Options

Why Are So Many "Nerds" Libertarians?

13468922

Posts

  • Options
    SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    The Gold Standard is all because of Ayn Rand's overactive distrust of goverment which fueled a wholly irrational belief in the "objective" value of gold as superior to a floating exchange rate and federal reserve system. She preached it heavy, and so Objectivists everywhere buy into it full steam, even though it is a fundamental misunderstanding of money.
    Au is Au

    Senjutsu on
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    Au is Au
    I C WUT U DID THAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yar on
  • Options
    Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Okay, folks. First- Friedman was right about the depression being partly due to tight monetary policy.

    However, there were other contributing factors that our libertarian friend here ignores, and most importantly, dismissing the impact of the New Deal or WW2 is flat-out monocausal.

    Isn't a mainstay of mainstream libertarian thought that federal economic management is outside the scope of government and "tight" monetary policy (or even returns to the gold standard lol) is the only legitimate monetary policy?

    I'm pretty sure that Ron Paul was taking that position.

    Indeed. However to take the global economy off of fiat money would be disaster, as Friedman would be the first to point out. If Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard, he's like ten thousand times crazier than I thought he was.

    Professor Phobos on
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    Because nerds are generally cripplingly anti-social.
    Fixed that for you.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    Au is Au
    I C WUT U DID THAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    On that note, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/08/13/BA200448.DTL
    Although his law can't be broken, a misdemeanor fine of up to one-tenth of a cent would be imposed on anyone or anything caught being unidentical to itself within city limits.

    Senjutsu on
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I think he really just wants to get back to Kansas and following the gold standard is the only way. A witch told him so.

    moniker on
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Thinatos wrote: »
    Yar wrote: »
    Because nerds are generally cripplingly anti-social.
    Fixed that for you.
    Hey thanks dude. That's probably the second reason, yeah.

    Yar on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2007
    Indeed. However to take the global economy off of fiat money would be disaster, as Friedman would be the first to point out. If Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard, he's like ten thousand times crazier than I thought he was.


    Ron Paul 2008: Like Ten Thousand Times Crazier than You Initially Thought

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    MahnmutMahnmut Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    I think he really just wants to get back to Kansas and following the gold standard is the only way. A witch told him so.

    Witch was misguided. The gold standard only leads to a humbug politician; it's the silver slippers that will take Ron Paul home.

    Mahnmut on
    Steam/LoL: Jericho89
  • Options
    Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Indeed. However to take the global economy off of fiat money would be disaster, as Friedman would be the first to point out. If Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard, he's like ten thousand times crazier than I thought he was.


    Ron Paul 2008: Like Ten Thousand Times Crazier than You Initially Thought

    Thank you, sir. May I sig this for a short while? It amuses me greatly.

    Professor Phobos on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2007
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Indeed. However to take the global economy off of fiat money would be disaster, as Friedman would be the first to point out. If Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard, he's like ten thousand times crazier than I thought he was.


    Ron Paul 2008: Like Ten Thousand Times Crazier than You Initially Thought

    Thank you, sir. May I sig this for a short while? It amuses me greatly.

    Please do :)

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Mahnmut wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    I think he really just wants to get back to Kansas and following the gold standard is the only way. A witch told him so.

    Witch was misguided. The gold standard only leads to a humbug politician; it's the silver slippers that will take Ron Paul home.

    Feh, details. All we really learned from that story was that an army of flying monkeys = power.

    moniker on
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    moniker wrote: »
    Mahnmut wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    I think he really just wants to get back to Kansas and following the gold standard is the only way. A witch told him so.

    Witch was misguided. The gold standard only leads to a humbug politician; it's the silver slippers that will take Ron Paul home.

    Feh, details. All we really learned from that story was that an army of flying monkeys = power.

    I learned that you can do anything you want as long as you claim you are doing it in order to help a sweet little girl.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    Mithrandir86Mithrandir86 Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    Ron Paul is strongly pro-Gold Standard. The Government has no right to devalue your savings a blloo bloo bloo

    The Gold Standard is pretty dumb, and it caused just so many problems.

