Categories: Brown University

40 Comments

Casey Skipper · May 21, 2012 at 6:16 pm

I am a conservative and do not support many of the things you claim conservatives are. Why? because of you assumption that you can give freedom to certain individuals but not others. In order to have individual rights they have to be across the board. When you start making exceptions is when you start playing god with individuals. The only way we have exceptions is when you force the hand of people to accept ideas they are not in favor of. Individual rights stop when another begins.

Casey Skipper · May 21, 2012 at 6:21 pm

We should only let government enforce the rights of each individual but not attempt to spread the equal arrangement of wealth, health or living standard because that should only be given from the public. In my experience I have found the most altruistic people are conservatives. Government can not provide this function with any real heart or effectiveness because of the paid labor and misuse of funds. When you use your own money you spend it more wisely. Congress may even agree.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 6:29 pm

Conservatism is by definition to keep the status quo/traditional values. The only time i support conservatism is when it about feminism which has now become more than it was intended. Facts do say when good father is around that is when children will become better human beings. “When you start making exceptions is when you start playing god with individuals” i am agnostic nor worry if their god or not.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 6:32 pm

“Why does he support the NDAA a more aggressive act than the Patriot act?” Obama said he was going to veto but didn’t but left was angry at him & sued him via Hedges V. Obama. “Status Quo argument is the biggest push for the libertarian movement right now” ?I am implying right wing libertarian as libertarian origin was libertarian socialist but more left wing paleoconservative took the word upon themselves.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 6:35 pm

Fascism does incorporates only one form social liberalism which is individualism but discusting perverse way that is called right wing individualism which is form social darwinism. Conservatives have always been the enemy of liberal republic with garbage nonsense of “limited government” on the economic area but social values ready to limited it in the name “national security” or “war on terror.” Fun fact for the conservatives: there is no end to the “war on terror”

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 6:40 pm

“Why does he support the war that he promised to end?” Good question as Democrats are trying now end war in Afganistan by 2014 but the liberals have pushing it since Osama death. Iraq war is over but instead just sent to Kawait incase for “something” which i believe is bogus. Do Democrats really support what you claim? Dennis Kucinich, Obama the 2008 version & Bernie Sanders.

Casey Skipper · May 21, 2012 at 6:46 pm

The only status quo I would support is individual rights. Status quo I think you may be in support of is SS, income tax, property tax etc. When I say libertarian I mean social and economic. You really cant have one with out the other. Once you sacrifice one for the other you have given up all rights in the long run. Social liberals are collectivists using state coercion. Libertarians are individualist that participate freely in society according to individual rights.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 7:29 pm

“When I say libertarian I mean social and economic” When you mean libertarian you mean conservative libertarian as there somewhat social liberal but fiscal consservative. “You really cant have one with out the other.” not true like Bahrain.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 7:34 pm

“Social liberals are collectivists using state coercion. Libertarians are individualist that participate freely in society according to individual rights” Yes in the economic stance to certain extent as they would want more of progressive taxation. The Boston Tea Party is the best example of what liberal would want. In social value liberals would be individualism that said you openly free to think & as please as long does hurt other people.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 7:40 pm

I recommend you that when you use “Libertarians” that you mean right wing Libertarian (which is oxymoron) as i am implying that is what you mean by “Libertarians.” The word libertarian was ment for those people who believed in libertarian communist or anarchist which is the reason Libertarians are consider around the world hardcore leftist or far left.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 7:49 pm

“Status quo I think you may be in support of is SS, income tax, property tax etc.” That is not status quo as SS, income tax & property tax. The status quo would be letting corporations do whatever they want in the beginning of industrial revolution. Under liberalism great things have happen like constitutionalism, liberal democracy, free and fair elections, human rights, capitalism (the left has abounded since industrial revolution), and the free exercise of religion.

