Monday, August 30, 2010

Just Who is Funding What?

In today's column, Paul Krugman derides what he calls a Republican "witch hunt" because, well, politics has become a pretty ugly thing. If he were to do what I do -- not watch TV or listen to talk radio -- then perhaps his poor life would be a bit more peaceful.

At one level, I can agree with him. I am not enamored with Glenn Beck's antics, I don't listen to Limbaugh, am sick of the "Ground Zero Mosque" nonsense, and I don't believe that President Obama is a closet (or even open) Muslim, nor am I on a grand search for his birth certificate. Furthermore, I don't believe that Mexicans and Central Americans slipping into our border states is a "threat to national security," and I fear that conservatives are going to be pushing the dreaded "Your papers, please," regime upon us -- something that Democrats ultimately would embrace too, given that it would give them more power over those dreaded Republicans traveling about the country.

I am watching more and more Republicans making these things their central talking points, which is why I stay away from party politics. However, in reading Krugman's list of bogeymen, I think that he is also being his usual dishonest self. We read:
...powerful forces are promoting and exploiting this rage. Jane Mayer’s new article in The New Yorker about the superrich Koch brothers and their war against Mr. Obama has generated much-justified attention, but as Ms. Mayer herself points out, only the scale of their effort is new: billionaires like Richard Mellon Scaife waged a similar war against Bill Clinton.
Since I don't receive money from any of these folks nor work for their organizations (although I have published some articles in Cato's magazine, Regulation), I'm not beholden to any of them. But, for all of the hoopla about those dreaded rich people funding things Krugman doesn't like, let us not forget that Krugman and the Democrats have their own billionaire benefactors, led by George Soros.

Yes, if you look at huge numbers of organizations -- including those organizations that Mayer used to gain her "facts" against the dreaded "Kochtopus" -- you will find that they are funded by...Soros. In fact, a number of organizations that Krugman likes to use as his own fact gatherers are funded by Soros and his Open Society Institute. Furthermore, we often see the NY Times editorial page using Soros-funded outfits as their sources.

However, I don't ever recall Krugman mentioning the OSI in any of his columns or blogs, yet Soros is far wealthier and more active than even the Koch brothers. For that matter, Soros was every bit as active against George W. Bush's presidency as was the right against Bill Clinton when he was in the White House.

One does not have to like any of this to recognize what is going on. As the executive branch gets more powerful -- and more reckless (which is what "Progressives" like Krugman want, to be frank) -- the stakes get higher. More and more, it is the executive branch and its regulatory agencies calling the shots, and when that happens, huge amounts of wealth are transferred without a single vote from Congress.

Yet, this kind of unaccountable government, with its symbiotic ties to "private" organizations and "think tanks" funded by billionaires, is precisely the very dream of "Progressivism," and Krugman is squarely in that mix. So, given that Soros began his OSI antics in 1979 -- long before the Koch brothers were funding groups on the Right -- I would say that this process first started on the Left.

But to read Krugman, we are supposed to believe that these poor Democrats are poor little babes in the woods, cowering before the Billionaire-Funded Republican Attack Machine. Give me a break, people. This is politics on all sides, and it is ugly and destructive, and Paul Krugman is an integral part of the ugliness.

55 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mr. Anderson:

Now, if only George Soros had a major TV network, newspapers, and a talk radio network incessantly repeating things that a fair amount of the time have little to do with truth or journalism, we could draw some equivalence here.

Now, who was it who said something like "repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth" ...

Anonymous said...

Mr. Anderson:

Oh, and PS: if you want to know what "progressives" think, you probably ought to read or listen to them. Most progressives I know are almost as unhappy with Obama as you are. We view him as a center-right president whose first instinct is to compromise the (perhaps historic) ideals of his own party.

We are not for a strong executive, that's what the R's are about (recent history: Bush, executive orders, signing statements).

We are about life being good for everyone, not just the rich. Public sector, private sector both.

PS: are you ever considering adding more content than ad hominem attacks on Krugman to your analysis? I'm sure the philosophy department at Frostburg State would tell you that all such arguments logically fail.

William L. Anderson said...

Excuse me. Read the "Progressives" from the early 20th Century on. They definitely wanted a strong executive at the expense of Congress. During the Great Depression, huge amounts of law making was transferred from the legislative to the executive branch.

You really need to be better caught up on your history. Read Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Croly, the early Walter Lippman, John Dewey, and others.

I hate to tell you this, but you "only the rich live well" is not true. Again, you might want to read your history about how people have lived in the past.

However, modern progressives won't be happy until everyone is equally poor.

Oh, and please don't give me the "poor, George Soros" routine. This "my billionaire is not as evil as their billionaire" is nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Anderson:

I have done a fair amount of historical reading: huge amounts of law making were not transferred to the executive from the legislative: in fact, during FDR's Hundred Days, Republicans as well as Democrats voted to put the country back on track. Though, even then, Republicans cried "debt! debt!" and "socialism! socialism!".

It's refreshing to know that things do not change for you, and that you and your party hew so closely to your ancestors.

