Search results

FYI that is not what ethics is. That is more an attempted statement of the most commonly sought goals of practical politics than a definition of ethics.

A certain quote towards the end of Billy Maddison leapt to my mind when I read this...

Very interesting topic. Whilst certainly there is a connection between the moral and the legal, it is by no means necessary for justice. Consider that all 4 combos of im/moral and il/legal are possible. (Note: I only use examples which can be rationally justified). Immoral and illegal -...

Like it or not, the issue of fiat currency is a constitutionally permitted process. I do law at USYD (and my friend does law at ANU). We were talking about this based on our classes in constitutional law (which includes a section on foreign constitutions) and Article 1 of the constitution states...

^This perfect analysis

Leopold FTW! Him and Superintendent Chalmers = best characters LOL

That was precisely the point of that sentence. To highlight the absurdity of that form of reasoning.

Nothing of substance here First, you are redirecting debate to whether government is efficient at all. Which is an implicit concession to my point that supporting some government involvement does not logically entail supporting its involvement in all areas. But that's not totally true, you...

That conclusion does not follow from the premise.

Your grasp on logic then is obviously pathetically feeble. I would like to say two things First, in theory, what you say is false. You must understand why and for what purpose we want taxes raised or government intervention. The reason is because it is effective at achieving certain, commonly...

You specify in practice. Are saying that stagflation demonstrated Keynesian fiscal and/or monetary policy to be ineffective? This is demonstrably false as even a cursory look at economic data will testify to its efficacy In theory, stagflation poses no problem either. Although, granted, you may...

Yes Keynesianism can handle stagflation well. Supply shocks combines with inefficient labour markets (the labour market is a BIG area of market failure, but also unions mess everything up as well). That's the basic gist.

1974-early 80's experienced rampant stagflation. It even overthrew all economic thinking up to that point. We had to wait for Milton Friedman to come to the rescue and explain it.

??? Do you mean ignore that it ever occurred? or ignore that it is happening now or has happened recently? If the latter than I can ignore it because we are not experiencing stagflation and if the former I don't need to ignore it. Keynesianism can handle stagflation perfectly well.

Hyperbolic crap. To think that raising taxes on the wealthiest individuals is even commensurate to true, unbridled communism, is to have a pretty high view of communism.

Implying that rich people are the motor of the economy to the extent that they are the ones 'spending money sustaining our economy' is quite a Keynesian thing to say. But if you endorse Keynesianism, as I do, then you should recognise that higher taxation on the rich only mildly reduces their...

Scuba, That's interesting to hear, I wonder though, how did the truth of austrian economic inform your morality? Are you a utilitarian or do you believe in rights, given the two are mutually exclusive I just wonder what side you fall on.

Question to all the libertarians. Why do so many of you believe austrian economics to be true? It seems like there is no causal connection between a moral/political philosophy and the true nature of economic exchange. saying "I believe Austrian economics because I am a libertarian" is like...

Absolute disgrace, another indicator of the downfall of western civilisation