Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "Iowa Revives Child Labor | The Kyle Kulinski Show" video.

Sorry but I almost forgot their other rules Starting at the 4th rule. "The Government must provide a police force to protect us from other Americans without making us pay for it." And their 5th rule. "The Government shall provide an Army, Navy and Airforce to protect our overseas investments without making us pay for it." And their 6th rule. "The Government shall provide a secretive organisation to infiltrate other nations so that we can strip those nations of their resources without making us pay for it." And their 7th rule "We get everything we want. You get whatever we leave you, including any mess we make."
2
Never forget the 1st rule of American Libertarians. "We demand the liberty to strip others of their liberty!" or their 2nd rule "We demand the government get out of our lives and stop telling us what we can't do except when they make laws that allow us to get into other peoples lives and tell them what they can't do!" or their 3rd rule "We demand the government build infrastructure that helps us make money, but the government must do it without making us pay for it."
1
@youtubecruiser6819 They don't say it out loud but you know that's exactly what they think the rules should be. Do you know that Charles Koch the billionaire maniac wants to hold a constitutional convention, where they can re-write the US Constitution? Thom Hartman has spoken about it numerous times. I think they need 33 or 34 states to make it happen and have about 31. The really scary thing is that at such a convention each state gets 1 vote and it only takes 26 votes to re-write the US Constitution. Charles Koch is one of the major money men behind things like Citizens United and the Federalist Society takeover of judicial appointments.
1
And if you do go back through Thom's videos a couple of times he's read of this list of government organisations that the Libertarians have called to be disbanded. It includes the EPA and FAA as well as all publicly funded education. So far they have all but crippled the EPA by installing destructive clowns who just wrecked its ability to function. Then they had SCOTUS rule that unless congress very specifically passes a law mandating the EPA control a specific substance like CO2 the EPA cannot police CO2 or any other pollutant.
1
@youtubecruiser6819 Your right to a point I am poking fun at their nonsense, but you need to go and look at some of the nonsense they have proposed. And lets NOT forget they just had Roe V Wade overturned so they can have the liberty to strip others of their liberty. In one of Milton Freidman's books he claimed that doctors didn't need to be licensed. He claimed that by word of mouth people would become aware of people who were bad doctors and "the market" would take care of them. Its total nonsense but there are people among the libertarians who believe there should NOT be regulations on anything. Those people are crazy to say the least
1
Actually this is not really capitalism at all its a perversion of capitalism that is closer to feudalism and serfdom. If you have time go and look up Prof Mark Blyth where he talks about the various forms of capitalism we have gone through in the past 150 years or so. What's happened is that we should have gone through a major transition after 2008 like happened after WW2 and again during 1970s. The super wealthy prevented that from happening by getting bailed out from the GFC. Here's his short primer on what he calls Angrynomics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXJD5rE4omY
1
@Khalkara Well its no longer capitalism as we've practised for most of the last century for a start. If you look at the rise of the middle class in the post WW2 period that was when capitalism was working for much larger percentage of the population and we had functioning social democracies. But that didn't work for some people. There's a great interview here on YT whit David Pakman and Yanis Varoufakis. Its only about 27 minutes so its not that long. Listen to what Yanis says about how social democracy and capitalism needed each other to work but how that's now broken and we are sliding into a form of feudalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu0lNnXAiL0
1
@Khalkara WHAT TF DO YOU WANT? There's world class economists EXPLAINING what's gone on and you just sit there like a clownish 5year old saying they don't know what they are talking about. I think all you are after is an argument. Your so ignorant that you said (and these are your exact words) "Also social democracy is capitalism" social democracy is a political system capitalism is an economic system AND YOU DON'T KNOW THAT BASIC DIFFERENCE.
1
@Khalkara Seriously what is your education level? YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND the difference between something that describes a political system and something that describes an economic system. Yanis Varoufakis is a world renowned Professor of Economics. If you think you know more than him go ahead because right now you couldn't look more stupid.
1
@Khalkara If you understand the difference political and economic subjects THEN WHY DO YOU KEEP SAYING STUPID THINGS. Nobody needs to strawman you they just have to point out what you have said and its clear you don't know the difference between politics and economics. What's there to argue, when you don't even understand the subject. My bet is you never finished High School, because even a high school kid could understand the difference.
