We all would miss one book and one film today. That’s all. 
[quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Chris”]
We enjoyed peace and international respect under Clinton’s masterful stewardship.[/quote]
We were the laughing stock of the world with that moron.[/quote]
No, we were well respected. The world was laughing at the Republicans for their obsession with Clinton’s nether regions. Clinton, however, was well-respected around the world and remains so today.
Now, under Bush’s incompetent rule, we are the world’s laughing stock.
[quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Namahottie”]
Not a poli-sci fantic like some of you, but I do recall the Clinton era to have a bit more peace…[/quote]
Yep…Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia…Somalia…wonderful.
[/quote]
Ummm, did you just stop at the end of “to have a bit more” ? I did mention that he kept terrorism in other countries… Where’s the “exasperated” emoticon?
Also, if Gore won, Alito and Roberts would not be on the Supreme Court, and the rights of American citizens would be under a great deal more protection as a result.
That sounds right to me, but how does this square with the idea that the government command is necessary to force Detroit to make high-mileage cars?[/quote]
Sometimes, it is necessary to compel people to act in their own long-term interest: mandatory health and automobile insurance springs to mind, but don’t quite fit as these address welfare (personal and community) rather than marketability. Mandatory primary and secondary education may be a better fit, though in most such cases the individual’s investment is time, not money.
[quote=“Hobbes”]It almost sounds like you are saying:
color=blue Consumers want high-mileage cars. Thus, no government coercion is needed. The market will give Detroit the incentive to produce high-mileage cars.[/color]
and also saying:
color=red Consumers don’t really want high-mileage cars. That’s why the government needs to institute mileage standards – to force the auto-makers to produce high-efficiency vehicles in quantities above that which the market demands.[/color]
Both (a) and (b) seem internally consistent to me as stand-alone propositions, but how do you fit them together?[/quote]I am saying both (a) and (b), and these are internally inconsistent. There’s nothing unusual or remarkable about people having internally inconsistent preferences, eg: I want to eat well and improve my health, but I also really want a fistful of cheeseburgers; I want to be faithful, loving, and trustworthy, but I also want to take that gorgeous minx (not my gf) to bed.
Consumers want large, powerful vehicles, and they want fuel efficient vehicles. The market will supply both, and there is no need for government coercion. When times are good, consumers will make choices based on their strongest preference: likely power/ size rather than economy/ecology. When times are bad, consumers will makes choices based on their strongest preference: likely economy/ecology rather than power/ size. But, even if a wise corporation invests in the necessary r’n’d to produce fuel efficient vehicles, retooling a factory and supply chain to churn them out will take between 18 and 24 months, and maintaining an idle plant/ supply chain is not economically feasible.
So, when times change, consumers will act on their preferences by purchasing vehicles produced elsewhere/ by companies that made other choices. The market rolls on happily, but in Detroit, the big three, having chosen poorly, become canon fodder for Schumpeter’s creative destruction, taking tens of thousands of jobs with them. The market works just fine when it comes to creating incentives, but even the most efficiently organized automobile manufacturer can’t change directions in time to chase the market.
There’s no need for gov’t action, unless the gov’t values employment… and the environment… and energy independence. There’s no ‘market’ for clean air, but we have an interest in breathing it; tragedy of the commons, you know.
Is that answering the serious question? 
[/quote]Its OK…he’s from France…
Good deal. As I suspected, you were not trying to argue that the government can predict consumer preferences better than the automakers can. And you were also not making an inconsistent argument (although you correctly note that consumer preferences themselves can be inconsistent).
Basically you are saying that there is a public benefit to clean air, and a public benefit to preventing Detroit from putting all their eggs in one basket, and that these public benefits justify the government action. Fair enough.
Cheers,
H
[quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Truant”][quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Truant”]
But anyway, why was Iraq invaded again?[/quote]
[/quote]
Is that answering the serious question? 
[/quote]
It’s the answer the question deserves.[/quote]
Huh? What is so smart arsy about asking a question like that?
Why was Iraq invaded?
Was it part of the ‘war on terror’ in the wake of 911?
Was it because of the weapons of mass destruction? (it’s interesting another crazy dictator actually does let off nuclear bombs and the US are not even considering saving the world from that idiot.)
Was it to topple an evil dictator, to ‘reduce bloodshed’ and to promote the ‘freedom of democracy’?
It’s a simple, honest question, and one that more and more Americans are asking, let alone the rest of us - so what is the answer? The real answer?
Sure there is a market in the form of, ironically enough, automobiles for one thing. I know people who almost never breathe the air they pollute. They go from their air-conditioned apartments directly to their air conditioned cars which they drive to their air conditioned offices and then back to their cars which they drive to the air conitioned retaurant. Next it’s back in their cars and back home. They might take the drive out in the country for a bit of fresh air once in a while or fly to Bali for some seriously fresh air. It all costs money and it all pollutes.
[quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Chris”]
We’d have peace and prosperity, we’d be fixing global warming, and America would be respected throughout the world.[/quote]
We haven’t had peace or respect since at least 1941. What planet are you on?[/quote]
switzerland have…maybe because they’re not playing “world sheriff”…
Is that answering the serious question? [/quote]Its OK…he’s from France…[/quote]
who’s from france?
[quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Chris”]
We’d have peace and prosperity, we’d be fixing global warming, and America would be respected throughout the world.[/quote]
We haven’t had peace or respect since at least 1941. What planet are you on?[/quote]
I’m an Earthling so things are a bit different where I come from. Is it true that on Planet Zord all Muslims are direct descendants of Satan and kill the bulk of their victims by shooting fire from their anuses?
