TPP

[Turdacious]

What educational or experience do you have in the economic field, Turd?

Now someone's going to pretend that economics matters when discussing trade agreements?

Well, first off, nobody here said it doesn't, what they did say was that economics isn't the only consideration, and, not always the most important.

So you're just wrong on that. Good of you to adopt Pinky as a pseudonym: you're clearly not the Brain.

I ask because he writes off any and all economic posts or questions, dismissing them as, "you don't know economics", and whatnot.

I figure he must have a background in it...or else his dismissals mean very little.

So I asked. Let's see if he answers.

That's a terrible paraphrasing of my response, but whatever. My main point is that declining consumer prices have to be considered, which BD ignored.

And yeah I do have a background in economics-- both educationally and professionally. No, I am not an economist (I generally consider an economist to be someone who both works as one, and has a PhD in the subject).

[Testiclaw]

What kind of background?

[Turdacious]

What kind of background?

The kind where I like to keep my VL and RL separate.

[Blaidd Drwg]

That's a terrible paraphrasing of my response, but whatever. My main point is that declining consumer prices have to be considered, which BD ignored.

No I didn't ignore it. I said I'll allow that even the experts differ on whole host of potential upsides and downsides of any particular trade deal. Consumer prices (an economic issue) are one of many economic issues being considered..The Entire Fucking Point of this dialogue is that there are many other considerations not being considered in a secret trade deal than few if any of our representatives are going to read before they vote. I'm saying, as any reasonable person would...that's Horseshit.

Too much bridging the gap between flaccid defeatism (that's how the game is played) and nihilism (corporations gonna corporate) has blinded your senses. TPP and Fast track are issues that crosse partisan bullshit and are worthy of a look. I know you've spent a fair amount of time equating giving a fuck about the republic with histrionics....no modestly intelligent person would be so dismissive, no matter how much they might hate Lizzy Warren or the Tea Party.

[TerryB]

What kind of background?

He's a cashier at Lowe's.

[Turdacious]

I know you've spent a fair amount of time equating giving a fuck about the republic with histrionics....no modestly intelligent person would be so dismissive, no matter how much they might hate Lizzy Warren or the Tea Party.

Yet you're trying to convince me to change my mind by using their tactics? Smart.

[Protobuilder]

What kind of background?

The kind where I like to keep my VL and RL separate.

Same-same, my VL brother. I am an economist on another board as well, a doctor on another and a passive-aggressive schoolgirl with a love for all things tentacle-related on yet another.

[Blaidd Drwg]

No one expects Turd to change his mind. He has shown virtually no propensity for using it let alone complex maneuvers like changing direction.

I, otoh, held out hope he might have the intellectual honesty to give the positions he claims to oppose at least a cursory review.... Failing that, he might have tried to be funny.

[Turdacious]

No one expects Turd to change his mind. He has shown virtually no propensity for using it let alone complex maneuvers like changing direction.

I, otoh, held out hope he might have the intellectual honesty to give the positions he claims to oppose at least a cursory review.... Failing that, he might have tried to be funny.

Or I want to judge the treaty based on it's final form, rather than selective leaks. Treaties negotiated in secret don't always get signed-- case in point. Knowing what Congress will ratify before you agree to a treaty is diplomacy 101.

Remember-- you led with Elizabeth Warren.

[Blaidd Drwg]

Warren? really...that's what we're on about here?

Turd keeps harping on one of the many links in this thread as having some sort of determinative meaning to the overall arguemnt. It doesn't. Reagan said some brilliant shit despite having the IQ of a bowl of soup with dementia on top. MLK said some inspiring things despite being a philandering shitbag as a person.

One of the easiest ways to judge whether someone you're talking to is essentially an intellectual failure is whether or not they can separate potentially usable information from sources they might otherwise not agree with, or are made uncomfortable by or in general don't understand. (members of this forum especially should be familiar with this process)

Turd would like to judge the final bill in it's entirety? As covered earlier in this thread, the whole point reasonable people are objecting to is letting significant public policy measures develop in secret to this degree without light of day. Or wait, maybe it won;t even be signed?

Ahh..nothing to see here, move along.

Waiting until a major public policy initiative is fully developed before commenting on it?..No one, in their right mind believes that waiting until the 11th hour to judge a thing will result in a more accurate picture of it.

Incredibly complex policies that special interests want to keep secret are EXACTLY the sorts of measures that warrant early debate, speculation, cogitation and general airing. Did Turd apply this same 11th hour logic to Obamacare? Let's just wait until the Senate is ready to go and then we'll judge it de novo? I think not.

[Testiclaw]

Did Turd apply this same 11th hour logic to Obamacare?

zing

[TerryB]

I'm getting tired of BD's long posts.

