Gyroscopic Investing

I was pleasantly surprised by Gingrich / Huntsman debate. What a welcome departure from the absolute crap debates that's have dominated the republican primary. I actually was impressed by both of the candidates depth of knowledge. I can actually say I learned something. Thank goodness for CSPAN. Did anyone else watch?

Heck, no! 

I prefer my pithy sound bites and easily digestible sarcastic quips.

I prefer the guy the media hates to even mention.  You know... that guy who is leading in the Iowa polls right now.

You mean the guy that says that we shouldn't worry about anybody but ourselves?

Reub wrote: You mean the guy that says that we shouldn't worry about anybody but ourselves?

At least in foreign affairs... yea.  That's him.

Ad Orientem wrote:

Reub wrote: You mean the guy that says that we shouldn't worry about anybody but ourselves?

At least in foreign affairs... yea.  That's him.

You mean that same guy who couldn't responsibly oversee a small newsletter that was published in his own name... is now somehow going to be responsible for managing 1/3 of our federal goverment?

Coffee wrote:

Ad Orientem wrote:

Reub wrote: You mean the guy that says that we shouldn't worry about anybody but ourselves?

At least in foreign affairs... yea.  That's him.

You mean that same guy who couldn't responsibly oversee a small newsletter that was published in his own name... is now somehow going to be responsible for managing 1/3 of our federal goverment?

Given his views on how big the Federal Gov't should be that aught not to be problem.  But yea the whole news letter thing is not good.  It's really old news and he's long since repudiated what was written, and if that's the worst they can dig up on him I'd say he is way ahead of most of the other people running. Still damned embarrassing though. 

Ah yes, let's see, should I vote for the old, rich white guy who says "I'm not a lobbyist, they just paid me $2 million as a 'historian'" or should I vote for the old rich mormon white guy whose daddy owns a large corporation?

That's what I love about democracy, you can pick any candidate you want, as long as they're old, rich, white, and know the right people.

Storm,

Yes...

"Doesn't matter what you see,
Or into it what you read,
You can do it your own way,
If it's done just how they say."

Metallica

Could "Bain Capital" sound any more evil if it tried (not saying it is)?  It's like the "Evil Corp" name from every conspiracy movie ever made.  They very well could have been responsible for Paul Wellstone's plane crash... and every Kennedy untimely death ever.  (sorry if "too soon" on any of those).

moda0306 wrote: Storm,

Yes...

"Doesn't matter what you see,
Or into it what you read,
You can do it your own way,
If it's done just how they say."

Metallica

I saw Metallica on the Ride the Lightning tour and I saw them twice on the Master of Puppets tour.

One venue had about 1200 people, another venue had about 2200 people and the third was opening for Ozzy in an arena.

Awesome.

Metallica is one of maybe a handful of things that makes the 1980's even bearable to fathom IMO.  Up there with Die Hard, Honda CRX, Star Wars, Guns & Roses, and Harry Browne for President (even from a non-libertarian).

I know I've probably alienated a lot of people here, but to much of my generation, we see the 1980's and scratch our heads.

Storm wrote: That's what I love about democracy, you can pick any candidate you want, as long as they're old, rich, white, and know the right people.

Yes, just like Obama.

Obama is such a wierd phenomenon. Why does he want to be president only to do the exact opposit of everything he says he wants to do

Because he started getting the Big Boy briefings, once he became President.

Big Boy briefings?

Like the ones that said we need to hold the hand of the financial industry, or hold who we deem to be terrorists more indefinitely?  What briefings did he get that all of a sudden convinced him that global warming wasn't even worth talking about any more?

I have a feeling the information getting to Obama is going through an unfavorable set of filters.... aka, old, white, rich men who know the right people...

It's not just him though... even the charasmatic actor from the '80's was being told what to do by Don Regan, and we know the affable son-of-a-hero we just got done with was utterly surrounded by people giving advice based on their agendas, not the interests of our country, soldiers, or world.

