4 ms·
.. and my trotskyist would argue that the Soviets failed because they never achieved "true" communism. He's just as right as you. Gotta go, but on that whole
by jbooth 16y ago
.. and my trotskyist would argue that the Soviets failed because they never achieved "true" communism. He's just as right as you.
Gotta go, but on that whole federal reserve thing, go take a look at the boom/bust cycle in the US prior to and after establishing the federal reserve.
Again, it's not about what you find ideologically satisfying, it's about what actually works in the real world.
EDIT: btw, the fed and fannie/freddy had almost zero to do with the housing crisis. The problem was the multiplied leverage much more than the housing debt itself, and fannie/freddy's rules about loans to minorities only affected a miniscule % of total defaults.
- maxharris 16y agoAgain, it's not about what you find ideologically satisfying, it's about what actually works in the real world. Actually, it's got to be both. Being smart is being able to correctly predict things, and that requires both theory and empirical observations. While everyone has some sort of philosophy, some philosophies are better in the real world than others.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- intended 16y agoBeing smart means also knowing that you inherently cannot predict things. You may be better than others at getting stuff right, yet you are inevitably going to be wrong.