Liberty Forged

the State has no money of its own, so it has no power of its own. ` Nock

Self-evident ignorance and other obvious deficiencies…

Posted by Jesse on October 12, 2008

Need I spend my time on seemingly unimportant comments? Unfortunately yes.

Although the opposition has no real argument to offer it is still worth the effort to defend and clarify positions in this matter. The material in question begins with a post regarding the “Worst Week“. Of course the author points out the simple and important fact that Wall Street is not representative of all that is the US economy. And this is important to note when one notes the battle cry of those who want to destroy the free market and governments who want to control money and all transactions and are using an alleged “crisis” to carry out their goal. An impossible goal, to be sure, but governments have never been a bastion of common sense or integrity. Indeed, fallible humans institute power for any reason they deem fit whenever they can get away with it. How many times have you or someone else said: “there should be a law“. (Kinda scary when you think about it.)

I write this as a reaction to a contributor in the so-called “discussion“.

Let me repost some comments in lieu of this misallocation of criticism.

This is the author’s thoughts on the “worst week”:

“I think the threat of an Obama presidency is a major reason for Wall Street’s ills of late.”

“There is simply no other reason. “

I don’t even think I need to confirm my suspicion that this comment was made by a McCain fan. Of course, this is not my problem. This is blatant political bias. My point in responding to such a post was to add to the “discussion”.

For anyone knowledgeable in the going-ons of the market and it’s arch nemesis in organized theft and violence, it should be clear why the market is not rallying. History is relevant and there is none in this post. 5 ‘n 1/2 years is a marker, but it doesn’t tell us anything.

The reactive comment comes after my repeated attempts to bring to the table a larger view of the current state of the economy. I went beyond the bounds of Wall Street by commenting on this broader topic of the economy and introduced info on military spending. In addition, I responded to a comment on Chris Buckley’s endorsement of Obama, but all-in-all, i added nominally more to the discussion than anyone else. I am criticized not because I was speaking off-topic but because the commenter “wasn’t interested”

To cut to the chase…I have yet to directly respond to the latest comment. I think that what was said should speak for itself. (Really, it is so off base in the context of the “discussion” it is amusing. And I know this person says the same of me, except I am presenting actual relevant material (i did include personal opinion and language, whereas this individual is relying on….? I don’t even think they could coherently define anarchism)

Unfortunately, I have recieved similar attitudes from related posters. Of course, they wont claim to be related. I have posted articles that show how the positions they hold are based upon a similar philosophy. I just don’t think they like the language I use, which is something I am working on to improve. But some of these people aren’t familiar with the subject material I present and when they are it is usually insufficient or often based on presumptions or concluded with a question.

I will add more to this later…..I have work to attend to.

———————

UPDATE:

well i responded. i used mike rozeff as a weapon. his precise analysis is deadly.

i used this link.

Liquidity Revisited (contains a great link to Rogers on bloomberg too, 10minutes long)

harking back to the opposition comment…anarchist proposals? heck yeah!! lol. go ahead click on the link if you dare…

______________________

UPDATE:

So, I think that the links i provided to the comments section on both websites were made

by the same individual…. I hadn’t realized that till just now…Most people seem to go by the same name….my bad…

But my position is still the same:

I tried to narrow my comments to the focus of the author, derekglover on libertasexemplar.

It is not my intention to conflate the attitude of the commenter with the content of the post. Thats just a matter of circumstance.

My first comment was stupid. I really didn’t understand that I was asking exactly what the author was claiming. Duh!

I could’ve spent more time on providing the evidence derekglover asked for specifically. he deviation in his post and my responses were a matter of perspective. partial responses by the author:

“I have made an assersion in hopes of explaining the situation and my evidence is Obama’s chances of election, proximity of election day, and his tax proposals. What kind of evidence do you want?”

“Investors are concerned with things outside the scope of the bank bailout.”

i was making another claim other than the “threat of an Obama Presidency”. Namely that: the confidence is not there.” and“government is pre-empting the market and establishing vast controls.”

I continued to suggest other input and more sources for a larger perspective on the economy because it serves no one to only look at one sector of the economy or government action. It is all related.

Sure, I offered some harsh language and opinion! : “a con game has been played and a lot of cards are on the table. people are folding left and right. soon only a few powerhouses will remain. it might be a massively decepetive and destructive way to eliminate competition but it is working.”

Meanwhile, the commenter who demands “discussions of merit” avers: “clearly, the Office has been preempted by It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia as the funniest show on television.”

Advertisements

4 Responses to “Self-evident ignorance and other obvious deficiencies…”

  1. Jesse said

    lol j_ball. why would you take it personally?

    look at the timing of the post and its context.

  2. Jesse said

    its not like i am posting profanities..i am posting relevant material!!

    it is amazing the viceral reaction one gets for posting links.

  3. Jesse said

    oh yeah….in case no one caught it…i said “nominally more”
    thats just a simple count, not a measure of substance.

  4. Jesse said

    note to the future: i have just re-read this entry

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: