Anarchist420
Diamond Member
This is what pisses me off most about the world Bank and the IMF. The WB employees get paid by the tax payer through the roof and the WB employees don't pay any tax. How is the WB pro-market if the loans they make couldn't be loaned out without the tax-payer?
Why does the WB have to always use pro-market rhetoric? An example would be when they mention market prices, and they always talk about "privatization". It's like when Bush said he was going to "privatize" SS. So I hear that Romney wants to "privatize" SS. What fucking good does that do? It doesn't decrease spending or taxes. The same thing goes with neoclassicalism and neoliberalism. They're not pro-market, they're pro business and the 2 are seldom interchangable. If policies had been set by a supporter of the Austrian School in the roaring 20s, we wouldn't have had the GD, and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today. Instead of blaming the free market, everyone needs to blame neoclassical economic theory. Milton Friedman was a big dumbass and a nonlibertarian. Ben Bernanke is a Friedmanite (neoclassical, monetarist) not a libertarian. Ayn Rand wasn't a libertarian, she was an objectivist. Same goes with Gary Johnson, he's not a libertarian. Same goes with that retard Neal Boortz, he's a neocon, not a (paleo)libertarian. The ACLU isn't libertarian, it's progressive. The CATO institute is largely nonlibertarian, it's mostly neoliberal. The Heritage Foundation isn't pro-market, it's neoliberal and probably somewhat neoconservative. I could go on, but I'm not going to bother.
Someone should write a book called "Sinful: How the Church of Neoliberalism Tricks the People into Believing in Statism Under the Guise of Liberty".
Why does the WB have to always use pro-market rhetoric? An example would be when they mention market prices, and they always talk about "privatization". It's like when Bush said he was going to "privatize" SS. So I hear that Romney wants to "privatize" SS. What fucking good does that do? It doesn't decrease spending or taxes. The same thing goes with neoclassicalism and neoliberalism. They're not pro-market, they're pro business and the 2 are seldom interchangable. If policies had been set by a supporter of the Austrian School in the roaring 20s, we wouldn't have had the GD, and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today. Instead of blaming the free market, everyone needs to blame neoclassical economic theory. Milton Friedman was a big dumbass and a nonlibertarian. Ben Bernanke is a Friedmanite (neoclassical, monetarist) not a libertarian. Ayn Rand wasn't a libertarian, she was an objectivist. Same goes with Gary Johnson, he's not a libertarian. Same goes with that retard Neal Boortz, he's a neocon, not a (paleo)libertarian. The ACLU isn't libertarian, it's progressive. The CATO institute is largely nonlibertarian, it's mostly neoliberal. The Heritage Foundation isn't pro-market, it's neoliberal and probably somewhat neoconservative. I could go on, but I'm not going to bother.
Someone should write a book called "Sinful: How the Church of Neoliberalism Tricks the People into Believing in Statism Under the Guise of Liberty".
