0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Any takers for a discussion about “Marxian economics”?
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:16 am to cadillacattack
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:16 am to cadillacattack
quote:
Socialism isn’t it … as history has proven.
She just wants to use capitalism as the evil that caused all of the prisoners she loves to be imprisoned. It was capitalism that drove them to murder, rob, and rape people.
She also will not grasp a large portion of this thread outside of basic talking points, as any deep dive into actually understanding the nuances and intricacies of such a complicated topic will elude her, but she will give her damnedest to act as if she understands because she is a pseudo-intellectual who thinks she is smart because she was able to remember just enough to pass standard tests in college and get a degree, but is actually very dumb outside of memorization skills.
When she is absolutely lost and has no idea how to respond to someone much smarter than her (basically everyone here not named Kige Ramsey), she will reply with a snarky remark that often has nothing to do with the topic and is very dismissive, so, again, she can try to appear as if she is the smart one who fully understands the topic.
Not sure why you people keep engaging with such a moronic and miserable person.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:16 am to 4cubbies
Using Aristotle’s Golden Mean, Market Capitalism is the virtuous balance spot between the vice of command collectivism and the vice of anarchistic economy.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:18 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I didn’t even make a claim what do you think I’m arguing for?
Bringing up industrialization is the same as Trump bringing up "manufacturing"
We are a global economy now. Pretending that it's the 1950s-60s, with the post-War economy in the US and the global economy being neutered, is irrational.
The true global economy didn't start until the USSR fell and the "new world order" was established, and I'd suggest you look at what happened to the economic status and SOL across poor countries in the world as more freedom/capitalism was allowed to spread once this happened.
This post was edited on 11/3/26 at 8:20 am
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:20 am to Rip Torner
Socialism hinges on the idea that productivity, innovation, and indusstriousness will remain unchanged with incentive structures removed.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:20 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Did the central planning align with the decline of real wages and de industrialization though?
Our government has put into place anti-capitalism laws since the beginning. True competition cannot happen with even simple things like patents and copyrights.
quote:
That started in the 50s or 60s
Well after the exponential rise of government meddling in the economy. With what happened in the 1910's and with FDR, I am not surprised at the outcomes.
This post was edited on 11/3/26 at 8:21 am
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
We are a global economy now. Pretending that it's the 1950s-60s, with the post-War economy in the US and the global economy being neutered, is irrational.
Hopefully the rise of robot automation will lead to a domestic resurgence in manufacturing. If anything, the recent munition shortage should prove we need that rapid scalability in domestic production for war materials if needed.
This post was edited on 11/3/26 at 8:22 am
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
We are a global economy now. Pretending that it's the 1950s-60s, with the post-War economy in the US and the global economy being neutered, is irrational.
The true global economy didn't start until the USSR fell and the "new world order" was established, and I'd suggest you look at what happened to the economic status and SOL across poor countries in the world as more freedom/capitalism was allowed to spread once this happened
This all sounds like globalism and I was assured, by the members of this here forum, that America was anti-globalist
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
We are a global economy now
Sadly, yes
Many things that we need to onshore, though. Like medication.
That said, Louisiana wouldn't have $300 billion in new growth if it weren't for globalization.
I just wish globalization would stop being used as an excuse to issue work visas and suppress American's wages
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:what term would you like me to use instead?
Bringing up industrialization is the same as Trump bringing up "manufacturing
quote:Are you implying that deindustrialization is irrelevant when discussing the evolution of our economy? You’re being a dick for no reason.
We are a global economy now. Pretending that it's the 1950s-60s, with the post-War economy in the US and the global economy being neutered, is irrational.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:23 am to 4cubbies
quote:
You’re being a dick for no reason.
Still can’t respond?
What’s that saying again? Don’t throw stones when you live in a glass house?
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:23 am to Roaad
quote:
Centrally planned economies lack fluidity, flexibility, and agility.
And consider it's a stunningly mind numbing position to take in the Gulf south re: hurricane preparedness.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:26 am to 4cubbies
Well you go first.
I'll wait.
I'll wait.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:26 am to SlowFlowPro
You sound pretty Marxist there. “You will buy what we tell you to buy”.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:26 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:The theorist cited in the passage is identified as a Marxist economist when I googled him.
Why is what you posted here supposed to lead to a discussion about “Marxist economics”?
Edit: I should have used “Marxian”
This post was edited on 11/3/26 at 8:32 am
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:26 am to 4cubbies
Weren't you supposed to start a new job today? And yet here you are battling it out with the more economically equipped minds of politalk. 
Impressive.
Impressive.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:27 am to Roaad
quote:several people are egregiously offended by this apparently.
She obtained specious information, and she is seeking to discuss. Running people off for shite like that is how you create echo chambers.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:27 am to 4cubbies
quote:
is identified as a Marxist economist when I googled him.
Has a Marxist economy ever worked? No. So why take anything they say seriously?
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:28 am to 4cubbies
quote:
several people are egregiously offended by this apparently.
Dodge dip duck dive and dodge some moar
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:30 am to 4cubbies
Impressive. You've made the PoliBoard band together with their most hated enemy, SFP, in pointing out what a stupid vapid cvnt you are.
Posted on 11/3/26 at 8:31 am to 4cubbies
PT's most devouted Leftist blaming capitalism for America's problems. personally, I am shocked.
This post was edited on 11/3/26 at 8:32 am
Page 3 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News