triple owned tsetse in this thread
damn
The Economist is famously left-leaning you moron.
The Economist pushes neoclassical economic policies, which are all theories of left-leaning ideologies.
Chicago school of economics is neoclassical as well.
Neoclassical is a very precise term that is used for very precise reasons. Don't pretend for a second that it is on par with often emotionally charged words like "neoconservatism." The term is used because it's based on classical philosophy, that is, philosophy espoused by Plato/Socrates. The alternative, in this context, is rational philosophy, that is, philosophy that is espoused by Aristotle.any movement with the term neo attached to it should be disregarded as vanity outright
no regulation is anti free market and pro monopolization
the market thrives on competition, not overbloated giant companies
... and... so that dumpy doesnt forget what he actually has said...
The truth is... you've bought into the von Mises libertarian nonsense and thus babble this shit about how everything else is socialist and leftist. You honestly think that The Economist is "left-leaning" because they believe there is a role for government in markets... even though they are one of the most famous pro-market, pro-limited government, pro-democracy, PRO-CAPITALIST mags on earth. lol
5 pages later, you've yet to produce a coherent and sensible explanation for why The Economist is "left-leaning."
TseTse, let's try this again.
Is "liberal" considered "left" in the UK?
Is "conservative" considered "right" in the UK?
(wow @ fancy showing himself to be a truly stupid fuck if he thinks triple owned shit on this thread)
... and... so that dumpy doesnt forget what he actually has said...
I think the Brectian influence of the dusseldorf school, when conflated with the theories of the 1970s french post-renault economic philosophers, clearly shows that neo-clasicalism economics is nothing more than simple anarcho-modernist theory.
The Economist is not pro-capitalist. Not in the slightest.
yeah, you know what, i have a B.S. in economics from the U.S. Naval Academy and you have what again?
Nothing. "real policy shit"? I mean seriously. All you do is copy and paste shit you read in the economist, which i agree is a fantastic publication that i too subscribe to.
but you've never had an original thought and you're a closed minded pompous asshole who "can't lose" an argument even when he's already lost.
once again, i have a B.S. in economics from the US Naval Academy and you probably barely graduated from high school.
Suck my big ass dick you fairy.
The only McCain supporter participating in this discussion is TseTse, the thread starter.How is Mccains plan to fix the economy going to work? How is it good? How is it better than Obamas plan?
Can anyone answer that?
any movement with the term neo attached to it should be disregarded as vanity outright
no regulation is anti free market and pro monopolization
the market thrives on competition, not overbloated giant companies
Flame away, tough guy.
I honestly dont give a fuck about your academic credentials when you are stupid enough to think triple "owned" anybody by showing he hasn't the fucking slightest clue what he's talking about.
And i might add, he had NOTHING to say about economics... so what's your point.
If you have something to say about economics and the election, feel free to share it. Otherwise, just spare us this retarded shit cuz when you honestly think triple was anything but being toyed with... it's sad.
If someone in the UK calls himself "left" leaning, would the person to whom he is speaking associate that with "liberal"?Jesus christ, i already explained this shit to you already...
The term "liberal" is usually used to imply right-oriented philosophy outside the USA which is its historical political and economic implication in terms of being focused on individual rights, free trade, limited government, etc. As in classical liberalism and its offshoots.
"Conservative" in the UK tends to mean something more specific in the UK, because it refers to a party that has Tory roots and leans towards old school monarchy leanings. Folks sometimes sarcastically call them "her majesty's loyal party" or whatever.
That's why the Economist calls itself "liberal" and not "conservative."
go ahead and cry about it
while you're at it cry about your sad meaningless life
you should also cry about how you've never accomplished anything and probably never will.
fucking windbag