    Mithrandir86 on
  • Options
    JohnnyCacheJohnnyCache Starting Defense Place at the tableRegistered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I'll tell you why the internet is lib

    because libertarianism is perfectly suited to the internet fucktard theory.

    The internet is the place where we all gather to whine, bitch, whinge and critique and libertarianism is a "tear down" philosophy totally consistent with that negativity.

    The internet is also the place where everyone is anonymous and thus free to "lay it down hard" and "run this bitch" and so it's the perfect place to say things like "caveat emptor" and "fuck charity, let 'em starve"

    Psychologically, the sort of person that makes a good Epeen Waver also makes a good libertarian, is what I'm saying.

    Also, just to pick a tiny thing from the early pages apart, Bartertown was an oligarchical dictatorship, Thunderdome was the gladiator arena where residents thereof could seek/face justice (upon certain spins of "the wheel" after breaking "a deal")

    JohnnyCache on
  • Options
    SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Thinatos wrote: »
    No, I totally think Jefferson would be a Libertarian today, because Jefferson was bat-shit fucking crazy. He'd fit right in with the Libertarian movement.
    Hahaha, well observed.

    SithDrummer on
  • Options
    JacobkoshJacobkosh Gamble a stamp. I can show you how to be a real man!Moderator mod
    edited September 2007
    The Gold Standard is pretty dumb, and it caused just so many problems.

    You have to admit it would totally rule if a mountain of gold appeared every time real wealth increased.

    Jacobkosh on
  • Options
    Mithrandir86Mithrandir86 Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    The Gold Standard is pretty dumb, and it caused just so many problems.

    You have to admit it would totally rule if a mountain of gold appeared every time real wealth increased.

    As ridiculous as it sounds, some people actually implicitly expect that to happen.

    Mithrandir86 on
  • Options
    ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2007
    Thinatos wrote: »
    No, I totally think Jefferson would be a Libertarian today, because Jefferson was bat-shit fucking crazy. He'd fit right in with the Libertarian movement.
    Hahaha, well observed.

    Nah.

    I'd bet he'd be one of those anarcho-syndicalists.

    You can't be a libertarian and hate industrialization/economic centralization as much as Jefferson did.

    Shinto on
  • Options
    EriosErios Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Pages behind.com
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    Yet again, mithrandir, I'm going to have to call you out on the fundamental and rather scurrilous dishonesty of throwing up Milton Fucking Friedman like he's the end all be all of economics and not even acknowledging the existence of controversy.

    He's not. That's why threw up the second book. It was published in 2005, and Ben fucking Bernanke was the editor.

    Edit: Some people may have issues with Freidman due to his political views, which is fine, but as Economist he was really the greatest of the 20th century.
    The book I am referring to is not a political book like Capitalism and Freedom, but rather an academic Economic book. He won a Nobel Prize for it. It's pretty much Economic canon at this point.


    No, fuck you, die. I will put up John Manyard Keynes on that pedestal for his influence on policy that lasted from the Great Depression to the Current administration. Friedman is basically an addendum to Alfred Marshall.

    And monetary policy? That's not just the only reason even friedman cites (though I suppose banking sentiment is akin to MP). To him, a panic regarding banking (reminding you, no FDIC) caused a failure of the banking infrastructure.

    And screw U-Chi, gimme, Stiglitz, Bhagwati et. al from the school on the Hudson!

    Erios on
    Steam: erios23, Live: Coconut Flavor, Origin: erios2386.
  • Options
    ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2007
    I have to do a presentation on anti-trust policies next week.

    While Greenspan may only be tangentially mentioned, I have a feeling that I may have to bring up the rumors of his being Ayn Rand's lover, then have a several slide tirade against Ayn Rand, before the presentation of anti-trust material can continue.

    Shinto on
  • Options
    Che GuevaraChe Guevara __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2007
    jacobkosh wrote: »
    The Gold Standard is pretty dumb, and it caused just so many problems.