[quote=“dablindfrog”][quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“Chris”]
We’d have peace and prosperity, we’d be fixing global warming, and America would be respected throughout the world.[/quote]
We haven’t had peace or respect since at least 1941. What planet are you on?[/quote]
switzerland have…maybe because they’re not playing “world sheriff”…[/quote]
Had…Don’t forget all the shady deals they did with the Nazi’s that came to light in the past few years…
I guess that makes things pretty exciting in your bedroom come Saturday nite.
If Al Gore were president and 9-11 had still somehow happened, then I bet that there would still be Republicans outing CIA agents, molesting children in Congress, and trying to cut the pay and housing allowances of our combat troops.
I guess that makes things pretty exciting in your bedroom come Saturday night.[/quote]
Things can get exciting but not because I’ve got a big Muslim problem in my neighborhood.
Seriously, if we buy your scenario that most or all of the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims are incorrigible terrorists bent on overrunning and enslaving the West then what are the options? What are you suggesting be done? Anything that doesn’t involve the wholesale slaughter or enslavement of millions of human beings?
[quote=“spook”]
Seriously, if we buy your scenario that most or all of the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims are incorrigible terrorists bent on overrunning and enslaving the West then what are the options? [/quote]
Spook, it’s hardly my scenario. I suggest you read the koran, read some history and then read what modern Muslim leaders have to say.
Well…since Islam swept out of Saudi Arabia in the 7th Century AD, just who have been slaughtered or enslaved? You might start by asking Theo van Gogh…
And here’s some news from Ireland for you:
[quote]
Extremist lawyer wants flag of Islam on Leinster House
The flag of Islam should be flown over Leinster House, an Islamic extremist said tonight.
Speaking in Dublin before addressing a Trinity College debate, Anjem Choudray also reiterated controversial views that Muslim violence is justified in certain circumstances.
The British-born lawyer, 39, angered the Irish Government last year when he said that Ireland risked becoming a target for a 9/11 style attack because it allowed US war planes to refuel at Shannon Airport.
Mr Choudray said: “As a Muslim, I believe Islam is superior to every other way of life and that it can resolve all the social and economic problems that Ireland suffers from.
“And as a symbol of that, the flag of Islam should be flown over the Dáil.
“This is symbolic of the fact that all societies will be run better according to God’s law.”
Referring to the US military stopovers at Shannon Airport, he said tonight: “If US warplanes are using Irish soil, then Ireland is seen as aiding and abetting the war on so-called terror.
“Ireland says it has a position of neutrality but I don’t think it is seen that way in the Muslim world at all.”
Mr Choudray also warned that the Pope must be careful with his public statements so that he doesn’t offend Islam.
He said: “He has enough advisers to tell him that this is a sensitive issue and that Muslims take their religion very seriously.”[/quote]
breakingnews.ie/2006/10/19/story281662.html
If you don’t feel Western civilization is worth defending, perhaps you might consider submitting to Allah.
[quote=“Doctor Evil”][quote=“spook”]
Seriously, if we buy your scenario that most or all of the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims are incorrigible terrorists bent on overrunning and enslaving the West then what are the options? [/quote]
Spook, it’s hardly my scenario. I suggest you read the koran, read some history and then read what modern Muslim leaders have to say.
Well…since Islam swept out of Saudi Arabia in the 7th Century AD, just who have been slaughtered or enslaved? You might start by asking Theo van Gogh…
And here’s some news from Ireland for you:
[quote]
Extremist lawyer wants flag of Islam on Leinster House
The flag of Islam should be flown over Leinster House, an Islamic extremist said tonight.
Speaking in Dublin before addressing a Trinity College debate, Anjem Choudray also reiterated controversial views that Muslim violence is justified in certain circumstances.
The British-born lawyer, 39, angered the Irish Government last year when he said that Ireland risked becoming a target for a 9/11 style attack because it allowed US war planes to refuel at Shannon Airport.
Mr Choudray said: “As a Muslim, I believe Islam is superior to every other way of life and that it can resolve all the social and economic problems that Ireland suffers from.
“And as a symbol of that, the flag of Islam should be flown over the Dáil.
“This is symbolic of the fact that all societies will be run better according to God’s law.”
Referring to the US military stopovers at Shannon Airport, he said tonight: “If US warplanes are using Irish soil, then Ireland is seen as aiding and abetting the war on so-called terror.
“Ireland says it has a position of neutrality but I don’t think it is seen that way in the Muslim world at all.”
Mr Choudray also warned that the Pope must be careful with his public statements so that he doesn’t offend Islam.
He said: “He has enough advisers to tell him that this is a sensitive issue and that Muslims take their religion very seriously.”[/quote]
breakingnews.ie/2006/10/19/story281662.html
If you don’t feel Western civilization is worth defending, perhaps you might consider submitting to Allah.
aimislam.com/islam.html[/quote]
Call me simple-minded but when I look around I only see us and our allies occupying Muslim countries, imprisoning countless Muslims in territorial ghettos or secret gulags, interfering in their internal affairs and not the other way around. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Also, by any yardstick you choose – be it Johns Hopkins, Lancet, Iraq Body Count, the International Committee of the Red Cross or the Whitehouse – we’ve killed far more of them than they’ve killed of us in the last ten or twenty years so I fail to see how we’re qualified to paint ourselves as innocent victims of unprovoked aggression.
spook -
Will…Will Durant? Is that you Will?
[quote=“spook”]
Call me simple-minded…[/quote]
OK. If you insist.