AggieShanks said:

---

I don't understand the economics argument. Republican policies that enrich businesses and the top 1% cause wage stagnation (when we adjust increasing wages for inflation). Money and resources are finite. So, if more money is going to the top 1% and they aren't forced to circulate their money then the other 99% gets poorer.

Student loan forgiveness also directly impacts the middle class. How is that a bad thing?

---

Republicans are not the current party of the oligarchy and corporatocracy class. Trump's position is to bring manufacturing back and expand export capabilities. As it is today, the Republican platform is the same as it was in 2016 under Trump, focusing on the forgotten middle class. Under Biden, the rich are getting richer while everyone else is beaten down by inflation.

As far as your comment about money, your Keynesian is showing. You really need to learn about financial liquidity, and the supply and demand of the dollar. There is no wealth pie.

So you believe in government picking winners and losers?


The people that took out the loan should be on the hook for them. I shouldn't be required to pay off someone else's poor decisions. They also could pay them off if they wanted. It's a choice not to pay them off

backintexas2013 said:

---

So you believe in government picking winners and losers?


The people that took out the loan should be on the hook for them. I shouldn't be required to pay off someone else's poor decisions. They also could pay them off if they wanted. It's a choice not to pay them off

---

He believes the government should be propping up the losers.

I highly doubt he would support the government forgiving my law school loan.

AggieShanks said:

---

I don't understand the economics argument. Republican policies that enrich businesses and the top 1% cause wage stagnation (when we adjust increasing wages for inflation). Money and resources are finite. So, if more money is going to the top 1% and they aren't forced to circulate their money then the other 99% gets poorer.

Student loan forgiveness also directly impacts the middle class. How is that a bad thing?

---

You're spouting talking points, not economics. That is probably why you are okay with Democrat policies. Don't get me wrong, some Republican policies are also based on bad economics, but absolutely all Dem policies are.

I think this board had much more diverse political discourse/viewpoints 10 years ago compared to now. Anyone with liberal leaning ideas (hell even conservative but anti-Trump) is labeled a troll and/or a moron.

This was a random innocuous post a few nights ago about how humans have evolved to discriminate against out-groups. I can't find it now, but I assume it was a post to take the temperature of the board and see if the thought resonated with anyone regarding today's politics.

All the responses were essentially either mocking the OP for making a dumb post, or saying something like "humans didn't evolve and man was made in the image of God…" and were "blue starred." I think a lot of people simply enjoy coming here to ridicule anyone that doesn't align perfectly with their own ideology.

Anyone remember ThomasFord from the Mueller thread? Poster child of non-conservative on this board

Quote:

---

Money and resources are finite.

---

Nonsense. Heck "money" is printed and created, look at the last four years.

Resources are created and developed. Human ingenuity and ambition are actually the primary resources to create wealth.

Government is a drag on wealth. Every dollar the government redistributes comes with a cost and makes LESS wealth available to society. My dad (RIP) said that the government redistributing wealth is like giving yourself a blood transfusion and poking a hole in the tube.

"Redistribution of wealth" is a battle cry for socialism, a precursor to communism, and is achieved with Marxist tactics once a power-hungry regime gets its foot in the door. Young, emotional, and stupid people fall for the propaganda. Give me my fair share you benevolent and graceful daddy government. Tax me harder and give it to the poors. That will make them get off their asses and get jobs, I'm sure of it.

The world just watched the wealthiest country in South America fall to one of the poorest most wretched ones quickly, less than two decades from the 90s to 2000's, after a socialist coup d'etat. Yet people still vote for today's democrats.

There aren't any winner and losers when companies of today buy our their competitors and control policies to restrict real competition.

AggieShanks said:

---

I notice a lot of discussions get shot down as anyone that doesn't fall into the groupthink down here are trolls. I'm generally curious if they are any left leaning people on the politics board?

---

Just tell the truth.

You follow the book of ....Y'all don't agree with me, must be group think.

After reading other comments, this is a great takeaway for sure. I believe that others hold onto a dream that is increasingly impossible to really achieve without government intervention.

And he always claimed he was a Republican.

There are actually three kinds of posters on this board: libtards, boomers, and true conservatives (only me)

AggieShanks said:

---

After reading other comments, this is a great takeaway for sure. I believe that others hold onto a dream that is increasingly impossible to really achieve without government intervention.

---

Yes. But with more and more government, everything is possible.



it's going to be amazing when we have nothing and are happy.

AggieShanks said:

---

There aren't any winner and losers when companies of today buy our their competitors and control policies to restrict real competition.

---

What do you think government market manipulation leads to? Most large corporations are for government intervention because it stifles competition. It raises the barrier to entry for competitors and cements their positions. Markets work best when left alone. It is the most efficient method of allocating resources, but the biggest Democrat selling point is trying manipulate those markets to do things that are more inefficient in order to get to a desired outcome. The problem is it spends more resources than the market requires and it usually ends up making the problem, whatever it was to begin with, worse.

Both sides ask for the government when it works for them. Louisiana forcing the 10 commandments in schools, restricting access to contraception, and banning porn within states. No side really wants less government.

You do know when markets are left alone that they eventually evolve into stagnant markets full of big sharks devouring any small shark of value. And the small sharks can never get market cap because the big sharks hold it all. Free markets only work in new industries. They eventually have to be regulated. The meat market is a perfect one of where the market was poisoning people for a few bucks. Pharmaceuticals is another of which researching/storing drugs is too expensive for anyone to get into.

AggieShanks said:

---

I notice a lot of discussions get shot down as anyone that doesn't fall into the groupthink down here are trolls. I'm generally curious if they are any left leaning people on the politics board?

---

Have you considered going to Reddit? Your groupthink brether (and its aligned bots army) dominate that site from stem to stern.