    You have to admit it would totally rule if a mountain of gold appeared every time real wealth increased.

    As ridiculous as it sounds, some people actually implicitly expect that to happen.

    It's about attributing value to material things.

    A mountain of material wealth (or even immaterial wealth ala Microsoft) might be worth its weight in gold, which would have the same effect as creating that mountain of gold. Using oil as an economic standard is more insane, because the object of a mountain of oil barrels is to process and eventually burn them.

    However, a mountain Microsoft's operating system CDs and DVDs would be worth significantly more than gold at current standards.

    An ounce of gold goes for about $742.31 Canadian.

    Two CDs or DVDs, without packaging, weigh about an ounce, and two Windows Vista Ultimate DVDs go for $499 at The Source, or about $1000 Canadian, plus tax.

    Therefore, a mountain of MS Vista Ultimate CDs with licenses (but without packaging) is actually worth a lot more than gold.

    Che Guevara on
  • Options
    SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Shinto wrote: »
    I have to do a presentation on anti-trust policies next week.

    While Greenspan may only be tangentially mentioned, I have a feeling that I may have to bring up the rumors of his being Ayn Rand's lover, then have a several slide tirade against Ayn Rand, before the presentation of anti-trust material can continue.

    "...and that brings to an end this overview of US anti-trust policies. In conclusion, bitch is crazy"

    Senjutsu on
  • Options
    KatholicKatholic Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Shinto wrote: »
    I have to do a presentation on anti-trust policies next week.

    While Greenspan may only be tangentially mentioned, I have a feeling that I may have to bring up the rumors of his being Ayn Rand's lover, then have a several slide tirade against Ayn Rand, before the presentation of anti-trust material can continue.

    Shinto, can you go back to your old buddy icon? I like it better, it made you seem more evil in a way.

    Katholic on
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Shinto wrote: »
    Thinatos wrote: »
    No, I totally think Jefferson would be a Libertarian today, because Jefferson was bat-shit fucking crazy. He'd fit right in with the Libertarian movement.
    Hahaha, well observed.
    Nah.

    I'd bet he'd be one of those anarcho-syndicalists.

    You can't be a libertarian and hate industrialization/economic centralization as much as Jefferson did.
    Man, Libertarians specialize in totally selling out one set of their beliefs in order to advance another one. He'd fit in perfectly.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    JohnnyCacheJohnnyCache Starting Defense Place at the tableRegistered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Seriously I think the alignment between nerds and libs comes from the simple alignment on many petty issues - it's an appealing philosophy on the surface, where it eliminates several hypocritical and nonsensical elements of our government.

    JohnnyCache on
  • Options
    GlorfindelGlorfindel Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Hacksaw wrote: »
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    Ron Paul is strongly pro-Gold Standard. The Government has no right to devalue your savings a blloo bloo bloo
    He probably thinks Alan Greenspan was the devil.

    hold up, I don't think a return to the gold standard would be good, but Greenspan . . .

    The man who is partly responsibly for your housing bubble, and claimed you can't even tell if there is a bubble until it pops?

    Glorfindel on
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    There really isn't much ground to stand on criticizing Greenspan.

    Yar on
  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    There really isn't much ground to stand on criticizing Greenspan.

    That's a joke, right?

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    There really isn't much ground to stand on criticizing Greenspan.

    That's a joke, right?
    No.

    I mean, you can criticize the greatest batter ever for his strikeouts. That's easy. But realistically there isn't much ground to stand on.

    And no, it's not a bubble until it pops. If it never pops, it wasn't a bubble. Just as many so-called "bubbles" turned out to be sustained growth as not.

    Yar on
  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    I mean, you can criticize the greatest batter ever for his strikeouts. That's easy. But realistically there isn't much ground to stand on.

    I think we can start at "he betrayed Americans on the SS deal", and work from there.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    Yar wrote: »
    There really isn't much ground to stand on criticizing Greenspan.

    That's a joke, right?
    No.

