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH REGULATING AN INDUSTRY THROUGH A GOVERNING BODY COMPOSED OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELD. I NEVER ONCE SAID REAGAN WAS A CORPORATIST SINCE HE IS NOT. I AM A CORPORATIST AND HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH REAGAN. NOW STOP POSTING BULLSHIT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE CORPORATISM AND CORPORATION DO NOT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS IN THOSE WIKI ARTICLES YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT READING.

Ok got that? Thanks.

[Supreme Marshal Petan]

America, I am ashamed of you.

Sincerely

Britain

Ha. Just wait until he backstabs the Teabagger by establishing the Church of Aqua Buddha.

And he shall have at least one faithful servant who will be willing to die for him. All Hail Aqua Buddha!

[Serrland]

You are aware that Mussolini reorganized the Italian government to establish twenty-two 'corporations' which would resolve all matters of economic importance and represent the political ideas of business owners, yes?

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

According to the sources I have sighted, Fascism is inherently a Corporatist or Corporatist-influence political and economic system. If you can provide an alternative source, please do. Also, am I to presume you have stopped accusing Reagan of Corporatism?

Do you have reading problems? You obviously do. Let me put this in all caps since you refuse to read what I type and are attacking a strawman. This is my last post before I just put you on ignore because your ignorance is giving me a headache.

CORPORATISM IN FASCISM IS NOT RULE BY WHAT YOU KNOW AS CORPORATIONS. CORPORATIONS IN THE FASCIST SENSE IS NOTHING MORE THEN A RULING COUNCIL COMPOSED OF LEADING UNION LEADERS AND OWNERS OF VARIOUS INDUSTRIES THAT WORK TOGETHER TO COME TO DECISIONS IN REGARDS TO THE INDUSTRY. THEY ARE AND I REPEAT ARE NOT A BUSINESS THEY ARE A GOVERNING COUNCIL. CORPUS = BODY HENCE THE TERM CORPORATION WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BUSINESSES AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH REGULATING AN INDUSTRY THROUGH A GOVERNING BODY COMPOSED OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELD. I NEVER ONCE SAID REAGAN WAS A CORPORATIST SINCE HE IS NOT. I AM A CORPORATIST AND HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH REAGAN. NOW STOP POSTING BULLSHIT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE CORPORATISM AND CORPORATION DO NOT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS IN THOSE WIKI ARTICLES YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT READING.

Ok got that? Thanks.

Good Lord, Panzer, my eyes! Come now, none of that, for the rest of our sakes!

[Caninope]

What if the Senate ends up 50/50?

Then we get some real excitement, as the VP actually becomes relevant for the first time in a long time.

Well if the American people had known that, I'm sure they would have wanted Obama to have picked someone else for VP.

[Panzerjaeger]

Do you have reading problems? You obviously do. Let me put this in all caps since you refuse to read what I type and are attacking a strawman. This is my last post before I just put you on ignore because your ignorance is giving me a headache.

CORPORATISM IN FASCISM IS NOT RULE BY WHAT YOU KNOW AS CORPORATIONS. CORPORATIONS IN THE FASCIST SENSE IS NOTHING MORE THEN A RULING COUNCIL COMPOSED OF LEADING UNION LEADERS AND OWNERS OF VARIOUS INDUSTRIES THAT WORK TOGETHER TO COME TO DECISIONS IN REGARDS TO THE INDUSTRY. THEY ARE AND I REPEAT ARE NOT A BUSINESS THEY ARE A GOVERNING COUNCIL. CORPUS = BODY HENCE THE TERM CORPORATION WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BUSINESSES AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH REGULATING AN INDUSTRY THROUGH A GOVERNING BODY COMPOSED OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELD. I NEVER ONCE SAID REAGAN WAS A CORPORATIST SINCE HE IS NOT. I AM A CORPORATIST AND HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH REAGAN. NOW STOP POSTING BULLSHIT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE CORPORATISM AND CORPORATION DO NOT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS IN THOSE WIKI ARTICLES YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT READING.

Ok got that? Thanks.

Good Lord, Panzer, my eyes! Come now, none of that, for the rest of our sakes!

