Liberals are the most vile creatures to ever walk the earth. their stupidity, their fear of their own freedom is a menace too all intelligent, confident humans. Their own self hate leads them to try to control everything, rob from those who are not scared and ashamed. Liberals don't even care if their bullshit works. They will grab more power in their idiotic desperation. They are worse than filth. A cancer. Their own failings need to be exposed, before they run their smelly mouths. They need to be shunned not helped or pitied. And their woe is me crap should be stomped, or you will find them sucking you dry. There is a reason these banks are so huge. The big government that supports their failings is leeching off the free and the strong. And liberals will still try and place blame on freedom for what they have caused. Worse yet they believe it, because they are idiots.
Martinghoul, why are you down here in the gates to the Underworld? You've been here long enough to know that ET politics is as follows: 1 - Tea Party/Libertarian 2 - Everybody else ...and everybody else is a flaming liberal. Actually, that pretty much describes American politics as well these days. The problem is everybody else hasn't yet realized just how disengaged from reality the guys up in number one are...yet. But as the poll numbers for the governors of Ohio, Florida, and Wisconsin show, once they find out, they don't like it. (Don't worry about that last bit about the guvs. Stick to Denmark, it's nicer.)
All of those countries more free than the US have far larger tax rates (tax/GDP) than the US does. Is that the key to economic freedom, higher taxes? Edit: oops, not Singapore. "Most".
How about you chase those rabbits down by actually reading what I've already posted? Look -- if you want to believe "liberalism is successful" in countries with oppressive taxes that have increased faster than GDP, be my guest. Obama probably thinks Obamacare is a great plan too but time will tell on both. BTW, I don't believe increasing and high revenue/GDP is "all-encompassing" nor did I say it was. And just because the U.S. has a different set of problems, it doesn't render Denmark, Sweden and Norway immune to the negative effects of excessive taxation. And to further clarify, I have no idea the extent to which liberalism is retreating in any of those three countries, if at all, but am confident it will if their taxes get much higher.
I don't know why, to be honest... I think I'll stop. I don't really see myself as either a flaming liberal or a flaming conservative. My two favorite places in the world are Scandinavia and Singapore and it's hard to imagine two cultures that could possibly be more different. Still, as far as I am concerned, both types work and who am I to say one's better than the other?
As I keep saying, it's not about Norwegian oil. We're talking about Scandinavia and neither Denmark, nor Sweden have anything special in the way of natural resources. As to socialism, let me talk about my favorite regions, with which I am somewhat familiar. I am not really sure what your point is, except that this is a more complex issue than just the economic freedom. For example, Denmark seems to offer more economic freedom than the US (according to the Heritage Foundation ranking) and yet, as Trader666 keeps reminding us, it's a "socialist" country with the highest tax burden as %age of GDP in the OECD (48.2%). Moreover, Denmark is one of the top countries in the world ranked by political freedom (ranked #3 in the EIU Democracy Index, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index). On the other hand, Singapore, which seems to offer almost the best economic freedom out there, is actually ranked very low in terms of political freedom (#82 in the Democracy Index; 133 out of 175 in the Press Freedom Index). I can tell you first-hand that if you're a Westerner and you're into the whole "civil rights", "freedom of expression", etc thing, Singapore isn't the place for you (the Internal Security Act gives the govt very broad powers over the individual). So how do you reconcile these two: economic and political freedom? As I mentioned, I love both Scandinavia and Singapore and am happy that they both seem to work.
Well, listen, mate, if you don't wanna address my specific points and just offer generalities, it's OK. I believe I have responded precisely to what you have said. Moreover, I have asked you a few times to confirm whether I have understood you correctly. In response, you keep saying the same thing and now start bringing in stuff that's completely irrelevant. When did I ever say anything about Obama and Obamacare? At any rate, let me just point out my new favorite data point. According to the Heritage Foundation, Denmark, with its highest taxes in the OECD, ranks above the US in terms of economic freedom. Moreover, according to their data, Denmark's index of economic freedom has been rising steadily, although the earliest data point they have is from 1996 (1996 - 67.3, 2011 - 78.6). Shocking, isn't it?
Nonsense. I've given you specifics, refuted points and faulty logic but am tired of re-explaining things. Speaking of which, you still don't get the oppressive taxation which is why I keep bringing it up... as I've said I believe it's because of your bias, thus the Obamacare analogy. Looking at your "new favorite data point" we can see that Denmark overall is just barely above the United States but if you look at fiscal freedom (tax burden) and government, they have atherosclerosis in comparison to the others in the top 10. I also question the equal weighting of all factors. But you'll see what you want to in it given your biases and so will I given mine. Which BTW you wouldn't admit to until I boxed you into a corner. So do us both a favor and play your holier-than-thou games with someone else.
Well, you're tired, I'm tired, we're all tired. And you're incorrect, I do get the whole oppressive taxation thing. But, as I have said before, you keep pointing to this single metric again and again and you think somehow that it's all encompassing and most significant. I disagree; it appears that the Heritage Foundation (which is a conservative think tank, if I am not mistaken) disagrees; the Economist Intelligence Unit disagrees; the financial mkts disagree. Still you insist that you and you alone are qualified to define what constitutes a crisis (as per the original assertion of the article). You'll therefore have to forgive me for attaching very little weight to your opinion given the weight of evidence against it. As to boxing me into a corner and games, I am not quite sure what to say. It's a very childish attitude, in my view, but you're certainly entitled to it.
More biased holier-than-thou nonsense. I never said it was all encompassing or most significant and even specifically said I don't believe it's all encompassing but despite all that, you pretend to know what I think ("you think somehow that it's all encompassing and most significant"). You also summarily dismissed my points and falsely claimed I insist that only I know what constitutes a crisis ("still you insist that you and you alone are qualified to define what constitutes a crisis"). So who's really being childish? As I said... go play your games with someone else.