It is true, we've lived better as a nation since the 1930's. We no longer die poor in large numbers, thanks to programs like Social Security and Medicare. The bottom end no longer compete for penny wages due to the minimum wage. We mostly get enough to eat by providing farm subsidies. And welfare still takes care of those not able to take care of themselves.

It must be a sad, inconvenient truth to you (who by his own admission "stays away from party politics": could have fooled me!) to know that what you spout would take us back to the pre-Industrial age. How wonderfully "regressive" of you.

And I'd be happy to take money out of politics on both sides. No PACs, no unions, no media support, no nothing. Just individuals.

Care to sign the pledge?

Anonymous said...

From the Right Radical

As the esteemed professor says. Mr. Amon you really should read your history. Furthermore your bunkiness about Social Security, Medicare, farm subsidies, and the minimum wage as the savior of the middle class, and working class are that, bunk.
These programs mirrored and, borrowed from Otto Van Bismarck. Who used them to consolidate Germany into a central state. The promises helped him buy approval from the masses, in the outlying states, for the German central state.
Think about that for a moment. Without your precious social "safety net". There might have not been, a centralized German state, nor a WWI, a WWII, or a Red revolution in Russia. Talk about saving lives! There's over 100 million right there! You really need to take a long range view my friend.
In the U.S., of course. The "progressive" era, brought us the Central Bank. Which has allowed the central state to grow (and totally politicize the American experience, much to every citizen's chagrin).
It has also lead our nation to conduct an aggressive foreign policy, which has killed millions of foreign peoples in our name. Without the inflation, which is caused by the monetization of the military industrial complex (ie War Machine) via Federal Reserve. This foreign policy would be unstainable. This is reason enough to totally repudiate. The so-called progressive era, and it's causes.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Radical:

Long before there were central banks, there was war. Long before progressivism, there was war.

We humans seem to find ways to fund it, no matter how or why.

Perhaps you should be looking further back in history for your examples ...

It is a lovely strawman, though. Have fun attacking it at your leisure.

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous the staunch progressive

You are clearly blinded by your ideology.

Anonymous said...

@@ Anonymous:

Nice addition to the conversation.

And you are not?

Can you somehow address the content of the argument, without men of straw or the ad hominem attack?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Progressive,

If you want to act like an abused wife that can rationalize her abusive marriage, rationalize away. Sure there was war prior to the progressive era. But the lifeblood of your welfare-warfare state is the Central Bank. It is how the U.S. became an empire. I don't know how anyone can dispute that? And you are an enabler! With all your do-gooderism via the barrel of a gun! In fact, we all have blood on our hands, but you more so then I. If the hurts your feelings, tough.
If you think it's the raving of a madman. Shame on you. For you are the one that supports the taxes, believes in good "government", that society should be forced to be our brother's keeper. That all men, should be live their lives in service to the "art of the possible" If we could just all believe in the same things, pay enough taxes, and submit. Everything would be hunky-dory. You and your ilk have achieved most of your platform. You should really quit your complaining, about unfairness. You have reaped what you have sown. Take a look around and be proud of it. Furthermore take responsibility for it. I don't need a strawman. Your ideology is a very target rich environment, and a pathway to the gulag.

Yours Truly
The Right Radical

Anonymous said...

Mr. Radical:

See, I knew you couldn't do it without the ad hominem.

Do you feel better, though? You know, we progressives are always concerned when we hurt someone else's feelings, after all.

Even when our ancestors lived in caves, they believed in collective action and division of labor. But here you are, standing bravely against evolution. Bravo, sir!

So you've apparently conjoined correlation with causation, and concluded that Central Banks are Bad.

But while you're here: Canada has a Central Bank. Is Canada an empire? So does Sweden. Is Sweden an empire? So, what exactly do Central Banks cause?

On the record: I am happy with much of what we have achieved. But of course, being a progressive, I believe in its root word: progress. I don't really know who you are or what your life situation is, but can you honestly say that government and everything it does has only and in every case been a source of evil for you?

If you tell me that you should not be your brother's keeper, then what of the Christian Ethic that I'm almost sure you believe this country was founded on? And what of the Declaration's "All Men Are Created Equal" phrasing? And if you look at your coinage, can you translate the Latin contained thereon?

I'm pleased to pay taxes, actually. My taxes support my community. They pay for roads. They pay for the schools that even you might have been educated in. And even Mr. Anderson can't quite escape their financial reach, teaching at a public university as he does. I'm even quite happy that my payroll taxes pay for the generations ahead of me. Respect for my elders, I'm told, is a good thing.

To my chagrin, however, it looks more and more like we will live in a corporate state that flirts on and off with fascism. No more will government be the effective counterveiling force to what corporations decide is the best for all of us. If we don't like them, or vote against them, they'll just move more jobs offshore. Your military-industrial complex is now simply the enforcement arm of business. Even you cannot deny this.

Why are we in Iraq, again? Oh, yeah. Nothing to do with oil. Move along, nothing to see. To bring this thread full circle: go see with the Kochs and Koch Sr. do/did for a living, and if you can't draw the lines without help, I'm here for you.

With deep appreciation,
Mr. Progressive.

Anonymous said...

Mr. P.
"Even when our ancestors lived in caves, they believed in collective action and division of labor. But here you are, standing bravely against evolution. Bravo, sir!"