Casey Skipper · May 21, 2012 at 7:54 pm

Not sure where we are going with this. Sometimes in at the end of any conversation I find that many so called democrats agree with what I do with small differences. Usually the biggest difference is how we define our terms. I have really begun to think that no matter the party we vote for we tend to get more of the same even though the redorick is different and has little substance. Appreciate the debate and I hope in the end we achieve what we want. Good luck.

istraight1 · May 21, 2012 at 8:02 pm

Agreed. I disgree with most conservative values but i support there right to say as liberal as fundmental bases of liberalism as the government should not say or pick what it is okay or not.

Casey Skipper · June 20, 2012 at 3:34 pm

No Redorick is a good friend of mine. OF course I mean rhetoric. I admit I would may have spelled it incorrectly but I have no idea how I came up with Redorick. Spelling NAZI! Lol is there any other spelling errors?

Casey Skipper · June 25, 2012 at 5:48 pm

No big deal. Just giving a hard time.

Pk B · January 1, 2013 at 4:28 pm

nice education

hotneo7 · January 8, 2013 at 10:43 am

400 people make the top 1%, imagine if they took their money and hop on their private jet and left. The country will have no rich to tax and the middle class will be left holding the bag. So much for voting for politicians that promise to tax the rich. The solution is cutting benefits. There are too many baby boomers that are cashing out, a run on the government. Some don’t really need it as they own several houses and have a stock portfolio that should be liquid. Game over for the seniors.

Robofish · January 23, 2013 at 10:41 pm

Do you really think everyone who isn’t in the top 1% is ‘middle class’? That’s an awfully broad idea of the ‘middle’!

I have to agree with you on the need to cut pensions and benefits to the boomer generation, though.The problem is, there’s too many of them, and no government in any Western country wants to piss off such a powerful demographic group.

hotneo7 · January 23, 2013 at 11:16 pm

And that is why governments will keep raising debt ceiling and print more money to fund it…only problem the program gets diluted with devalued currency so either cut entitlements completely or give them funny money that doesn’t buy bread. Ask any German about hyperinflation. The middle class is huge, but the higher end are quickly joining the 1% and the rest lost 40% of their net worth. The middle class will be taxed more this year than the rich. Just watch and see.

Tyler H · February 10, 2013 at 4:28 pm

Marginal tax rates are not even close to the only factor in people’s decision about where to live. And Even if the top rate were raised to 40%, they would still have lower rates (especially considering capital gains) than most anywhere else in the developed world. The top rate in France is 70%, and they still don’t have the ‘mass exodus’ of rich people you are irrationally afraid of.

hotneo7 · February 10, 2013 at 6:21 pm

Have you read a newspaper lately? Who’s talking about leaving the country? The rich are fleeing CA for non-income tax states like Florida or low tax like Texas. That is a simple fact when governments increase tax and the rich have always neglected their civic duty to stay rich using loopholes and tax havens offshore.

Tyler H · February 10, 2013 at 7:05 pm

You pivoted nicely from moving countries to moving states.. I’ll give you that. Obviously moving from california to florida is very different than moving from the U.S. to, say, Slovakia (which has the lowest top marginal rate in the OECD I believe). And yes, in the news they have talked about how sports and entertainment figures.. who do not contribute to the local economy at all, are CONSIDERING moving. By your logic, all rich people would live in Florida. And Slovakia. This is clearly untrue.

Kyle Cruickshank · February 16, 2013 at 2:06 am

Babbage callme Alan elliotts

Zlatko Hernčič · April 17, 2013 at 7:47 am

EU TROIKA – Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse….But where is the fourth? GOD?

Eastsideweezy · April 29, 2013 at 10:32 pm

Of course he leaves out the massive massive amounts of money wasted by governments delivering these services.

For example look at education spending in the USA. The vast majority of it isn’t going to the classroom or the teachers but rather feeding a massive corrupt system that doesn’t deliver on results.

If you cut education spending in half the results would change little as they can not get much worse in the USA.

John Bishop · May 28, 2013 at 10:04 am

What’s with the pointless background music? Just the job for those with hearing impairment and/or tinnitus. Oh and we tend to be in the bottom 40% too.