    I mean, you can criticize the greatest batter ever for his strikeouts. That's easy. But realistically there isn't much ground to stand on.

    And no, it's not a bubble until it pops. If it never pops, it wasn't a bubble. Just as many so-called "bubbles" turned out to be sustained growth as not.

    You can absolutely tell when a significant portion of a large industry is based on a business model which is untenable in the long term.

    That's what a bubble is.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    No, that's not at all what a bubble is.

    A bubble is when the interest and popularity in investing in something is greater than the actual value of that something. But since the two pretty much define one another, you really can't say for sure it's a bubble until you see it popping.

    And I don't know what you mean by the SS betrayal. Greenspan has been saying for a while that SS needs reform and can't survive. It wasn't in his power to fix it.

    Yar on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2007
    Greenspan's tenure mas marked by the dot com bubble and the housing bubble. There are criticism of him on many sides, but personally, I think he was insufficiently disciplined in raising interest rates during periods of what turned out to be somewhat artificial growth.

    Also, he did sell out on endorsing Bush's tax cut

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    AbsurdistAbsurdist Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Greenspan's tenure mas marked by the dot com bubble
    not his fault
    and the housing bubble.
    arguable
    Also, he did sell out on endorsing Bush's tax cut
    Touche.

    Absurdist on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yar wrote: »
    And I don't know what you mean by the SS betrayal. Greenspan has been saying for a while that SS needs reform and can't survive. It wasn't in his power to fix it.

    No, he made a deal with the taxpayers - they'd pay more into SS, and that would shore it up when the Boomers hit. (This is in large part why we had surpluses.) then when Bush came in, he happily handed it over to the wealthy.

    So, fuck Greenspan.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    He more or less created the housing bubble in order to ensure a soft landing for the .com bubble so as to prevent a recession. Didn't really work, it just punted it down a decade or so for when the housing bubble begins to burst as sub-prime forclosures fuck over many banks and hedge-funds royally. (as opposed to completely due to government bail-outs of the more stupid lenders)

    moniker on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited September 2007
    Absurdist wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Greenspan's tenure mas marked by the dot com bubble
    not his fault
    Not really his fault, but he really should have raised interest rates much more aggressively than he did. A lot of that bullshit could have been nipped in the bud with a somewhat more restrictive money supply, and it would have allowed for more aggressive corrective action when the bubble burst. As it stood, interest rates couldn't be cut after a certain point because they were going into negative territory.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Thinatos wrote: »
    Shinto wrote: »
    Thinatos wrote: »
    No, I totally think Jefferson would be a Libertarian today, because Jefferson was bat-shit fucking crazy. He'd fit right in with the Libertarian movement.
    Hahaha, well observed.
    Nah.

    I'd bet he'd be one of those anarcho-syndicalists.

    You can't be a libertarian and hate industrialization/economic centralization as much as Jefferson did.
    Man, Libertarians specialize in totally selling out one set of their beliefs in order to advance another one. He'd fit in perfectly.

    Isn't there something a bit odd about a libertarian who owned slaves?

    EmperorSeth on
    You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
  • Options
    AbsurdistAbsurdist Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Absurdist wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Greenspan's tenure mas marked by the dot com bubble
    not his fault
    Not really his fault, but he really should have raised interest rates much more aggressively than he did. A lot of that bullshit could have been nipped in the bud with a somewhat more restrictive money supply, and it would have allowed for more aggressive corrective action when the bubble burst. As it stood, interest rates couldn't be cut after a certain point because they were going into negative territory.
    Hmmm. Pretty good point. I think that my knowledge of macroeconomics is too generalized to adequately counter that, but I maintain a certain support of Greenspan if only because he was able to generate so much foreign investment revenue during a time period when the dollar was relatively strong and the deficit was relatively large.

    I'm not saying, of course, that the economic future of the US is rosy - quite the contrary - but I think most of the blame falls on bad congressional budgeting rather than on bad reserve management. Just my 2 cents. :D

    Absurdist on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sign In or Register to comment.