I know but I already posted this and he entirely ignored it. So I figured he needed it bigger and more obnoxious.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Both of the California govs race and the California Senate race are too close to call.

The networks made a mistake by declaring Democratic victory in California barely one minute before the polls even closed. Reminds of that paper that declared Dewey President of the US when Dewey actually lost the election.

[Greed and Death]

Good Lord, Panzer, my eyes! Come now, none of that, for the rest of our sakes!

I know but I already posted this and he entirely ignored it. So I figured he needed it bigger and more obnoxious.

Not directly addressing you, but you know Corporatism is an ill defined term.
For instance the New Deal was seen as corporatist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_De ... orporatism
Seems corporatism can be a lbel given to both left and right economic policies.

[Caninope]

Both of the California govs race and the California Senate race are too close to call.

The networks made a mistake by declaring Democratic victory in California barely one minute before the polls even closed. Reminds of that paper that declared Dewey President of the US when Dewey actually lost the election.

I'm using NY Times.

[Panzerjaeger]

I know but I already posted this and he entirely ignored it. So I figured he needed it bigger and more obnoxious.

Not directly addressing you, but you know Corporatism is an ill defined term.
For instance the New Deal was seen as corporatist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_De ... orporatism
Seems corporatism can be a lbel given to both left and right economic policies.

Oh I am well aware but he started going on about how Fascist Corporatism = Rule by Businesses which it doesn't. I understand why he has the confusion as in America for some odd reason Corporatism means rule by actual Businesses. Whereas in Fascist Italy it meant a body of Industry Bigwigs and Union Leaders who worked in unison. Though with all the changes done to Corporatism especially in Modern Europe I can understand the confusion but I find it baffling to cite wiki sources that aren't saying what he thinks they are saying and going, "Look I'm right."

[Belschaft]

1. I agree with you analysis here pretty much entirely. However I'd argue that it produces benefits beyond the simple repairs to the road - every extra pound/dollar each worker earned is a pound/dollar they can spend elsewhere, benefiting the economy.

The problem is, it's a pound/dollar that's not backed up by any actual contribution to the economy, so when the road worker then goes and spends it, he's basically exchanging no value for some value, and so is pulling a fast one on the unlucky firm that has the "pleasure" of doing business with him. It doesn't increase the total amount of wealth in the economy--all it's done is shift some of the wealth that was already there from one party to another, and done so in a rather dishonest and sneaky fashion.

And yes, you can get the same effect by just paying them benefits - but this way we also get a repaired road.

A repaired road, yes, but in so doing the total amount of resources in the economy has suffered a net loss. I fail to see how that's a superior outcome. At least with a straight-up handout, then ignoring the effects of the bureaucracy to administer it then at least you haven't wasted the gas on a counterproductive trip out to the pothole.

There's also various other jobs supported by the road repairs - the company that makes tarmac for example.

But again, since the purchases made from these firms don't actually represent a positive contribution to the total size of the economy, all it's doing is shifting resources around. And you're going to have the bureaucracy whether you do make-work programs or just give out handouts; at least handouts don't waste other resources on top of that.

2. While it is true that in the long run this can lead to problems, in the short term it supports the economy when it needs the help. In the long run it can be dealt with - the short term increase in consumer and business confidence is more important.

I've got homework I've put off far too long; hopefully I can get to this later on. But in short: you and Keynes are right in the short run; the problem is ending such policies after that "short run" has expired.

1a. While it's true that the act hasn't created any wealth physically, I'm not sure that really matters. To a great degree our concept of 'wealth' is false, as such a great proportion of our economy only exists in theoretical terms nowadays. Does, for example, Apple hold assets with a real world value equivalent to the billions it's worth on the stock market? Of course not, but nevertheless the economy keeps on turning. Does a share which has had it's value inflated by a factor of ten by speculators actually have that value? Again, no. While he may be exchanging sometihng with no value for something with value, as long as the basic principles upon which the modern economy functions remain the same this doesn't actually matter. As such, governments can manipulate this to create false wealth. Yes, it is sneaky and dishonest, but it works, as long as we keep pretending that it has value.

