You have claimed more than once, that you are a conservative, I call BS!

Bellow you posted this:

America could theoretically minimize that exposure economic cycles with a controlled economy.

Directly from the communist manifesto!

No conservative would ever think that a controlled economy would work, let alone minimize economic cycles.

Where do you think these cycles come from?

Freemarket place or government regulations, tax changes, and policies?

This is why you are called a usefull idiot, because you are easily manipulated and exploited to advance the communist agenda.  Who in their right mind would think that a controlled economy would work.  Hasn't worked yet, never will!

Only a usefull idiot.

You have claimed more than once, that you are a conservative, I call BS!

Bellow you posted this:

America could theoretically minimize that exposure economic cycles with a controlled economy.

I'm not endorsing that action. I am stating a fact, counterproductive as that fact may be. I'll repost the statement pertinent passages in the post, first the subject line:

"Y'all have heard of 'economic business cycles', yes?

"At some point the market corrects for excesses? 

"America could theoretically minimize that exposure economic cycles with a controlled economy. That could, again, in theory- avoid contractions, recessions and depressions."

What in that post is counter-factual? I didn't endorse the idea of a controlled economy, I acknowledged that it was a possible action. The idea of a government controlled and 'stabilised' economy is much older than the 'communist manifesto'. It never works in the long run. There, in a nutshell, is the reason (amongst many others) that the US dollar is the de facto world reserve currency. That action is not likely or reasonable, but it possible.

If I say you could rip your clothes off and run nude down the street screaming profanities, am I encouraging you to do so? Or merely acknowledging that it's not impossible...?

Here's a question that will get your panties all wadded up:  the Fed has and has for a long time manipulated the economy, to some extent- mainly with interest rate actions.

I have posted before that I consider you leaning to be a communist, the more you post the mote it is clear you are not a conservative, you lean way to far to the left.  Ha! A controlled economy!

Your question leads to a flase idea.  The goverment does not manipulate the economy under the Fed.  The Fed makes those decisions and they are not is not the Goverment.

 History like economics was not your best subject in school.  Remember, the US had a series of financial crisis, and the solution was to take control of the financial market away from the government.  So, Congress started the Federial Reserve.  It is not a government agency, it is a mix of public and private enterprises.  It is not funded by the government.  It works independently from the government.  I don't expect you to understand the working of the Fed, but you should know it is made up of 12 banks and is not a government agency.

Old Guy said:

"History like economics was not your best subject in school.  Remember, the US had a series of financial crisis, and the solution was to take control of the financial market away from the government.  So, Congress started the Federial Reserve.  It is not a government agency, it is a mix of public and private enterprises.  It is not funded by the government.  It works independently from the government.  I don't expect you to understand the working of the Fed, but you should know it is made up of 12 banks and is not a government agency."

Glad he said it.

I was about to throw you under the bus myself for your profound ignorance, Crowbot.

Now, as you must yourself not be aware Crowbot,

the US Central banking system was created in 1913. Signed it law (Federal Reserve Act ) by president Woodrow Wilson. The Act  itself was a result of secret meeting held in Jekyll Island GA, a few years before. American and European financiers attende,  who recognized the apparent need for a central bank.

Wilson later regreted signing the Act, believing he had in fact handed too much power--monetary policy--to bunch of private individuals which would theoretically, be able to independently undermine the government's ability to control and regulate in the best interest of nation and it's people.

When those same American bankers later handed the Russian Bolseviks the money used to pay off the a reparations debt demanded by the Germans (1918) , the Soviets had enough breathing space to consolidate their gains, a civil war lasting until 1922 resulting in the "Soviet Union."

Thes events led to WWII , after America joined the war (WWI) in Europe. The US and France wanted reparations from defeated Germany -- and the German central banks in turn bankrupted the German economy to pay their "debt" .. They printed money causing inflation-- just like they recently in the US on Creepy Joe's watch-- The excuse this time was to pay for the massive spending the Democrats appropriated to " fight Covid" 

Central Banking has been at the center of every American conflict and war since the Federal Reserve Act created it. Some people believe the central bank is fully to blame for all that,

BUT the function of separating "monetary policy" from political "fiscal policy" on the surface  appears to be necessary.