Brent Holl · May 30, 2013 at 3:43 pm

An incorrect assumption. Lots of public school systems suffer from underfunding already. Reformists go with private alternatives that get very expensive or seek to streamline public education. Underfunded classes and failure to attract good teachers with a living wage is a recipe for not delivering results.
The unfortunate truth is simply that we get what we pay for in education. No deposit no return. Stupid is cheap.

pcuimac · June 6, 2013 at 8:18 am

Have you seen the hyperinflation anywhere since you last posted this bs?
And what about the confidence fairy?

hotneo7 · June 6, 2013 at 7:06 pm

What you call bs is already happening. The foundation of hyperinflation is set. First the BRICS nations have agreed to trade each other in their own currencies dropping the dollar. Next the Chinese are amassing gold for the purpose of backing their Yuan. Same thing with the German’s repatriating their gold from the Fed. The Fed has been inflating the monetary base with QE each month. The supermarket customers are using the hand basket more than carts. Chips went from $2.99 to $4.29 in one year.

hotneo7 · June 6, 2013 at 7:10 pm

People are loosing confidence in the dollar. When you travel abroad the dollar is not accepted. The record breaking mint sales of bullion for the US and Canada confirms that people are dropping fiat for hard assets. If you did the research you would know all this by now. Hyperinflation happens to fiat in Germany, Argentina, and Zimbabwe, with Japan next. Parking meters now take card instead of coins because inflation has made coins worthless. Open your eyes.

Ascheriit · June 27, 2013 at 12:34 pm

Hyperinflation hyperinflation. You do know that the dollar is deflating, and NOT inflating, like you retarded austrian economics supporters predicted?

hotneo7 · June 27, 2013 at 4:44 pm

You don’t know what you’re talking about. The hyperinflation has stretched over decades since the inception of the Fed and the dollar has been reduced to 2 cents. The $20 bill was backed by 1 ounce of gold and now where is gold now? You’re arguing against reality. Jim Rickards has already consulted Congress & CIA about this. If anyone is retarded about the rising cost of food and fuel is you.

Ray Lopez · July 8, 2013 at 5:06 pm

The presenter Blyth makes a mistake in logic. At 3:19 of the video he says the Fallacy of Composition does not work (without presenting any reason why) but then, strangely, tries to justify why it won’t work on moral grounds: that the people who depend on government are the poor, hence cutting government to deleverage is morally wrong. This is a logical fallacy: suppose that cutting government *will* work to deleverage, but it hurts the poor. Does this disprove austerity? No.

Donna Clark · July 14, 2013 at 11:30 pm

He does not make a mistake in logic. His point is that the Fallacy of Composition, the belief that what is good for the part is good for the whole, lies behind a lot of austerity thinking. The presenter notes that it certainly makes sense for any one sector of the economy to leverage down debt. But if all the sectors of the economy start leveraging down debt at the same time it leads to a general contraction of economic activity and a prolonged and worsening recession.

keithfaecorstorphine · September 25, 2013 at 12:18 pm

Nice presentation. It is so true of what’s happening in the UK right now. The government have hit the most needy… the disabled, the unemployed, the low waged. They are playing a nasty game of appeasing the middle classes by reducing the mortgage rates to -0% while hitting those in social housing with all forms of increases and reductions in benefits. So while being seen to aid the middle and upper classes, the real working class get kicked in the balls yet again.

keithfaecorstorphine · September 25, 2013 at 12:19 pm

Listen again, you obviously were’nt following his talk. He’s spot on.

McZelAir · December 1, 2013 at 11:38 pm

Great video I really enjoyed your book

Mário Baptista · December 30, 2013 at 3:20 am

Austeridade, a história de uma ideia perigosa em Portugal …

John Christmas · July 5, 2014 at 6:05 am

Great video!  I am just starting the book today.  I see this video is more from a UK/USA perspective, about governments that spend most money on services.  My interest is more in Eastern Europe, where governments spend half on services and give half to corrupt oligarchs.  “Austerity” in Eastern Europe (so far) means cutting the services without cutting the oligarch gifts.

Gerd Martens · February 23, 2015 at 9:21 am

Excellent! It deserves to becoming common sense. When will it happen?

Comments are closed.