weedfacekilla's forum posts

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

yes absolutely, the war on drugs has been a complete and utter failure

making drugs illegal does not stop people from using them, on the contrary it makes people more curious

making something people want illegal simply creates a black market... look at mexico 60,000 deaths since they started to crack down on the cartels,

even some of the top cartel leaders thanks the USA for the war on drugs because otherwise they could not have gotten so stinkin rich

look there are so many reasons it would take a few pages.

go to mises.org

search war on drugs

read a few articles

you will never see the war on drugs the same

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nhQ31b_dbnM

go ron!

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

thanks for this, hadn't seen this one before

everyone freaking sign it please

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

[QUOTE="weedfacekilla"][QUOTE="Person0"]

Quotes out of Context are fun

-Sun_Tzu-

then please go ahead and explain how it's out of context he literally called for a HOUSING BUBBLE, which is exactly what the fed ended up doing and now krugman claims he never said that.

He wasn't advocating for anything, all he did was describe the situation that Alan Greenspan and the fed was in.

The screenplay for that kind of movie always ratchets up the tension. The besieged citadel fends off assault after assault, but again and again rescue is delayed. And so it has played out in practice. Consumers kept spending as the Internet bubble collapsed; they kept spending despite terrorist attacks. Taking advantage of low interest rates, they refinanced their houses and took the proceeds to the shopping malls.

But predictions of an imminent recovery in business investment keep turning out to be premature. Most businesses are in no hurry to go on another spending spree. And those that might have started to invest again have been deterred by sliding stock prices, widening bond spreads and revelations about corporate scandal.

Will the rescuers arrive in the nick of time? Not necessarily. This movie may not be ''55 Days at Peking'' after all. It may be ''A Bridge Too Far.''

A few months ago the vast majority of business economists mocked concerns about a ''double dip,'' a second leg to the downturn. But there were a few dogged iconoclasts out there, most notably Stephen Roach at Morgan Stanley. As I've repeatedly said in this column, the arguments of the double-dippers made a lot of sense. And their story now looks more plausible than ever.

The basic point is that the recession of 2001 wasn't a typical postwar slump, brought on when an inflation-fighting Fed raises interest rates and easily ended by a snapback in housing and consumer spending when the Fed brings rates back down again. This was a prewar-style recession, a morning after brought on by irrational exuberance. To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.

Judging by Mr. Greenspan's remarkably cheerful recent testimony, he still thinks he can pull that off. But the Fed chairman's crystal ball has been cloudy lately; remember how he urged Congress to cut taxes to head off the risk of excessive budget surpluses? And a sober look at recent data is not encouraging.Paul Krugman

don't know what you're reading

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="weedfacekilla"] the pledges will keep going up and krugman will be FORCED to debate.weedfacekilla
ha

what, who the hell wouldn't debate if a lot of money is going to feed the homeless, he's an ass

Is Paul Krugman a Coward?

Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts
[QUOTE="weedfacekilla"] the pledges will keep going up and krugman will be FORCED to debate.-Sun_Tzu-
ha

what, who the hell wouldn't debate if a lot of money is going to feed the homeless, he's an ass
Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

[QUOTE="weedfacekilla"][QUOTE="weedfacekilla"]

Great Post!

Remember guys it was only the Austrian Economists that actually predicted the 2008 crash,

Ron Paul predicted the housing bubble in 2001!

look at what the Economic Nobel Prize winner had to say about this...

If you guys want to learn more i suggest you read up on

Mises.org

Economicpolicyjournal.com

Consultingbyrpm.com - Robert P. Murphy, possibly the smartest Austrian economist right now

some other favs

Lewrockwell.com

Tomwoods.com

I guess you see now why Paul Krugman is AFRAID to debate Robert P. Murphy

Krugmandebate.com

Person0

bumpage

Quotes out of Context are fun

then please go ahead and explain how it's out of context he literally called for a HOUSING BUBBLE, which is exactly what the fed ended up doing and now krugman claims he never said that.
Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

Krugman might be a coward, I really don't know and I really don't care. But let's be real, Robert Murphy is a nobody who is seeking one thing out of this and one thing only - publicity. If he actually cared about the homeless he should just raise money for the homeless, instead of using them as a bargaining chip for his 15 minutes.

it's not for his own publicity, he's trying to legitimize Austrian Economics, either way, the pledges will keep going up and krugman will be FORCED to debate.
Avatar image for weedfacekilla
weedfacekilla

435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 weedfacekilla
Member since 2009 • 435 Posts

Great Post!

Remember guys it was only the Austrian Economists that actually predicted the 2008 crash,

Ron Paul predicted the housing bubble in 2001!

look at what the Economic Nobel Prize winner had to say about this...

krugman housing bubble

If you guys want to learn more i suggest you read up on

Mises.org

Economicpolicyjournal.com

Consultingbyrpm.com - Robert P. Murphy, possibly the smartest Austrian economist right now

some other favs

Lewrockwell.com

Tomwoods.com

I guess you see now why Paul Krugman is AFRAID to debate Robert P. Murphy

Krugmandebate.com

weedfacekilla

bumpage

Is Paul Krugman a coward?