I am so heartened to see that you support the free market. Hmm, The Division of Labor. Not that I am that knowledgeable about the caveman. But I will take your word of it, and will accept your premise. One guy went, and picked berries, one guy hunted deer or whatever. It might offend you, but I would probably surmise that the women, stayed at the living space. Looked after the offspring, mended the skins into clothing, and kept the place clean. They all expected to be paid of course, with food, clothing, and the upkeep of their young. I might even think at they did those tasks, that they were the most proficient at. As to create more efficiency, and create a higher output of berries, deer meat, and skins for their backs.
One thing they probably didn't have my institutionalized friend. Was someone from above them telling them, when, where, and how many berries they could pick, or how many deer they could hunt, or how many children they could have. Nor that they should give away their hard fought material to the tribe across the valley, who refused to work since they could only get one deer a day. Of course people like you, Mao and Mr. Krugman weren't around yet.
Now bringing society forward 10K+ years. We have, what we have, because of the division of labor, machinery inputs, and the profit motive. Money is a conduit to obtain those things. I know you think it's something silly, like FDR regulating electrical utilities, to create a cartel in the Electrical Power Industry, that creates the very fossil based pollution that keeps you awake at night, and since you can afford to turn the AC down keeps you sweating all day. And calling it capitalism, but really it isn't. Repeat after me. My computer that I am using to communicate with this nitwit radical, was created expressly for the purpose of making someone a buck. As was my cell phone that I call mommy on, and my microwave that I cook my dinner in. Now the more manufacturers of these items there are the cheaper they will be, which exactly the opposite of what government wants, and is the chief reason for all their regulations. Remember: You’ve come a long wave baby, in spite of the President of the United States!

Anonymous said...

So you've apparently conjoined correlation with causation, and concluded that Central Banks are Bad.
But while you're here: Canada has a Central Bank. Is Canada an empire? So does Sweden. Is Sweden an empire? So, what exactly do Central Banks cause?
Last time I checked. I was an American, although with a government like ours it gets more embarrassing to admit with each passing day. So I really don't give a hoot what the Canadians, or Swedes do. If they want to support a tyrannical central bank, that's on them. I want my country to be moral. So let's start here. Furthermore my premise is that the progressive era, created the modern fascist economy, and warfare state that we have today. Your premise is some fantasy is that, that doesn't matter. Because we are keeping senior citizens a powerful voting bloc.

Anonymous said...

On the record: I am happy with much of what we have achieved. But of course, being a progressive, I believe in its root word: progress. I don't really know who you are or what your life situation is, but can you honestly say that government and everything it does has only and in every case been a source of evil for you?" My life situation is fine. All governments are evil dude. You do realize they in the last century alone, over 150 million people were murdered at the hands of the state? Don't you? Someone has to speak out against that. I would think that progressives would, but they are phony intellectually as conservatives are.

Anonymous said...

Mr. R:

Of course I believe in a free market. But I also know that there hasn't been one since the dawn of modern economies.

You give a great example of natural resources. But what if my good friends across the valley, instead of being shiftless, had noticed that the price of deer hides was going up, and hunted them to extinction? Now, no deer to hunt for meat, no hides for warmth. All starve, and die cold and wishing ill upon the stupid hunters that couldn't leave well enough alone.

But let's fast forward 10K years, and the things keeping us up at night are the scarcity and increasing price of energy. We know burning fossil fuel is bad for us: it pollutes the air we breathe, the water we fish in (or at least New Orleans people fish in, and we know how unimportant they are), and we have to expend blood and treasure in faraway lands to kill other people so that we can guarantee our fix. We let them install governments that are repressive to their people, but as long as they are friendly to our drug habit, we'll look the other way.

Let's, by all means, not look at ways we can change this. Let's by all means, deny it occurs. Let's, by all means, decide we're not making the world a less habitable place. And let's by all means pretend we can sustain it.

It's a good thing we didn't have enough regulation in the oil industry a few months back, right? After all, the oil might have been a little more expensive.
(forget about these little tragedy of the commons events ...)

Not everything that has value is measured with dollars. And if no one has jobs, it really doesn't matter how cheap the goods get ...

Sweet, capital induced dreams, my prince.

Mr. P.

Anonymous said...

If you tell me that you should not be your brother's keeper, then what of the Christian Ethic that I'm almost sure you believe this country was founded on? And what of the Declaration's "All Men Are Created Equal" phrasing? And if you look at your coinage, can you translate the Latin contained thereon?""""
I believe in the separation of church and state. The state can not make men moral, nor can it make them equal. See how confused you are? The state can only treat men morally, and equally. But it never has one done that. It treats people unequally for political reasons. What are you some kind of Utopist?

Anonymous said...

I'm pleased to pay taxes, actually. My taxes support my community. They pay for roads. They pay for the schools that even you might have been educated in. And even Mr. Anderson can't quite escape their financial reach, teaching at a public university as he does. I'm even quite happy that my payroll taxes pay for the generations ahead of me. Respect for my elders, I'm told, is a good thing."""

You have some kind of ideal that this is altruistic of you. It's theft, and you are forcing others to pay for something they don't want to support. I.E. Wars, abortions, welfare, corporate subsidies, etc. This creates division, and disharmony. Again so much of your progressive agenda is nothing but a pyrrhic victory. And I discussed above the reason we have material progress in the modern world. It has nothing do with government.

Anonymous said...

@ 12:34

I am, apparently, a stranger in a strange land ...

"
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ...
"

... that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men ...

Oh, yeah. THAT Utopia ... not quite as apparently self-evident as Jefferson thought, eh?

Anonymous said...

To my chagrin, however, it looks more and more like we will live in a corporate state that flirts on and off with fascism. No more will government be the effective counterveiling force to what corporations decide is the best for all of us. If we don't like them, or vote against them, they'll just move more jobs offshore. Your military-industrial complex is now simply the enforcement arm of business. Even you cannot deny this."""""

Oh my God. This what I have been trying to tell you! The origins of this all this is your beloved, progressive era! That's when you get the technocratic state, and these "experts" shuffling back and forth between, government, corporate and academia. The hallmark of the "progressive" state is one run by experts. Which of course being humans they are corrupted to use for their own wealth enhancement.

Anonymous said...

"
You have some kind of ideal that this is altruistic of you. It's theft, and you are forcing others to pay for something they don't want to support. I.E. Wars, abortions, welfare, corporate subsidies, etc. This creates division, and disharmony. Again so much of your progressive agenda is nothing but a pyrrhic victory. And I discussed above the reason we have material progress in the modern world. It has nothing do with government.
"

Government creates the economy in which the capitalism you describe flourishes. It creates the currency that's traded, the security of property both real and intellectual, and the court system to uphold those rights and adjudicate right from wrong. It creates the society that in relative safety you can be unafraid to consume goods and enjoy them.

But, other than that, no relation whatever to government.

Sigh.

You cannot have one without the other. Repeat after me. You cannot have one without the other.

There are many things I pay for that I do not support. But the common good is not one of them.

I do apparently join you in that we should spend far less on our military than we do, so thank you for confirming a progressive position.

Anonymous said...

"you are forcing others to pay for something they don't want to support. I.E. Wars, abortions, welfare, corporate subsidies, etc. This creates division, and disharmony"

Right, and so called conservative principles have all the answers. Religious freedom, unless it's a mosque in NY. No censorship, unless it's Janet Jacksons tit. Equal rights and freedom of choice for all, well except for gays and women.

At least progressives have the decency to respect ALL human lives, not just the lives of rich white men.

Anonymous said...

@ 12:20

"
Last time I checked. I was an American, although with a government like ours it gets more embarrassing to admit with each passing day. So I really don't give a hoot what the Canadians, or Swedes do. If they want to support a tyrannical central bank, that's on them. I want my country to be moral. So let's start here. Furthermore my premise is that the progressive era, created the modern fascist economy, and warfare state that we have today. Your premise is some fantasy is that, that doesn't matter. Because we are keeping senior citizens a powerful voting bloc.
"

And yet, you persist ...

Look, the Canadians had a progressive era that matched ours. They have a Central Bank.
They joined us in WWI, and in WWII.

Are they fascists, or are they not?

If not, perhaps your causation argument could use another look?

But now, if I'm following you, senior citizens are the fascists?

Sigh.

If anything, I believe we've evolved a warfare state due to our unique position of being the worlds largest economy and the only one not bombed out of existence in WWII. Nothing like a military to maintain an empire, and the empire is fed by needs of the corporations in it.

But don't worry, it won't last much longer. What we've built is no longer sustainable, and will collapse under its own weight soon enough.

But enjoy the reality TV / reality while you have it. Bread and Circuses for All!

Anonymous said...

Why are we in Iraq, again? Oh, yeah. Nothing to do with oil. Move along, nothing to see. To bring this thread full circle: go see with the Kochs and Koch Sr. do/did for a living, and if you can't draw the lines without help, I'm here for you."""

You never took responsiblity for supporting wholeheartedly the way, our country government is paying for this war, ie via the Federal Reserve. You support that, and the income taxes that pay those interest payments. So your outrage is fake, and by supporting our regime you are responsible for the bombs that have fallen, and the lives that have been ended as well. That's the just the way it is.

Anonymous said...

@ 12:52:

"
To my chagrin, however, it looks more and more like we will live in a corporate state that flirts on and off with fascism. No more will government be the effective counterveiling force to what corporations decide is the best for all of us. If we don't like them, or vote against them, they'll just move more jobs offshore. Your military-industrial complex is now simply the enforcement arm of business. Even you cannot deny this."""""

Oh my God. This what I have been trying to tell you! The origins of this all this is your beloved, progressive era! That's when you get the technocratic state, and these "experts" shuffling back and forth between, government, corporate and academia. The hallmark of the "progressive" state is one run by experts. Which of course being humans they are corrupted to use for their own wealth enhancement.
"

This is very close to the most intelligent thing you've said so far on this thread, so congratulations!

But, give me the alternative: we could do anarchy, sure, but I'm not sure we'd survive as a modern economy (and where I disagree with my even farther left friends).

We've tried a state being run by non-experts, I give you the Republican party of the last 20 years.

And government run by businessmen or landowners predates the progressive movement, even in our country. Who were the founders, after all?

