Obama wins a Nobel Peace Prize

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
Socialists in Europe are largely AGAINST the EU, against the euro, etc.

Saying the EU is "socialist", is laughable, since socialists are against it.
It was not a statement it was a question.

The Euro is another issue entirely. Let's stay on point, shall we?

What is your source that Socialists as a whole are against the EU?

Or are merely some Socialists against the EU?

Either way, a source would be nice.
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/deficit.jpg
LOL

yglesias.thinkprogress.org = ROFL @ the progressive douchebag site

First sentence starts with this "Paul Krugman writes an excellent column..." and that's about all you need to see here folks. Krugman is a lying troll and just another STF.

Hey, let me start up Microsoft Office and make a pie chart, I bet I can come up with one that ALMOST as laughable at that one.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Um, no.

Paul Robin Krugman (pronounced /ˈkruːɡmən/;[1] born February 28, 1953) is an American economist, liberal columnist and author. He is Professor of Economics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times.[2][3] In 2008, Krugman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography. He was voted sixth in Prospect Magazine's 2005 global poll of the world's top 100 intellectuals.[4]
The Nobel Prize Committee stated that Krugman's main contribution had been to explain patterns of international trade and the geographic concentration of wealth by examining the impact of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.[5] Krugman's work on international economics, including trade theory, economic geography, and international finance[6][7] has established him as one of the most influential economists in the world according to IDEAS/RePEc.[8] Krugman is also known in academia for his work on liquidity traps and on currency crises.
As of 2006, Krugman had written or edited more than 25 books, 40 scholarly articles and 750 columns at The New York Times dealing with current economic and political issues.[9] Krugman's International Economics: Theory and Policy, co-authored with Maurice Obstfeld is a standard introductory textbook on international economics. He also writes on political and economic topics for the general public, as well as on topics ranging from income distribution to international economics. Krugman considers himself a liberal, calling one of his books and his New York Times blog: "The Conscience of a Liberal".[10]




Research Papers in Economics (RePEc) is a collaborative effort of hundreds of volunteers in 57 countries to enhance the dissemination of research in economics.

Are you saying that YOU are smarter than this guy?

I seriously doubt it.


Krugman earned his B.A. in economics from Yale University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1977. Whilst at MIT he was part of a small group of MIT students sent to work for the Central Bank of Portugal for three months in summer 1976, in the chaotic aftermath of the Carnation Revolution.[18] From 1982 to 1983, he spent a year working at the Reagan White House as a staff member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He taught at Yale University, MIT, UC Berkeley, the London School of Economics, and Stanford University before joining Princeton University in 2000 as professor of economics and international affairs. He is also currently a centenary professor at the London School of Economics, and a member of the Group of Thirty international economic body, as well as the Council on Foreign Relations. He has been a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research since 1979.[19]
Paul Krugman has written extensively on international economics, including international trade, economic geography, and international finance. The Research Papers in Economics project ranked him as the 12th most influential economist in the world as of July 2009 based on his academic contributions.[20] Krugman's International Economics: Theory and Policy, co-authored with Maurice Obstfeld, is a standard introductory textbook on international economics. Krugman also writes on economic topics for the general public, sometimes on international economic topics but also on income distribution and public policy.
The Nobel Prize Committee stated that Krugman's main contribution is to analyze the impact of economies of scale, combined with the assumption that consumers appreciate diversity, on international trade and on the location of economic activity.[5] The importance of spatial issues in economics has been enhanced by Krugman's ability to popularize this complicated theory with the help of easy-to-read books and state-of-the-art syntheses. "Krugman was beyond doubt the key player in 'placing geographical analysis squarely in the economic mainstream' ... and in conferring it the central role it now assumes."[21]
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
Thanks. It appears some Socialists are against it. However; if the majority of Europeans are against it, how can the EU exist?

Oh, right. Europe is not Socialist.

LOL!

Please do not put words into my 'mouth,' so to speak. I was asking a question, two questions actually. I did not state categorically what your position was on the percentage of Socialists in Europe because I do not know. Hence the two questions together.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Thanks. It appears some Socialists are against it. However; if the majority of Europeans are against it, how can the EU exist?

Oh, right. Europe is not Socialist.

LOL!

Please do not put words into my 'mouth,' so to speak. I was asking a question, two questions actually. I did not state categorically what your position was on the percentage of Socialists in Europe because I do not know. Hence the two questions together.

You are putting words into MY mouth. Never did I say that the "majority of Europeans" are against it.

Considering that the "majority of Europeans" are NOT socialist, that would be a ridiculous statement to make. Hence, why I did not make it.

There is not a single socialist country in Europe, so no, Europe is not "socialist".

The majority of Americans are against the war in Iraq.. so how does that exist?
 

DubsFan

Well-Known Member
Doob drinks his own kool aid dude. He won't be happy til he makes $100,000 a year as a waiter. Subsidized of course. :) He's a Soc dude.
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
You are putting words into MY mouth. Never did I say that the "majority of Europeans" are against it.

Considering that the "majority of Europeans" are NOT socialist, that would be a ridiculous statement to make. Hence, why I did not make it.

There is not a single socialist country in Europe, so no, Europe is not "socialist".

The majority of Americans are against the war in Iraq.. so how does that exist?
Changing the subject does not change the argument.

All I can say is that if you believe that, "There is not a single socialist country in Europe, so no, Europe is not "socialist." Then we have nothing else to discuss. Obviously your definition of Socialism is apparently so narrow and pure that no true 'Socialist' country, or union of Socialist Democracies, exists.