1
@Khalkara Here's one of your ignorant statements. From your 1st comment to Poju Antsalo "Capitalism by definition will always be 1% VS the 99%." That's nonsense and nothing like what Adam Smith described. The economic system that by definition was 1% versus 99% is called feudalism NOT capitalism. That shows you can't differentiate between various economic systems.
1
@Khalkara Here's another of your ignorant statements. From your 2nd comment to Poju Antsalo "Socialism is good yes. Because the system leads to the least harm to the least amount of people." At the level of a reasonable amount of socialism where society collectively pays for social programs like health care and education then YES, but that's an ECONOMIC answer. At the POLITICAL answer you get examples like East Germany, Soviet Russia and North Korea where the cost to the general populace of living under a ruthless police state is horrendous. That shows you can't differentiate between ECONOMICS and POLITICS.
1
@Khalkara Here's a great example of your condescending arrogance From your 3rd comment to Poju Antsalo _ "Its really sad that you think that is a good question to ask."_ That's called self righteousness when you attack someone over a question they ask. From the next part of that comment. "1) It assumes that there is no competition of any kind under socialism" "2) It assumes that competition is what leads to better products (coffee)" If you consider the ECONOMIC answer then those 2 statements are reasonably true, but if you consider the POLITICAL answer then socialism actually proved to be viciously uncompetitive. Because the socialist states of East Germany, Soviet Russia, Romania, etc. did nothing but cheat. We have the evidence from decades of Olympic cheating. We also know that whatever competition there was industrially in those countries went nowhere because nobody wanted their manufactured goods. Yet again that shows you can't differentiate between ECONOMICS and POLITICS.
1
@Khalkara Then we get to your comments to me. Your first comment to me was "How is this a perversion of capitalism?" I EXPLAINED to you that what we have right now with this is NOT how capitalism has been practiced for most of the last century. You didn't ask how it is different you just started the insults and attacks. I gave you references to people like Yanis Varoufakis and Mark Blyth WHO ARE EXPERTS in these things. You then came back and said you don't have time to listen to experts and that PROVES you are not only IGN0RANT but also ARR0GANT.
1
@Khalkara As for the more detailed answer to your first question of how is this a perversion of capitalism. AND THIS COMMENT IS FOR EVERYONE ELSE If you were to read Adam Smith or at least read about Adam Smith the author of "Wealth of Nations" which is considered the origin of capitalist economics, then you'd know he was never about the 1% having all the wealth at the cost of the 99%. Smith was about how the other 99% also gain wealth. Its was in response to the mercantilism which was the economics that came out of the industrial revolution. But going further. Mark Blyth points out that there have been 3 major variations of capitalism over the past 150 years or so. 1) First there was the gold standard that lasted up until World War 2. 2) Then there was Keynesianism that lasted up until the 1970s. 3) Then there was neoliberalism, which is also called Reaganomics and Thatcherism. Mark has pointed out in numerous lectures and at numerous conferences how neoliberalism should have ended after the 2008 GFC and that we need a new version of capitalism. Here's the 3 minute primer on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXJD5rE4omY Here's the conference talk he did in 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJoe_daP0DE And going further still into our current post GFC ERA which is a clusterFK. Albena Azmanova has described it as "Precarity Economics" in her book "Capitalism on Edge" which she's discussed with Mark Blyth https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2CsqAwb5is Eric Helleiner has described the neomercantilism that has emerged in China which is a new version of the mercantilism the world was economically running before capitalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4X2qTxtwVM Yanis Varoufakis has explained what he calls "tech-feudalism" many times here's one of those times. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ghx0sq_gXK4
1
@Khalkara IF YOU BOTHERED to actually go and listen to experts in their fields you'd learn things instead of being an ignorant arrogant F⋃CKWIT who annoys people.
1
@Khalkara YOUR WORDS "I don't care what Smith describes it as, I'm calling it like I see it." Way to ADMIT you don't know what you're talking about. 😅🤣😅🤣😅🤣 Look up Dunning-Kruger Syndrome. You have a nasty dose of it.
1
@Khalkara “He Who Knows And Knows That He Knows Is A Wise Man - Follow Him; He Who Knows Not And Knows Not That He Knows Not Is A Fool - Shun Him” ― Confucius, The Analects
1
@Khalkara That's because you keep saying DUMB SHlT. YOUR WORDS (AGAIN) "I don't care what Smith describes it as, I'm calling it like I see it." Go back to school dumbass.
1