Democracy is the worst form of government in the world. Except for all the others.

If you believe in division of labor in the capitalist sense, then you should accept its government parallel.

It means you're likely not the best suited to be running government, and you should be ceding that responsibility to those that are, any more than you should be building your own microwave before you can enjoy it.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:00pm

"
Why are we in Iraq, again? Oh, yeah. Nothing to do with oil. Move along, nothing to see. To bring this thread full circle: go see with the Kochs and Koch Sr. do/did for a living, and if you can't draw the lines without help, I'm here for you."""

You never took responsiblity for supporting wholeheartedly the way, our country government is paying for this war, ie via the Federal Reserve. You support that, and the income taxes that pay those interest payments. So your outrage is fake, and by supporting our regime you are responsible for the bombs that have fallen, and the lives that have been ended as well. That's the just the way it is.
"

I take responsibility, even though I protested against it, talked my Congressmen into taking positions against it, on behalf of all America for the shame we as Americans have brought on ourselves and our country for the murder of innocent Iraqi lives to further our corporate interests and our insatiable need to drive Hummers.

Along with allowing ourselves to be repeatedly lied to by media based corporate interests and not holding them accountable.

Along with not bringing our own war criminals to the justice they deserve.

And if some day, people from those countries come to blow things up here, I will understand why.

Will you do the same, since I assume you live in America, drive a car, and generally participate in all that our economy requires to maintain itself?

The government pays for a great many things, not all of which are instruments of evil and destruction.

Anonymous said...

Dude you have me so confused I can't think straight. You want to revolutionize the country? Then at a minimum we have to agree to a strict adherence to the founding documents. No expanded reading into the commerce clause, the 10th amendment or anything like that. Repudiate the racist turd Woodrow Wilson administration. Repeal the Federal Reserve act, the Income tax, and restore the direct election of Senators. Eliminate 80-90% of federal, state and local governments (including the public school system) Give it a generation, and see what happens. If you guys don't like the results you can always put everything back in there, just like it is now. I hope to be called by the Lord within 20 years, so you can always blame on the Dead Right Radical. So for now I think I have answered all your questions. You have me confused as to why you just don't make the full jump, repudiate intellectually the state, it's phony money, it's wars, and disharmony, and speak like a freeman.

Anonymous said...



Then at a minimum we have to agree to a strict adherence to the founding documents. No expanded reading into the commerce clause, the 10th amendment or anything like that”

Just to clarify, the founding documents that classified blacks as 3/5ths a person, and did not allow women to vote? You want to return to those documents?

“Repudiate the racist turd Woodrow Wilson administration.”

While we are repudiating racist presidents, do not forget about Ron Reagan.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:28PM

"
Then at a minimum we have to agree to a strict adherence to the founding documents
"

I disagree: the Founders themselves recognized that their wisdom was for their age, and they expected every generation to reinterpret and to apply it to their problems.

That's why it's a work of genius. It's nonspecific, yet timeless.

If you remove what you propose, there will be nothing to go back to. The experiment in democracy will have ended, and stupidly.

A generation filled with willful idiots. It's too bad the rest of the world won't wait around for your little experiment to complete.

If you hope to be called by the Lord in 20, can't you just cash your SS checks and give thanks for all this nation has provided you? And if not, can't you just move into a right wing commune like my 60's brethren and take the full lesson of the experiment?

With freedom comes responsibility, and sometimes, the weight of that responsibility is too much for some to bear.

I don't repudiate the state, simply because it's the best opportunity for survival of society.

You eliminate 80-90% of your local government, and see who builds and maintains your roads, plows them in winter, brings you your water, puts out your house fire, and protects you from crime. Go 'head.

Eliminate the public school system, and see how many employable workers result.

You can almost see the economy shrink before your eyes, can't you?

Move to an island, trade beads. Or move to a commune. No reason for you to live in the USA. Find a nice remote place where there are no taxes and no services.

I don't have all your answers for you. My revolution looks different than yours. I want the country of my youth back. The thinking, reasoning one. I miss it.

Anonymous said...

Oh yeah the money system has to be free market. You have to repeal a bunch stuff like the Sherman Anti Trust act, the ICC, SEC, and all that other alphabet soup stuff grown from about 1860 onward. The guys in charge of Goldman-Sachs have to be deported out of the country with only the shirts on their backs, and the banks assets seized, and sold off.
There are some other NGOs in other industries I would do this to too. I wouldn't dare to call them companies, or corporations. Since they are nothing without their subsidies, taken from the mouths of labor. They are not capitalist, and I think they need to be disgraced.
ANARCHY TODAY! ANARCHY TOMORROW! ANARCHY FOREVER!

Anonymous said...

You're Hopeless Dude. You are a two bit statist. You have fallen for every bit of state propaganda. "The world will fall apart if the government goes away!" The public school system has dumbed you down entirely. There is nothing worthwhile that government does that can't be done privately via business, or volunteers or your neighbors working together. Yes Virginia that includes defense of the country, education, police as well as poverty eradication. Along with roads, and water and sewer systems. Please, please don't whine about injustice, morals, and fairness, all the while you continue to believe in this "system" I have had enough. You're hopeless, and you have no cause.
Furthermore I will be barely into my late 60s in 20 years. I do not hope to partake of your rotten, facist, ponzi scheme called Social Security. Goodbye Mr S.

Anonymous said...

@ 1:46pm.

And you wonder why people edge away from you on the subway?

Anonymous said...

@ 2:02

Good night, sweet prince.

Please reconsider that island. I think it would do you good.

Please also sign your SS checks back to the Treasury when you get them.

With thanks from a grateful nation.

The Dude (abides).

Anonymous said...

"
The guys in charge of Goldman-Sachs have to be deported out of the country with only the shirts on their backs, and the banks assets seized, and sold off.
There are some other NGOs in other industries I would do this to too. I wouldn't dare to call them companies, or corporations. Since they are nothing without their subsidies, taken from the mouths of labor. They are not capitalist, and I think they need to be disgraced.
"

Scratch a libertarian, get a socialist?

Gee, Toto. We're not in Kansas anymore ...

Anonymous said...

And you wonder why people edge away from you on the subway?

Who would take a stinky, smelly, government owned subway. Yuck! Maybe a bus, if it has good AC, and definitely my SUV.

Please reconsider that island. I think it would do you good.

You should consider an island named Cuba. It has no racism (so they say), free health care, and a wonderfully run economy. Just don't get on the wrong side of this dude Fidel. He's progressive I hear, but not that progressive.

Please also sign your SS checks back to the Treasury when you get them.
Once they pay me back the 15 pts they stole from me over my whole working life. I might consider this. Again seriously I doubt I will be around to collect. If I am I still plan to be working.

With thanks from a grateful nation.
I owe nothing to nobody, that I don't have some kind of relationship with. I will never worship this country like some kind of deity. I owe my country nothing, and they owe my nothing. My rights come from God. You have some perverted idea they come from government. Which is way this is a hollow statement from you:

"At least progressives have the decency to respect ALL human lives, not just the lives of rich white men."

How rich, to say something like this. But then to be a cheerleader for the state, and it's central bank that finances the murder of brown people the world over.
You're a fascist, and a socialist, and would have made a good Nazi. You would have went along with the program. You're an enabler, and you believe the state should reign over the individual. You redcoat. Get out of America

Now I am really done.

The Always Right Radical

Jason said...

Great discussion, but let's not lose sight of the original topic, which is that Krugman is a hypocrite for complaining about the bankrolling of right wing causes while neglecting to mention that George Soros bankrolls huge swathes of the left. David Horowitz's book "The Shadow Party" is an excellent investigation into the mind numbing scope of Soros' financial influence in the leftist cause.

Anonymous said...

And Godwin's law now is satisfied.

Fascist, Socialist, and Nazi?

Wow. That sounds Pretty Bad.

I hope you get to ask God about that Brother's Keeper thing.

I'm sure she can set you straight.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A31-46&version=NIV

Anonymous said...

Jason:

Reader's Digest version:

How does Soros personally benefit from bankrolling the left?

I know how the Kochs and the Murdochs benefit from bankrolling the right.

Anonymous said...

@jason:

Tell me what you disagree with:

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0928-16.htm

Anonymous said...

Justin Raimondo has a good handle on this. He has no love lost for the Koch's.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/08/29/in-defense-of-the-kochtopus/

Of course Mr. Progressive, won't be bothered to read anything that doesn't fit into his little con-lib paradigm box, that is not pre-approved, by Maddow, Oberman, or the Daily Kos.

Anonymous said...

Folks:

I'm happy to read your sources at all times. If they get sufficiently loony, I will stop. I watch Olbermann and Maddow only occasionally, and mostly for the humor value. I can't stomach Fox. I'm sorry. I've tried, and I can't. It's too transparent. There isn't much in the way of "news" or "analysis" coming from cable. Unless it's Stewart or Colbert. And that really says something about our culture when it's the comedians that are getting it right.

I've read this piece, and although it starts pretty huffy and puffy, it does get down to substance. (though I do wonder why he avoids mentioning the John Birch Society?)

And since dissecting these things takes time, I will report back as time permits. I spent most of the entire day here for no apparent reason, and now the piper must be paid ...

There are things that progressives and libertarians have in common: anti-militarism, considering the war on drugs as a failure, support for civil liberties, equal rights for all, market processes, and the elimination of corporate welfare.

Where we disagree are the effectiveness of the free market in maintaining rights and civil liberties, and on taxes. We believe in a government that is an effective counterveiling force to business, because we've seen how business can be antithetical to freedom.

We might agree with you that if a truly free market existed with robust competition this would not be true, but we're smart enough to know such a thing only occurs in theory, not in practice. Unchecked capitalism tends towards monopoly.

But most of all, we believe that money is a coercive force in politics, and if corporate coffers and the rich speak, then for the most part, it will be corporations and the rich dictating policy. This, I believe is the ultimate insult to democracy, and to the large majority that make up the working class of this country.

I would like to see publicly funded elections, and NO special interest money, from any side. Only individuals up to a specific amount. One time during a cycle.

I'm not sure what libertarians believe.

Mr. P.

Anonymous said...

And just when I was about to leave you ... I run across this.