(I'm not sure I worded that very well, but I think my general point is clear enough)

1b. I'd contend that the trip isn't counter-productive, and nor is the gas wasted. Nor is there a net loss of resources in the economy. It is precisely because resources have been used that the trick works. While some will have inevitably been lost, the question is does the act create a net gain elsewhere? By 'faking' an increase in employment do we create more new wealth than was spent? If we do we have been successful, as not only have we redistributed the resources but we've increased the total amount available.

1c. This very much leads on from 1b. While the states direct interaction with the company - be it from buying tarmac, subcontracting work or even hiring more street cleaners - doesn't grow the economy does it in turn lead to growth? If a company has to hire more people to fill a government contract, then employment rises. As such spending rises. As such other companies have to produce more and so on and so on...

The key thing here is that the government isn't creating any wealth or growth, but stimulating the economy so it does so itself. The wealth is created when the company interacting with the government interacts with another company. Now this can be compared to building a house of cards without the bottom layer, but I don't think it matters. Wealth has been created, more wealth than was lost in the process. Eventually this will reach a point where the support of the government is no longer required, and the issue the exchange featuring fake wealth ceases to matter.


This is just a rough argument, as the debate is approaching the edges of my ability to argue economics. However, I believe my argument is sound here - while I do not contest your basic position that the worker is trading sometihng that isn't actually backed by economic value, I disagree that this is a problem.

[WorldofWilly]

I would just like to say to you Left wing idiots that I was right about Rand Paul winning and your dumb asses were wrong. I predicted perfectly what was going to happen in this old thread 6 months ago.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=51769&start=50

This thread was locked probably so you idiots could hide your dumbass statements. Especially the ones about the economy getting better and Rand Paul winning the elections.

You guys should go back to the above thread and read page 3 and on where I make my brilliant statements and you will see I am a seer and a genius who was spot on in this election. I hope you all will read this and realize you all are lower progressive dunces who are not worthy of sniffing the crotch section on my skidmarked underwear.

Now if any of you would like to meet me somewhere where all you lesser humans will have the privileged of lining up to kiss my wrinkled, hairy ass. I do not just want a peck on the cheek either I expect you all to rim my hairy bunghole and admit that I am a conservative god and that you are all progressive slime who will submit to worshiping my bunghole for the rest of your measly, insignificant, liberal lives.

A homosexual ,tea party nutcase with a scat fetish...my, what is the world coming to.

How dare you speak to your betters that way! Read the thread of my perfect predictions and you will see how omniscient, wise and spectacular my predictions were. If you dare speak to me that way again I SHALL SMITE YOU!

[Panzerjaeger]

A homosexual ,tea party nutcase with a scat fetish...my, what is the world coming to.

How dare you speak to your betters that way! Read the thread of my perfect predictions and you will see how omniscient, wise and spectacular my predictions were. If you dare speak to me that way again I SHALL SMITE YOU!

For someone who just got an unofficial warning I would cool your jets.

[Luciratus]

You are aware that Mussolini reorganized the Italian government to establish twenty-two 'corporations' which would resolve all matters of economic importance and represent the political ideas of business owners, yes?

"Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

According to the sources I have sighted, Fascism is inherently a Corporatist or Corporatist-influence political and economic system. If you can provide an alternative source, please do. Also, am I to presume you have stopped accusing Reagan of Corporatism?

Do you have reading problems? You obviously do. Let me put this in all caps since you refuse to read what I type and are attacking a strawman. This is my last post before I just put you on ignore because your ignorance is giving me a headache.

CORPORATISM IN FASCISM IS NOT RULE BY WHAT YOU KNOW AS CORPORATIONS. CORPORATIONS IN THE FASCIST SENSE IS NOTHING MORE THEN A RULING COUNCIL COMPOSED OF LEADING UNION LEADERS AND OWNERS OF VARIOUS INDUSTRIES THAT WORK TOGETHER TO COME TO DECISIONS IN REGARDS TO THE INDUSTRY. THEY ARE AND I REPEAT ARE NOT A BUSINESS THEY ARE A GOVERNING COUNCIL. CORPUS = BODY HENCE THE TERM CORPORATION WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BUSINESSES AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH REGULATING AN INDUSTRY THROUGH A GOVERNING BODY COMPOSED OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELD. I NEVER ONCE SAID REAGAN WAS A CORPORATIST SINCE HE IS NOT. I AM A CORPORATIST AND HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH REAGAN. NOW STOP POSTING BULLSHIT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE CORPORATISM AND CORPORATION DO NOT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS IN THOSE WIKI ARTICLES YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT READING.