I will waste no more time 'dancing on the head of a pin' with you.

Good day.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Doob drinks his own kool aid dude. He won't be happy til he makes $100,000 a year as a waiter. Subsidized of course. :) He's a Soc dude.

That doesn't even make any sense.

Subsidized wages as a waiter? WTF does that even mean?

Drink my own koolaid? Whose koolaid would you rather I be drinking? Yours?

A soc? Wtf is that?
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Changing the subject does not change the argument.

All I can say is that if you believe that, "There is not a single socialist country in Europe, so no, Europe is not "socialist." Then we have nothing else to discuss. Obviously your definition of Socialism is apparently so narrow and pure that no true 'Socialist' country, or union of Socialist Democracies, exists.

I will waste no more time 'dancing on the head of a pin' with you.

Good day.
There are socialist countries, but none in Europe, as you seem to think.

There are other areas of the world aside from Europe and the US, you know. Or, maybe you don't... it's hard to tell from your posts.

Europe has socialist political parties, but that does not make them socialist states.

The US has a socialist party, does that make us a socialist country?


You can repeat your assertion that I changed the subject until you're blue in the face. I didn't change the subject. Perhaps you just can't follow an intelligent conversation, hmmm?
 

Johnnyorganic

Well-Known Member
There are socialist countries, but none in Europe, as you seem to think.

There are other areas of the world aside from Europe and the US, you know. Or, maybe you don't... it's hard to tell from your posts.

Europe has socialist political parties, but that does not make them socialist states.

The US has a socialist party, does that make us a socialist country?

You can repeat your assertion that I changed the subject until you're blue in the face. I didn't change the subject. Perhaps you just can't follow an intelligent conversation, hmmm?
Such a narrow line of 'reasoning.' The Democrats are the majority party in the U.S., but they pursue a Socialist agenda. Yet according to the Constitution, the U.S. is a Republic.

As the context of this discussion was Europe, I did not feel compelled to venture from it.

Show me an intelligent conversation and I'll follow it just fine. Chasing your rabbits is not my idea of an intelligent conversation.

Have a nice day.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Apparently YOUR definition of "socialism" is so broad, that it can be applied to any nation, even nations that are not, by definition, socialist.

let me guess, you're another one of those who uses "socialism" as a pejorative word to describe anything that you disagree with?

 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Such a narrow line of 'reasoning.' The Democrats are the majority party in the U.S., but they pursue a Socialist agenda. Yet according to the Constitution, the U.S. is a Republic.

As the context of this discussion was Europe, I did not feel compelled to venture from it.

Show me an intelligent conversation and I'll follow it just fine. Chasing your rabbits is not my idea of an intelligent conversation.

Have a nice day.
I've tried to explain this to doob as well Johnny. He is beyond hope, his unbending belief that he controls and manages every exchange on every thread makes him boorish and too tiring to even acknowledge. By all means, join a great many of us in the absolute bliss of adding him to your ignore list.

There are many in here with the same beliefs that doob holds, however, they have the ability to forward their positions without acting like we are in HIS classroom and HE somehow holds a position of superiority. JRH plays the same game but I can tolerate him because he breaks out of it once in awhile, doob never does, so he basically adds nothing to any debate in here. He is a smug, condescending little prick, which I can tolerate from someone who has earned that privilege. But I won't tolerate it from some nobody on a MJ forum who THINKS he's more respected than he will ever be.
 

CrackerJax

New Member
I caught Doob in a falsehood and called doob out. Doob then denies his own statement ever occurred. It was a small thing that any mature person would just say... oops my bad, and no worries.

What does DoobNoob do? Goes back and re edits the statement unaware that the edit will be recorded. So 9 minutes after I call shenanigans, doob does the edit and then DENIES doing the edit, even though it was there for all to see.

1.) uhhh, NOT BRIGHT.
2.) A liar squared.

DOObNooB joined my very short list of ignore.

Don't waste your time on Doob.... there are no redeeming qualities to mine from that person, they don't exist.
 

NorthwestBuds

Well-Known Member
I've tried to explain this to doob as well Johnny. He is beyond hope, his unbending belief that he controls and manages every exchange on every thread makes him boorish and too tiring to even acknowledge. By all means, join a great many of us in the absolute bliss of adding him to your ignore list.

There are many in here with the same beliefs that doob holds, however, they have the ability to forward their positions without acting like we are in HIS classroom and HE somehow holds a position of superiority. JRH plays the same game but I can tolerate him because he breaks out of it once in awhile, doob never does, so he basically adds nothing to any debate in here. He is a smug, condescending little prick, which I can tolerate from someone who has earned that privilege. But I won't tolerate it from some nobody on a MJ forum who THINKS he's more respected than he will ever be.
I caught Doob in a falsehood and called doob out. Doob then denies his own statement ever occurred. It was a small thing that any mature person would just say... oops my bad, and no worries.

What does DoobNoob do? Goes back and re edits the statement unaware that the edit will be recorded. So 9 minutes after I call shenanigans, doob does the edit and then DENIES doing the edit, even though it was there for all to see.

1.) uhhh, NOT BRIGHT.
2.) A liar squared.

DOObNooB joined my very short list of ignore.

Don't waste your time on Doob.... there are no redeeming qualities to mine from that person, they don't exist.
And YOU'VE done the same crap hypocrit! :evil:
 
C

chitownsmoking

Guest
obama talks a good talk but thats about it. but this can be said for every single politician. im getting more and more sick of the man everyday.
 
Top