You wonder why I think we need effective government, and that the free market doesn't always act in my best interests?

Enjoy your eggs tomorrow morning.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/31/business/31eggs.html?_r=1&hp

"
Barns infested with flies, maggots and scurrying rodents, and overflowing manure pits were among the widespread food safety problems that federal inspectors found at a group of Iowa egg farms at the heart of a nationwide recall and salmonella outbreak.

Inspection reports released by the Food and Drug Administration on Monday described — often in nose-pinching detail — possible ways that salmonella could have been spread undetected through the vast complexes of two companies.
"

“That is not good management, bottom line,” said Kenneth E. Anderson, a professor of poultry science at North Carolina State University. “I am surprised that an operation was being operated in that manner in this day and age.”

He's surprised?

I'm not.

Nytol.

Anonymous said...

Oh it's in the times so it must be true not! First I highly doubt that this is a nationwide phenomenon.
If you know anything about the chicken business, you would probably know that it is mainly a regional business. In my neck of the woods, it is mostly contracted farms supplying eggs, chickens, etc, to packaging outfits like Perdue, Tyson, Morning Star Farms, etc. I have been a half dozen of these processing plants which are located in along the Delmarva peninsula, the Shenandoah Valley in VA, and the Dutch Country of PA. Most of the plants were maintained in good condition, and the growers are to maintain standards if they are maintain their relationship, and hence their income with the companies. Despite what you were taught at Karl Marx University, it is not in a firms best interest to create tainted food, usually firms that continue do that are put out of business, FDA or no FDA.
Of course the history of the FDA is tainted, based on lies, distortions, and sensationalism. Based on a novel "The Jungle" from the socialist loser Upton Sinclair, who admitted later it wasn't based on any factual basis. But Teddy Roosevelt saw an opportunity to consolidate a good portion of food industry. And like the Tammany Hall pol he was. The statist, progressive TR didn't let a good crisis go to waste. Nope there is a reason, much of the food business has become an oligarchy for such power houses such as ADM, Monsanto, and Cargill. And it's called the FDA. And to be honest I have had eggs the last two mornings for breakfast, at two different establishments, and I feel great.
Respectfully submitted,
TRR

Anonymous said...

I've read this piece, and although it starts pretty huffy and puffy, it does get down to substance. (though I do wonder why he avoids mentioning the John Birch Society?)

Have something against the JBS? At the last event I went too. I went to the thing with my East Indian friend Mehul, and my Hispanic friend Fernando. I know you wanna paint it as some kind of right wing, racist organization, but those are the facts. I am not a formal member but I have friends that are. My problem with them is the spend too much time, dealing with immigration issues, and not enough on the issue of the day, which is the ghastly foreign policy of the US Gunverment, which they oppose but not vigorously enough.
My best
TRR

Anonymous said...

"Unchecked capitalism tends towards monopoly."

This is a blatant falsehood. It is painfully obvious. The more an industry is progressively managed, and regulated by government the more monopolistic, or oligarchic it becomes. Healthcare, Banking, the Airlines, Power, and Pharmaceuticals just to name a few are some most heavily regulated, and therefore centralized industries in our economy. Not surprisingly they feature all the earmarks of inefficient operations. High prices, few competitors, and high barriers to entry based on the regulatory hoops they have anykind of competition would have to jump through.
Of course one of the best Soviet industries in the US. Is the rotten, monopolized educational system. It burns through a great deal of money, into the 100s of billions of dollars, nationwide, and it's finished product. Well do I even need to comment on it?
Regards
TRR

Anonymous said...

@ 7:14pm

"
Oh it's in the times so it must be true not! First I highly doubt that this is a nationwide phenomenon.
"

First thing must be deny the messenger.

OK. Google is your friend.

"
Egg Kingpin Linked to Salmonella Scare Has History of Violations
"

"
The egg mogul linked to the widespread salmonella outbreak is considered by government officials a repeat offender, and the allegations and violations at his farms go far beyond sanitation to illegal immigration, unsafe workplace conditions and sexual abuse of female employees.

Though the recent recall is the first time conditions at his farms have drawn such heated and nationwide scrutiny, Austin "Jack" DeCoster has been cited for violations dating back at least to the early 1990s.
"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/24/egg-kingpin-linked-salmonella-scare-history-violations/

Does it help you that I cite Fox News?

Funny you bring up Upton Sinclair. I brought up the Pure Food and Drug act on another blog, and I got the same story back: Upton Sinclair later admitted that it wasn't based in fact. I challenged him to find me a cite.

He could not.

I give you the same challenge. Show me a cite where Upton Sinclair later recanted his story.
(and not the mises.org source you've probably lifted this from).

In fact, when TR sent Federal inspectors in, they found that conditions were actually *worse* than those contained in the book.

The result was the Pure Food and Drug Act.

This is just one of the areas I think Libertarians give a little too much credit to the "free market".

Examples abound and are almost too numerous to mention (did I already mention an oil platform in the Gulf?)

Anonymous said...

@7:51:

"
"Unchecked capitalism tends towards monopoly."

This is a blatant falsehood. It is painfully obvious.
"

TRR: what have you learned from our own Gilded age, which predated the progressive age? The Rockefellers, the Carnegies, the Astors, the Mellons, the Morgans?