Would you want Nancy Pelosi to call the shots on monetary policy AND spending ( fiscal policy) ?

So who really does call the shots?

I think it's kinda obvious

billionaires wouldnt  be billionaires for very long if they let mere " elected officials " make all the laws and policies. The Military Industrial Complex would still be making saddles for horses if money couldn't be created (ex nilo ) as "Credit" .. and spent by the government

"loaned at interest" to the Government.

And then,

we the taxpayers pay those billionare central bankers " interest " on the credit  they simply printed into existence.

It becomes "legal currency" when the note is signed by the US Treasury Secretary.

Every so often, some politicians in Washington threaten to not sign a new (higher) debt ceiling - which would mean not "borrowing" (printing) and spending as much money.

This is pure theater, of course. The ceiling is always raised. The band plays on.

On the Commercial side, Central banks operate like a drug distribution network..selling their printed money discount interest rate" to commercisl banking franchises to keep the minimum reserve balance ( 10%) at the local level. The commercial  banks create debt as "commercisl paper" when in turn, we take "loans"and  from them pay interest on the debt we just created.

The  money supply grows roughly in proportion to the aggregate volume of private economic activity, government spending, production, and finance.

Central Banking is actually the genius stroke which fueled the development of the Capitalist modern world. It's critics can also rightly point-out the disproportionate power un-elected bankers do have over national politics and Creepy joes so-called "democracy"

The real problem is human nature-- there has never been a fail safe "system" designed to contain what theologians have always called "evil" -- the old adage:

"Power Corrupts, Absolute Power Corrupts absolutely!" ( Lord Acton) 

And so we will continue to have booms and busts. and lies and disinformation, and wars and treaties, and more recently the modern "orchestrated crises" used to enrich the few and powerful, empoverishing thd poor and middle class masses. ( if only decreasing our buying power 9%, this time!)

Such is the world," behind the curtain. " (the Wizard of Oz)

CNN: "Pay no attention to that man vehind the curtain!"

Terrified and manipulated, our true believers on the "yellow brick road":

Crowbot " The Straw man" -- the guy who makes cut-and-paste straw-man arguments ( "Trump!" "TrumpRINos!) 

Jetsheep "The Cowardly Lion " The guy who growls at "extremists" everywhere, and wears a dress...

and

The Buddha " The Tin Man" -- Looking for a heart, he can't ever seem to find one in an elected politician -They always promise him the world, but they never seems to deliver.

So he blames "TRuMp" as the nexus and source of his dashed hopes and dreams ( Hillary?!?) 

What do these three  Lib "pilgrims" have in common?

They still believe in:

" How The Great and Powerful OZ!" 

Useful idiots! 

Not me. 

But as I said,

no one has built a "better mousetrap" to contain human evil.

But go back to reading your Neocon masters, Crowbot

They believe in creating "Noble Lies"

and they pay you to do the same--

Dont they?

whats "noble" about that? 

useful idiot! 

Tell me how I'm a 'neocon'? Or is that just another word you use to insult those who doubt or oppose your principles- if there were any other than padding your pocket, that is.

Exactly what "Noble Lies" have I told or promoted?

Educate yourself, Crrowbot.
Excerpts rom the link   https://philosophynow.org/issues/59/Leo_Strauss_Neoconservative
The father of Neoconservatism : Leo Strauss.

Straussian Philosophy

From the start of my awareness of his work it was quite clear to me that Strauss was philosophically enigmatic. It turned out he championed a way of doing philosophy that didn’t come right out with the sort of claims just anyone could understand. Or, putting it more precisely, he held that the most important philosophers didn’t speak simply, but were instead, deliberately duplicitous in what they said.