AggieShanks said:

---

After reading other comments, this is a great takeaway for sure. I believe that others hold onto a dream that is increasingly impossible to really achieve without government intervention.

---

America was not founded for this purpose.

There are scores of other countries that will steal from others for your benefit. Go there.

AggieShanks said:

---

You do know when markets are left alone that they eventually evolve into stagnant markets full of big sharks devouring any small shark of value. And the small sharks can never get market cap because the big sharks hold it all. Free markets only work in new industries. They eventually have to be regulated. The meat market is a perfect one of where the market was poisoning people for a few bucks. Pharmaceuticals is another of which researching/storing drugs is too expensive for anyone to get into.

---

This I completely agree with.Americans can't be "free market" in the way that they have been in the past. Apple, Microsoft, Google, soon Tesla, Crowdstrike, Microsoft, NVIDIA, TSMC, etc. They all have technology advantages and huge market share and its near impossible to fight that without regulation.

AggieShanks said:

---

I notice a lot of discussions get shot down as anyone that doesn't fall into the groupthink down here are trolls. I'm generally curious if they are any left leaning people on the politics board?

---

If the argument is weak, then it will be shot down. We've had liberals on this board claiming a piss tape existed, blaming Trump for Biden's surrender to the Taliban, and stating that all someone needed to do to overcome more government mandates on businesses is to sell more product. Do you really believe that garbage should be anything but disputed on F16?

As for the necessity of government intervention you brought just now, I would point you to the website below:

https://www.bidenomics.com/

We have had plenty of intrusive government action under this White House.

It has failed to lead to prosperity for anyone but the Buffets and the Gates-types of this world who rely on government largesse and/or regulatory interference for a significant portion of their profit margin

Again, I don't like to be in spaces without real conversation. Reddit struggles at that just like many other sites. Some posts are good, but they are few and far between.

Rapier108 said:

---

And he always claimed he was a Republican.

---

The "CM" always claim they voted republican

A good starting point is to define, in as few words as possible, the purpose of the Federal Government, what is it's number one goal?

For me it is "to ensure individual liberty".

Yes. They should. Also this is federal government. Liberals often point to state governments and equate it to the feds. They aren't the same and shouldn't be.

AggieShanks said:

---

You do know when markets are left alone that they eventually evolve into stagnant markets full of big sharks devouring any small shark of value. And the small sharks can never get market cap because the big sharks hold it all. Free markets only work in new industries.

---

That is absolutely absurd and the opposite of what actually occurs. Markets get better and more efficient the older they are and the less interference they have. Regardless of the size of the companies in the market, it is a more efficient allocation of resources. They have the highest utility/resources allocation ratio.

Quote:

---

They eventually have to be regulated. The meat market is a perfect one of where the market was poisoning people for a few bucks. Pharmaceuticals is another of which researching/storing drugs is too expensive for anyone to get into.

---

First of all, bad things happen. It doesn't matter if it is an unregulated market or regulated market. Failures occur in both. It's not like nobody dies of E-coli anymore now that there is government involvement.

Second, the pharmaceutical industry is a perfect example of my point. It is HEAVILY regulated. Why do you think it is so expensive for anyone to get into?

I can do without this kind of gov't intervention: (EPA Says It Released 3 Million Gallons Of Contaminated Water Into River)

Government is government? But it would be more productive to draw lines. I think the federal government is to ensure the unity of state governments within reason. States can have their own sovereignty, but within limits.

Just that deregulating the industry doesn't lead to better outcomes.

I wonder how many new federal agencies were created or additional federal employees were hired to enforce Louisiana state government telling teachers to talk about the 10 commandments. The taxes for everyone, especially Louisianians must be skyrocketing to fund that new regulation. See! Republicans are just like big government socialists too!

WestAustinAg said:

---

AggieShanks said:

---

You do know when markets are left alone that they eventually evolve into stagnant markets full of big sharks devouring any small shark of value. And the small sharks can never get market cap because the big sharks hold it all. Free markets only work in new industries. They eventually have to be regulated. The meat market is a perfect one of where the market was poisoning people for a few bucks. Pharmaceuticals is another of which researching/storing drugs is too expensive for anyone to get into.

---

This I completely agree with.Americans can't be "free market" in the way that they have been in the past. Apple, Microsoft, Google, soon Tesla, Crowdstrike, Microsoft, NVIDIA, TSMC, etc. They all have technology advantages and huge market share and its near impossible to fight that without regulation.

---

Free markets always exist in a state of imbalance and reaction to that imbalance. Regulation is an attempt at artificial balancing that usually just cements whatever imbalance is happening at the time and keeps the market from balancing itself. It feels like something needs to be done, but that is because you are only looking at one slice of the timeline.

I love threads like these. It exposes how ignorant the beta males are.

AggieShanks said:

---

Just that deregulating the industry doesn't lead to better outcomes.

---

Regulating the industry almost always leads to worse outcomes, so yes, in most cases, it would.

WestAustinAg said:

---

AggieShanks said:

---

You do know when markets are left alone that they eventually evolve into stagnant markets full of big sharks devouring any small shark of value. And the small sharks can never get market cap because the big sharks hold it all. Free markets only work in new industries. They eventually have to be regulated. The meat market is a perfect one of where the market was poisoning people for a few bucks. Pharmaceuticals is another of which researching/storing drugs is too expensive for anyone to get into.

---

This I completely agree with.Americans can't be "free market" in the way that they have been in the past. Apple, Microsoft, Google, soon Tesla, Crowdstrike, Microsoft, NVIDIA, TSMC, etc. They all have technology advantages and huge market share and its near impossible to fight that without regulation.

---

We haven't been free market in decades.