I'm too stupid to understand what Big Boy Briefings means

stone wrote: I'm too stupid to understand what Big Boy Briefings means

I think "Big Boy Briefings" are like when the commanding generals from the pentagon all take you into a secret room and say "there are 1 billion towel heads that want to kill us, be VERRRRRYYYY SCARED!"  Or all the former chairmen of Goldman Sachs take the president into a room and say "if you don't initiate a stealth bailout of the European financial system we'll defecate into the Intertubes and take out the entire US Stock Market along with every single american's retirement account."

Those kind of "Big Boy Briefings," when a new president is basically told that he is just a "teleprompter in chief" and he better shut up and do what they say or they'll release the photos of him snorting lines of coke off of his college girlfriends boob.

This country is a republic in name only today.  The reality is that it has become an oligarchy.  Back in the 1950's Senator Bob Taft of Ohio, a great American and one of the last of the old school true conservative Republicans said that every President since the 1930's had been chosen by the Chase National Bank.  I think he would say the same thing today.  The name on the mail box at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave may change every four or eight years, but not much else does.  In 2008 a left leaning friend of mine warned me that if I voted for John McCain we would wind up with George Bush's third term as president.  He was right.  I did, and we did.  Now we have seven men and one woman running for President, including the current one.  All but one of them are basically offering us George Bush's fourth term as President, or Chase National's twenty-first term depending on how you look at it.

I am tired of wasting my vote.  He almost certainly can't win.  And he is an imperfect candidate on a number of issues.  But I am voting my political conscience this year.  Ron Paul will get my vote in the primary and again in November, though I may have to write his name in.

Ad Orientem wrote: This country is a republic in name only today.  The reality is that it has become an oligarchy.  Back in the 1950's Senator Bob Taft of Ohio, a great American and one of the last of the old school true conservative Republicans said that every President since the 1930's had been chosen by the Chase National Bank.  I think he would say the same thing today.  The name on the mail box at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave may change every four or eight years, but not much else does.  In 2008 a left leaning friend of mine warned me that if I voted for John McCain we would wind up with George Bush's third term as president.  He was right.  I did, and we did.  Now we have seven men and one woman running for President, including the current one.  All but one of them are basically offering us George Bush's fourth term as President, or Chase National's twenty-first term depending on how you look at it.

I am tired of wasting my vote.  He almost certainly can't win.  And he is an imperfect candidate on a number of issues.  But I am voting my political conscience this year.  Ron Paul will get my vote in the primary and again in November, though I may have to write his name in.

I thought Ron Paul was a big friend to banks. He's against any regulation of them. The only bank he seems to dislike is the Federal Reserve.

Indices wrote: I thought Ron Paul was a big friend to banks. He's against any regulation of them. The only bank he seems to dislike is the Federal Reserve.

You are mistaken.  He is OK with regulating banks, up to a point.  They are for the most part subject to the interstate commerce clause.  The main reason he is not a friend of theirs however is that he believes in capitalism.  That means if you make bad business decisions, you go broke.  Banks don't like that.  They prefer crony-capitalism which translates into private profits coupled with public risk.  If they guess right when they are playing fast and loose with all that money then they get to keep the mad profits.  But if they blow it, then they expect the taxpayers to bail them out.  Heads they win, tails we lose.  Ron Paul is most decidedly not a friend of the banks.  If he had been in office in 2008-2009, there would be quite a few less banks out there right now.

Ad Orientem wrote: I am tired of wasting my vote.

Then you might want to stop voting altogether, because every individual vote in a presidential election with 100+ million voters is wasted. Such elections are decided based on broad trends, and no single vote is going to change the broad trend.

At least in, say, a market, the way you spend your money has a tiny but non-zero effect on prices. Your dollar "vote" actually means something. By contrast, in an all-or-nothing political election, your vote only has a non-zero effect on the outcome if it completely tips the scales. The chances of that happening in a U.S. presidential election, for example, are on the order of one in 100+ million. The total minus your one vote would need to be perfectly balanced between the leading candidates.