I'm giving turd the win on this one.

[Blaidd Drwg]

I'm getting tired of BD's long posts.

I'm giving turd the win on this one.

Proto, the inert gas of IGX has awakened.

[TerryB]

I'm getting tired of BD's long posts.

I'm giving turd the win on this one.

Proto, the inert gas of IGX has awakened.

Are you talking to him, or about him? If it's the latter, you forgot an important comma, and this is just the sort of thread that this sort of thing shouldn't be allowed to stand.

[Turdacious]

Did Turd apply this same 11th hour logic to Obamacare?

zing

Eh?

1. BD has done nothing to convince me that this is anything more than another trade treaty. Free trade has definite advantages, and previous trade treaties, on the aggregate, have been beneficial to the US.
2. Obamacare is an example of doing things in secret that haven't worked in the past and hoping that this time will be different. The idea that states were going to spend the money necessary to optimize their Medicaid programs (which they can't afford to do); that employers of lower wage workers were going to accept an increase in their labor expenses without changing business practices (which they've never done); and lower wage workers were going to be willing to pay for more health care than they reasonably think they'll consume (which they have never been willing to do)-- is a different matter.
3. BD really expects me to dig through Warren's protectionist shit and pick out the corn?
3. Testi-- wipe your chin.

[Blaidd Drwg]

If you're too intellectually flaccid to even muster having read any of the background then by all means, keep shoveling your own boot into your mouth.

And do yourself a favor and keep your ticky tack bullshit out of the TF, Let everyone believe that's beneath you.

[Turdacious]

[bennyonesix]

If you're too intellectually flaccid to even muster having read any of the background then by all means, keep shoveling your own boot into your mouth.

And do yourself a favor and keep your ticky tack bullshit out of the TF, Let everyone believe that's beneath you.

I've been pondering what happened here and I think it was predictable.

The lead up to TPP lays bare the essential question of Corporatism: can the decisions of corporations be trusted to result in positive outcomes for society?

A Corporatist does not care what is in the treaty because they believe that the sum total of decisions by corporations over time results in positive results for society. Or, perhaps that the system currently in place channels or selects those corporate decisions that result in positive results for society.

Thus we have TURD's refusal to address TPP itself because for Corporatists like him its qualitative property is not important so much as the fact that it was drafted by corporations. Even if it is unwise, it will be corrected in the future... Also, the common man can not make decisions with the same efficiency and foresight of corporations and thus should not seek to replace the corporations decision with his...

And also we have TURD's refusal to draw inferences from TPP's secrecy. For a Corporatist, that secrecy is irrelevant. The fact that corporations are running the negotiations is what is important. That is the guarantor of the positive outcome.

The rubber has quite literally hit the road here btwn BD and TURD. BD and TURD have different core assumptions and are merely talking at each other.

The real discussion should be the nature of corporations and the effect of their decision making on society in the short and long term.

[Turdacious]

The lead up to TPP lays bare the essential question of Corporatism: can the decisions of corporations be trusted to result in positive outcomes for society?

A Corporatist does not care what is in the treaty because they believe that the sum total of decisions by corporations over time results in positive results for society. Or, perhaps that the system currently in place channels or selects those corporate decisions that result in positive results for society.

You mean corporations act in their own best interest? That's new.

Thus we have TURD's refusal to address TPP itself because for Corporatists like him its qualitative property is not important so much as the fact that it was drafted by corporations. Even if it is unwise, it will be corrected in the future... Also, the common man can not make decisions with the same efficiency and foresight of corporations and thus should not seek to replace the corporations decision with his...

And also we have TURD's refusal to draw inferences from TPP's secrecy. For a Corporatist, that secrecy is irrelevant.

Or TURD has a different understanding of how treaties are negotiated. Your logic is remarkably similar to the logic taught in women's studies programs FWIW.

The rubber has quite literally hit the road here btwn BD and TURD. BD and TURD have different core assumptions and are merely talking at each other.

That happens at IGx?

The real discussion should be the nature of corporations and the effect of their decision making on society in the short and long term.

Has been discussed ad nauseum for years. On that topic, BD and I probably agree more than we disagree. Not sure either one of us agree with you. I don't.

[TerryB]

Yeah, that was a waste of space, B16. I could've told you that via PM if you'd run it by me first.

Your spectacular conclusion was a half-limp balloon suffering a slow death under a fat woman.

[TerryB]

:threadkiller

[Beer Jew]

Did someone say fat woman?

[TerryB]

REVIVED!

ITT: pictures of plump beauties!

[bennyonesix]

PAWG

http://www.iloveelke.com/

[bennyonesix]