Replies

No it isn't getting out of hand when I have had to correct statement after statement which are based on incomplete statements of H, statements either distorted or entirely false. I have no problem discussing mistakes or failures in his programs or ideas but it is annoying to have the Classics Comics versions thrown up time after time by those who know they are false. And it is a waste of my time. Honest criticism after actually reading what the man said or what experts on H (pro or anti) say. Not some warmed over Jeffersonian lies. The form of the American government is very much like the English so he wasn't too far off.

You have never read of "infant industry protection?" Read more.

Perhaps you are unaware that H's program and call for government intervention was specifically to repair an economy deliberately distorted by the Crown's colonial policies which did not allow the growth of industry. He had no wish for government intervention after that distortion was corrected.

Since H's program lead directly to the dynamic and explosive growth of the modern American economy I would suggest that your 1+1=5 analogy is entirely inappropriate. Although if Lincoln disagreed I am sure GOPcrapitalist would be there to provide reams of illogical, distorted and false support for your argument.

Stick to my comments and don't try and saddle me with your caricatures and false statements.
1 Government can certainly assist the creation of wealth and has;
2 I suggest reading any of my posts and show me where I have supported protectionism rather than argue against tariffs. What is it that provokes you and the others to LIE about what I have said when all can see it is false?
3 Don't confuse my opinion of the D.S. brigade with "people" in general. While some D.S.s appear to be too stupid to understand much of anything others are just mendacious cranks who try and distort, or lie about things.
4 "People require coersion to be productive." ? Rave on son it is getting funnier by the minute. That was the SLAVERS view of labor not the Ur-capitalist, Alexander Hamilton, or mine.
5 None of the founders, including the H-man, wanted "an all powerful fedgov." Cartoonish distortions and grotesque caricatures don't make it true.
6 There was nothing Jeffersonian in the Constitution. How did you come up with THAT howler. He was in Paris and Madison was as Federalist as Hamilton at that time.

"Ralfing" on the keyboard would be an improvement over what you are currently typing.

You might be able to make a point or two, if you could get anything out without sounding like an arrogant jackass.

I have no problem discussing mistakes or failures in his programs or ideas

Apparently, you do. Whenever someone even suggests that he might have been wrong, you denounce them as a traitor and an imbecile unable to understand the 'subtle complex ways of the mighty-friggin-H-man' who you can't stop adoring long enough to see that even Madison viewed H's leadership as an elected monarchy. Me rave on? Please.

Not some warmed over Jeffersonian lies.

i.e. to "understand the subtle complexity of his thought" one must accept that everything he said was Gospel while Jefferson spewed forth only lies and deceit. Right, step off the looney-meter before you break the thing.

You have never read of "infant industry protection?"

Yes, I have. Unfortunately, you said that protectionism applied to infant industry was "not protectionism" somehow. A clearly false statement. A capitalist can agree that protectionism may be used to foster competition, but would likely not subscribe to a theory that "some protectionism isn't protectionism" as you stated previously. Want me to read more? I will. Maybe you should learn how to write in the meantime.

Perhaps you are unaware that H's program and call for government intervention was specifically to repair an economy deliberately distorted by the Crown's colonial policies which did not allow the growth of industry. He had no wish for government intervention after that distortion was corrected.

Does your crystal ball also indicate when those protections would be lifted? I can help you out here: Never. Your acceptance of government intervention as the best method for 'correcting that distortion' is another matter which would normally be the subject of a worthwhile debate, were you able to carry one.

Since H's program lead directly to the dynamic and explosive growth of the modern American economy I would suggest that your 1+1=5 analogy is entirely inappropriate.

Laughable assertion on your part. As much evidence could be produced linking Washington chopping down the cherry tree to the development of the atom bomb, but what would you care, so long as you spew uncontested?

Stick to my comments and don't try and saddle me with your caricatures and false statements.

Your comments... Okay. I can stick with material like "monarchs aren't monarchs" and "protectionism isn't protectionism" and so on and so forth. I especially loved your "How much is the grand canyon worth" line. I laughed so hard that the people in offices nearby came over to join in. "Yes honey, we can't afford the house payment, but the love of our children is priceless so we're really not in debt."

Unfortunately, what I'm really trying to address is your root problem which is a belief that big government is the answer, and also attempting to refute your contention that love of big gov't is somehow conservative.

From now on, I'll stay with replies like "protectionism, takeit, is... alas... always still protectionism."