State of the Discussion

The posts in play...

Derbyshire and the Happy Meal Conservatives
()
+
quote of the day
()
+
Brooks on Jindal
()
+
Jindal: debt is bad when we say it is
()
+
the moderating influence of the technocratic Republican
()
+
Grow your own?
()
+
blogging
()
+
The Final Word on Liber-al-tarianism
()
+
Balance Sheet Recession
()
+
reflections
()
+
Quick Hit Financial Blogging…
()
+
Apple v. Microsoft
()
+
 

The comments...

Bob
+ I'm going to keep this very short because I have expressed my view on populism elsewhere on this site. I will repeat my view [. . .]
Cascadian
+ I guess that makes America Left of Center. I wouldn't disagree with that. At the moment the Right is in shambles. [. . .]

Sure, "E.D. Kain". Whatever you say. No intellectual honesty. Riiiiight. I take it you read, say, the paper edition of National Review? Do you?

+ Step back, Dierkes, and consider what you are proposing. Namely, the party in power at the federal level of this country believes that the federal [. . .]
+ [...] on he’s on, when he’s off he’s off.  Here he is dead-on.  I’m sure the Limbaugh/Happy Meal Cons won’t love this, but they need [. . .]
E.D. Kain
+ Mike: A ‘middle-brow’ conservatism is a good idea in that it would put us at a happy medium. We wouldn’t look like the dumb football player [. . .]
+ This is an interesting notion. Currently there is a real obsession with intellect on the Left. They believe that having a clearly articulate and well-educated [. . .]
Bob
+ Matthew asks, “…why, precisely, it is the job of the federal government to pay for people’s food, their unemployment monies, and the rest of the [. . .]
Bob
+ "I’m one of those weird people that think many of W ’s policies were liberal." Well you are certainly not alone in that boat. [. . .]
+ While I am sympathetic to Jindal having to follow-up Obama's speech...his was really, really bad. During the first couple of minutes I was fighting the [. . .]
Rortybomb
+ Freddie, everytime someone comments "If you have read...by Charles Murray" an angel gets its wings. In defense of Jindal, giving the retort speech is always a [. . .]

Don't forget, Jindal was in Congress when the Republicans were running up deficits like crazy. So he's your typical hypocritical Republican.

anon
+ I think he just has to deal with a crappy legislature. He ends up proposing some decent legislation and vetoing some crappy legislation. Ultimately, however, [. . .]
Cascadian
+ I would forward that the only way America can ever refocus towards non-federal levels of government is to cut and cut and cut federal [. . .]
Trevor
+ "Now, perhaps there is some other way to regulate the industry that keeps it smaller." Easy. You write it into incorporation and limited partnership codes [. . .]
+ Well, self-identified liberal boy, the argument against the uberliberal Yglesias would start and successfully conclude with the somehow forgotten in the annals of sounding so [. . .]
Cascadian
+ Hmm, I suppose this is my bad confusing Republican with conservative. I'm one of those weird people that think many of W 's policies [. . .]

"I'm a banana!"

(Nobody? Nobody? Bueller? No Hertzefeld fans?)

Bob

Cascadian, To continue with my "unreflective" comment, What the hell are you saying?

But, sorry for the slopy typing, that should have been Glenn Greenwald.

Cascadian
+ I'm not sure exactly how to take your post Bob. It seems a bit unreflective. I consider part of liberalism the notions that [. . .]
Bob

Will, I've always understood that tomatoes are fruit.

Bob
+ Maybe this is inappropriate, never stopped me before, but I would like to offer this as an alternative for the quote of the day. From [. . .]
Dan Miller
+ Hear hear! You never see conservatives writing about an affirmative vision for health care--especially not one that's politically viable (Norquistian slashing or health savings accounts [. . .]
E.D. Kain
+ Will: The rationale for stopping short of full-blown legalization is that it would prevent a dedicated Marijuana industry from aggressively marketing the drug. I'm the first to [. . .]
+ Also, I'm envisioning the future of the League as some sort of benign marijuana co-op on the Washington-British Columbia border. Why ruin that dream, ED? [. . .]
+ ED - The rationale for stopping short of full-blown legalization is that it would prevent a dedicated Marijuana industry from aggressively marketing the drug. This does [. . .]
Joseph F M
+ It's funny, but this is kind of what has always struck me as being as being the actual goal of the Republican party: not limited [. . .]
Cascadian
+ There is certainly a health concern. Is it actually worse than smoking a pack a day? A big mac a day? [. . .]
+ I agree - but then you are arguing for long-term, habitual use. In this age of lung cancer, addition medicine, etc it's hard to sell [. . .]
Cascadian
+ I smoke cigarettes, drink coffee and beer all of which give non habitual users highs of various degrees. It's been years since I've had [. . .]
+ I think we could get into logistical arguements about duration of the 'buzz' etc. You have a beer in a bar and wait the legally-recomended [. . .]
Cascadian
+ One is a vegetable, the other is an addictive drug that may lead to health problems. That’s a non-arbitrary reason to restrict property rights [. . .]
E.D. Kain
+ But Will, if the argument is that we should be allowed to grow it but not to sell or purchase it here, how does that [. . .]
+ This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. There's an intuitive distinction between marijuana and tomatoes. One is a vegetable, the other is [. . .]
+ Most people would argue that alcohol guaranteed some form of impairment 100% of the time (cooking with it aside). I mean, even if you [. . .]
+ I consider marijuana fairly harmless. I have real reservations though about legalizing a product that, when used correctly, guarantees some form of impairment 100% of [. . .]
E.D. Kain
+ Thanks, Mike. Great points. I think "creative" is the key word in all of it. Creative capital, creative solutions, creative partnerships. [. . .]
+ Beautiful piece E.D. Lots of great points, so i will just choose one: Re: How to get private capital flowing gain? I work for a [. . .]
E.D. Kain
+ Well yes, I mentioned that above. I'm morally and ethically opposed to such partnerships, as I don't believe profit should be made off of criminals [. . .]

Of course, there's the absolutely terrible public-private partnerships in the penal and defense contracting worlds too.

+ I think you need to make a more affirmative case for public-private partnerships than you’re making here, where you’re just asserting it as a good [. . .]
+ That is certainly a risk. I'm against privatization of certain things (like jails) on moral and ethical grounds. For instance, your example of [. . .]
Andrew
+ "I also like the idea of projects with public/private partnership potential." Out of curiosity, E.D., why do you like such projects? Frequently, the projects that [. . .]
+ Thanks, Bob. I am a sentimental idiot - though I prefer the term "Romantic." (Then again, perhaps more of an idiot in Dostoevsky's [. . .]

Yeah, this is certainly how I feel at times, either blogging or trying to get my creative writing on the page...

+ [...] possible.  The trick here is to not force private capital to move too soon or too quickly, essentially pushing healthy private institutions into high [. . .]

Dave:

I don’t know. This cheap debt - bidding up prices thing has too familiar a ring to it…

Yeah, no kidding....

+ @Eli: Since your argument neglects to mention anything about Microsoft or Windows, are we to assume you did the truly thrifty thing, and invested [. . .]
 
Please do be so kind as to share this post.
TwitterFacebookRedditEmailPrintFriendlyMore options