Some elections have been close, but to my knowledge they've never been decided by a single vote. If that were ever to happen, you can bet the public would clamor for an official recount, and the recount would result in slightly different totals that differ by more than a single vote. Political votes mean nothing. It's all just political theater designed to give people the illusion of participation. Real change only happens when people vote with their feet or their dollars or engage in mass protests.

I do plan to vote for Ron Paul--not because I think my vote will influence who gets elected (it certainly won't), but simply because I want to help "send a message" by getting Ron Paul's percentage high enough to raise some eyebrows. If Ron Paul were not running for president, I wouldn't waste my time voting at all.

Ron Paul oversaw the writing of a racist newletter in his name for many years and is therefore not qualified to be President. He also advocates legalizing all drugs and withdrawing from our role on the world stage. He is a screwball.

Reub I agree that racism is worse than corruption. Corruption just makes us poor. Racism can lay down scars in a society that take centuries to fade.

Storm wrote: I think "Big Boy Briefings" are like when the commanding generals from the pentagon all take you into a secret room and say "there are 1 billion towel heads that want to kill us, be VERRRRRYYYY SCARED!"  Or all the former chairmen of Goldman Sachs take the president into a room and say "if you don't initiate a stealth bailout of the European financial system we'll defecate into the Intertubes and take out the entire US Stock Market along with every single american's retirement account."
Those kind of "Big Boy Briefings," when a new president is basically told that he is just a "teleprompter in chief" and he better shut up and do what they say or they'll release the photos of him snorting lines of coke off of his college girlfriends boob.

Is it fair to say that, for better or worse, Roosevelt would basically have replied to such a Big Boy Briefing with, "whatever" . 

Reub wrote: Ron Paul oversaw the writing of a racist newletter in his name for many years and is therefore not qualified to be President. He also advocates legalizing all drugs [...] He is a screwball.

While Ron Paul's personal view is that most drugs should be legalized, his official position is simply the Constitutional one: that the individual states should be free to decide their own drug laws and that the federal government should stay out of it.

Speaking of racism and drugs, I find it ironic when people accuse Ron Paul of racism (or of being associated with racist writings) while simultaneously decrying his personal opinion that most drugs should be legalized. One of the main reasons Ron Paul wants to legalize most drugs is because their prohibition has disproportionately harmed minority--particularly black--neighborhoods and, at least in the case of marijuana, originated from blatantly racist stereotypes. He explains in one of his books:

The drug war has wrought particular devastation in minority neighborhoods, as decent parents find themselves consistently undermined when they try to teach good values to their children. When the lucrative profits from the black market in drugs make drug dealers the most ostentatiously prosperous sector of society, it is much more difficult for parents to persuade their children to shun those profits and pursue a much less remunerative, if more honorable, line of work. Putting an end to the federal drug war would immediately pull the rug out from under the drug lords who have unleashed a reign of terror over our cities. Finally, the good Americans who live there could make their homes livable once again.

[...]

A substantial motivation behind [federal marijuana prohibition], which is evident all over the debates on the subject, was a contempt for Mexicans, with whom marijuana use was widely associated at the time. On the floor of the Texas Senate, one state senator declared: "All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff is what makes them crazy." Similar statements could be heard in numerous states around the country. Harry Anslinger, who headed the federal government's Bureau of Narcotics, said that "the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races." That was not unusual: Anslinger made comments like that as a matter of routine.

The resulting Marijuana Tax Act of 1937--yes, federal prohibition is really just seven decades old--had little to do with real science or medicine, and a lot to do with petty ethnic grudges, careerism in the Bureau of Narcotics, and disinformation and propaganda in the popular press, where yellow journalism still lived. Hearings on this important matter took a grand total of two hours, very little of which had anything to do with the health effects of marijuana, the alleged reason behind the proposed prohibition.

Source: The Revolution: A Manifesto by Ron Paul, pp. 125, 127-128