Ok got that? Thanks.

In practice labor held no power under Mussolini's or Hitler's regimes. It was essentially business owners cooperating with the government to form policy. Various books on Fascist economic policy will attest to this fact (I am willing to provide titles and authors of economic and political experts on the ideologies.). The terms are related and denote regulating politics or industry in conjugtion with the other. Every article I have read affirms this. How am I attacking a strawman? I am merely stating that every article and book I have knowledge of contradicts what you are saying. I merely requested an article to disprove or inform me of my mistakes, and you respond by reiterating the same thing I just showed evidence against. You did imply that Reagan transformed America into a Corporate whore, which I stated was similar to Fascism and State Corporatism. I understand your arugment partially, but I do not believe are fully aware of the policies initiated and associated with Fascism.

greed and death: I find such an argument amusing, considering the policies that Mussolini enacted. Such an argument is utterly out of base with reality. Early capitalists received a developed in a different fashion compared to the industries which essentially aided in governing under the Fascist regimes of Europe. Mussolini himself was an uber-capitalist, and his railings against Fascism do not rebute his own policies.

[Allrule]

How dare you speak to your betters that way! Read the thread of my perfect predictions and you will see how omniscient, wise and spectacular my predictions were. If you dare speak to me that way again I SHALL SMITE YOU!

For someone who just got an unofficial warning I would cool your jets.

I think he's being facetious...

[Wilgrove]

How dare you speak to your betters that way! Read the thread of my perfect predictions and you will see how omniscient, wise and spectacular my predictions were. If you dare speak to me that way again I SHALL SMITE YOU!

For someone who just got an unofficial warning I would cool your jets.

I think it's a Suicide By Mod.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica-]

Both of the California govs race and the California Senate race are too close to call.

The networks made a mistake by declaring Democratic victory in California barely one minute before the polls even closed. Reminds of that paper that declared Dewey President of the US when Dewey actually lost the election.

I'm using NY Times.

Is theirs up? I'm using MSNBC and Fox and CNN. The California Secretary of State website's election results page is down.

[Aubelland]

For someone who just got an unofficial warning I would cool your jets.

I think it's a Suicide By Mod.

It's amazing how easy you people are to troll.

NOTE: I am not the troll, just making an honest comment.

[Panzerjaeger]

In practice labor held no power under Mussolini's or Hitler's regimes. It was essentially business owners cooperating with the government to form policy. Various books on Fascist economic policy will attest to this fact (I am willing to provide titles and authors of economic and political experts on the ideologies.). The terms are related and denote regulating politics or industry in conjugtion with the other. Every article I have read affirms this. How am I attacking a strawman? I am merely stating that every article and book I have knowledge of contradicts what you are saying. I merely requested an article to disprove or inform me of my mistakes, and you respond by reiterating the same thing I just showed evidence against. You did imply that Reagan transformed America into a Corporate whore, which I stated was similar to Fascism and State Corporatism. I understand your arugment partially, but I do not believe are fully aware of the policies initiated and associated with Fascism.

greed and death: I find such an argument amusing, considering the policies that Mussolini enacted. Such an argument is utterly out of base with reality. Early capitalists received a developed in a different fashion compared to the industries which essentially aided in governing under the Fascist regimes of Europe. Mussolini himself was an uber-capitalist, and his railings against Fascism do not rebute his own policies.

Oh for Christ's sake. I love this. As a Fascist you don't understand fascist policy. Welcome to ignore I am not repeating myself to the end of time to the Illiterate.

I love how you even admit you have no clue what I am talking about yet want to discuss Fascist Corporatism. Try somewhere else child I don't have the patience for your nonsense and inability to understand the articles you cite from Wikipedia.