Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Search

  • Re: Winning Strategies for Debate in Other Forums

    dont do these http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ politeness is key. reducto ad absurdum is rather fun as well because people noramally dont know what to say.
    Posted to General (Forum) by swalsh81 on Fri, Dec 7 2012
  • Re: Rothbard: Increase taxes to increase revenue

    Here is an interesting news article. Yes the media tends to oversimplify things but it is an exercise nonetheless. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9707029/Two-thirds-of-millionaires-left-Britain-to-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by swalsh81 on Wed, Dec 5 2012
  • Re: LRC should really not talk about evolution or Darwin

    [quote user="idol"] [quote user="Clayton"] [quote]The universe is very sophisticated, but that does not rule out the possibility of a more complex being than the universe creating it. [/quote] So then something even more complex than God created Him? After all, God is posited to act and, as Mises points out, a truly Absolute being
    Posted to General (Forum) by swalsh81 on Wed, Dec 5 2012
  • Re: Rothbard: Increase taxes to increase revenue

    I'm not sure about either question but I will ad my 2 cents on the topic. Comparing tax rates as such to tax revenue isnt too telling in an envronment when the tax system is so convoluted. (and I know that is somewhat contradicts the point of the first question) If politicians raise tax rates they may also add in some extra loopholes for their friends
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by swalsh81 on Wed, Dec 5 2012
  • Re: LRC should really not talk about evolution or Darwin

    " If scientists reject intelligence design by their criteria, it is outside of science. And thus not a competing science theory, but something else." This is my point. This is saying that, if only verifiable science is true, and science can only be natural then something that is not natural must necessarily not be true. This is horrible reasoning
    Posted to General (Forum) by swalsh81 on Wed, Dec 5 2012
  • Re: LRC should really not talk about evolution or Darwin

    yep thats the difference. " The American public has a lot of idiots who believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old, ergo it is correct!" This is right too, consensus does not necessarily equate truth among any group. Consensus among scientists that intelligent design is false does not equate truth. In fact, Modern science defines science as
    Posted to General (Forum) by swalsh81 on Wed, Dec 5 2012
  • Re: Inflation, GDP and the Stock Market

    I understand the problem with the word growth being bandied about. I was referring to it in the basic media/Krugman sense of higher GDP necessarily meaning growth. I also know that there are many more things that affect it but I was just asking about one particular part, specifically money supply vs the supposed "growth" or economic "health"
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by swalsh81 on Fri, Nov 30 2012
  • Inflation, GDP and the Stock Market

    This is something I have wondered for a little while. We are always quoted the numbers for GDP and the stock market as whether the economy is doing well. I understand the problem with aggregates, but what I am wondering is If an increase in the GDP number or the increase in the stock market averages is related to either inflation or an increase in the
    Posted to Economics Questions (Forum) by swalsh81 on Thu, Nov 29 2012
  • Re: Businessmen And Liberals

    It all has to do with which side of cronyism you are on. If you are the business trying to get favors or the politician receiving benefits in return for favors then then you will be supporting the status quo. On the other hand if you are the small business that is being hurt and undercut, not due to legitimate competition, but to extra favors being
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by swalsh81 on Thu, Aug 9 2012
  • Re: Marriage and taxes

    There are 3 aspects of a marriage: social, religious and legal. Social is the most obvious one and is the part about voluntary association. Religious is what encompasses the church and the vows. Legal is the peice of paper that gets you benefits from the government (unless of course you get welfare instead of paying taxes in which case you get more
    Posted to Political Theory (Forum) by swalsh81 on Wed, Aug 8 2012
Page 1 of 2 (11 items) 1 2 Next > | More Search Options