I think this is where your ideology gets in the way of the facts. Open your eyes a little wider, and let the knowledge seep in.

Regards, Mr. P.

Anonymous said...

"
Of course one of the best Soviet industries in the US. Is the rotten, monopolized educational system. It burns through a great deal of money, into the 100s of billions of dollars, nationwide, and it's finished product. Well do I even need to comment on it?
"

If it were as good as the Soviet system ... we wouldn't be having this discussion, on at least two levels ...

Anonymous said...

"
Have something against the JBS?
"

Only the McCarthyite parts.

And the stands against the Civil Rights Act.

Unless you're thinking McCarthy was just a misunderstood patriot.

Mr. P.

Bob Roddis said...

The aforementioned Raimondo article is excellent. As I've said for 37 years, our critics are truly clueless. Just as Austrian critics have no understanding of the centrality of economic calculation, libertarian critics have no understanding of the differences between Rothbardians, Hayekians, the Koch family etc....

They only need to speak a few words and their ignorance becomes obvious.

Anonymous said...

Dear Communist,

Here your deal about Sinclair. It is not from Mises, and the author has cited your precious sources that you rail on about. Of course if it was about "Climate Change" none would be needed.

Have a nice time pinko.
TRR

Anonymous said...

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/government-regulation-the-truth-about-quot-the-jungle-quot-by-upton-sinclair

Anonymous said...

@Bob Roddis:

Yep. Continue not to engage, or to have AP Lerner engage for you, answering both sides of the questions he poses.

Say something meaningful.

Try not to use ad hominem in your response. I know this will be difficult.

Anonymous said...

TRR: what have you learned from our own Gilded age, which predated the progressive age? The Rockefellers, the Carnegies, the Astors, the Mellons, the Morgans?

I have learned that they used the "progressive" era, to create a business-government alliance. Mussolini called it Fascism, but it could be known as Corporatism. Do yo have anything to offer but de-bunked generalities?

Anonymous said...

TRR:

Do you actually read your sources?



"
From Upton Sinclair. "The Condemned-Meat Industry," Everybody's Magazine. 14 (1906). 608-616.

"I saw six hogs in a line which had been condemned. A truck loaded with chopped-up condemned hogs was, in my presence (I followed it), placed in one of the tanks from which lard comes. I asked particularly about this, and the inspector, together with Mr. Hull, stated that lard and fertilizer would be the product from that tank. The tanks are in a long room. The east side is lined with tanks for manufacture of lard and fertilizer; the west side with tanks whose product is grease and fertilizer. The grease is for soap, lubricator, etc. Here is a clear infraction of the law, because it requires that such condemned meat be mixed with sufficient offal to destroy it as food. Of the six condemned hogs referred to, two were afflicted with cholera, the skin being red as blood and the legs scabbed; three were marked 'tubercular,' though they appeared normal to a layman; the sixth had an ulcer in its side which was apparent. Two men were engaged in chopping up hogs from this line. The truck-load prepared while I stood there was deposited in a lard tank. I asked particularly about the line of demarcation between the carcasses used for lard and carcasses used for grease. No explanation was given either by the inspector or by my conductor. 'It all depends on how bad he is,' was the answer. I gathered the impression, however, that not very many carcasses were placed in grease tanks."
"

"
"For ten years I was employed by Philip D. Armour, the great Chicago beef packer and canner. I rose from a common beef skinner to the station of superintendent of the beef-killing gang, with 500 men directly under me. . . .

"There were so many ways of getting around the inspectors--so many, in fact, that not more than two or three cattle out of one thousand were condemned. I know exactly what I am writing of in this connection, as my particular instructions from Mr. W. E. Pierce, superintendent of the beef houses for Armour & Co., were very explicit and definite.

"Whenever a beef got past the yard inspectors with a case of lumpy jaw and came into the slaughterhouse or the "killing-bed," I was authorized by Mr. Pierce to take his head off, thus removing the evidences of lumpy jaw, and after casting the smitten portion into the tank where refuse goes, to send the rest of the carcass on its way to market.

"In cases where tuberculosis became evident to the men who were skinning the cattle it was their duty, on instructions from Mr. Pierce, communicated to them through me, at once to remove the tubercles and cast them into a trap-door provided for that purpose.

"I have seen as much as forty pounds of flesh afflicted with gangrene cut from the carcass of a beef, in order that the rest of the animal might be utilized in trade. . . .
"

Nice try. No dice. In fact, interesting how your source says just the opposite of what Sinclair said.

I see what you mean, though, about the failure of the American public education system.

Yours in truth,

Mr. P.

Anonymous said...

TRR: what have you learned from our own Gilded age, which predated the progressive age? The Rockefellers, the Carnegies, the Astors, the Mellons, the Morgans?

I have learned that they used the "progressive" era, to create a business-government alliance. Mussolini called it Fascism, but it could be known as Corporatism.
"

Then I think maybe you should hit your history books a little harder. Take a look at TR, the Sherman anti-trust act, and the end of the Gilded Age.

The more personally insulting you become, the more I realize the end of your intellectual contributions are near.

Koch said...

To get the facts on this, please visit www.kochfacts.com.