This idea is not itself all that mysterious. Many people familiar with Plato’s dialogues know of the idea of the ‘Noble Lie’. A somewhat reasonable version of this idea – as distinct from the plainly unreasonable one which requires governments to deceive the public – is that philosophers who are enmeshed in rather complicated and at times disturbing truths need to withhold what they know from the general public, and give support instead to various conventions people need in order to get on with their lives. For example, just suppose that it is evident, after the most painstaking philosophical consideration, that there is no God, or free will, or that the bulk of the laws in one’s country are bunk. This may not be something ready for public consumption – most ordinary men and women are too busy with their daily affairs to take time out to fully assimilate such disturbing discoveries. There is also the fact that in many societies the rulers’ rule is unjustified, but they obviously don’t wish it be broadcast that they lack legitimacy. In this case, for simple self-protection and safety, philosophers need to speak enigmatically.

( snip) 

....These perplexing views came to this: The philosopher is essentially embarking on a search which it is unreasonable to think one can ever complete. Just as Socrates is reported to have thought that the only thing he knows is that he knows nothing, the philosopher – the true one (if such a real philosopher can be found) – cannot honestly conclude anything for sure. No one can honestly absolutely know basic, fundamental truths. Not that relativism is coherent, of course. What is honest is to claim to know nothing. Some Straussians, like Scripps College philosophy professor Harry Neumann, actually became nihilists; Neumann arguing for it in his book Liberalism.

( Snip) 

....Neoconservatives had disdain for what they took to be the naiveté of the libertarian idea that government must be strictly limited to the protection of individual rights. They believed that many aspects of society needed leadership, so they supported the paternalist aspects of the much-more-than-minimal state.

(...SNIP) 

....Neoconservatives hold the view that ‘American’ is the best bet for the world – America’s institutional set-up is a very useful combination of modern elements, having to do with the sovereignty of individuals together with the older idea of a substantial role for government – and that this is an idea that needs to be widely promulgated. Indeed, without its promulgation there can arise and persist major threats to the countries which do embrace this set up, such as the United States of America. In short, unless the semi-free democratic society is strong, and not only ready to defend itself but also willing to go on the offensive in support of its system abroad, it will perish. The neocon view is that either you’re willing to export liberal democracy or it will be crushed by all kinds of barbaric global groups.

( Snip) 

....

This conviction that humanity’s best bet is a semi-free society which vigorously promotes its institutions across the globe, is very likely the legacy Strauss left the neoconservatives. And it is probably what puts neocons on the side of George W. Bush’s variety of modern conservatism – the ‘compassionate’ statist type. An expression of this view has held sway in America since the Monroe Doctrine, reinforced by the likes of Teddy Roosevelt and then expanded in light of the recent annihilation of American functional borders throughout the globe by the administration of George W. Bush. As Bush put it in his 2005 Inaugural Address, “From the day of our founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the maker of heaven and earth.” Ergo? As Tom Wolfe put it, “It is America’s destiny and duty to bring that salvation to all mankind.” The main difference in this from the standard neoconservative vision is only that neoconservatives see religion in largely sociological terms; as distinct from the likes of Bush, who is, it seems, fully faith-based in his outlook. The former, as a rule, aren’t religious or faithful.

Strauss himself struggled with the problem of what to make of the two important traditions in the West; those of Athens and Jerusalem. He clearly preferred the thinking from Athens, but he could not deny the significance of the influence from and thus the importance of Jerusalem, namely Judeo-Christianity.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A Noble question:

"What hath Athens to do with Jerusalem?"-- Tertullian

Noble Lies:

"Im a conservative Republican. I believe in God and America"-- Crowbot.

(But  im really a pragmantic atheist, and a moral relativist... the TRUTH is what WORKS!)

I supported and promoted  GW Bush's vision of America 'saving' America and the World," . but  only to the exrtent it extended my party influence and its political power... I much prefer ATHENS to Jerusalem!  - RINO Dick CHENEY ...and his Jan 6th hearing RINO daughter. Liz.

A Noble Answer:

"Pontious Pilate-- ( Representing the  Power if the Roman State): 

"Dont you realize I have the power to order your death?

Jesus-- "You  have no power over me except that it were granted  to you from above. My kingdom is not of this world."   

************

And so you NEOCOs predictably run rough-shod over the truth and the  Powers granted to you by the Constitiution. There isnt a whiff of difference between you,  the far Left, and rhe Deep state. ( Including " being delebrerately duplicitous " in what you say to the public!

Useful Idiot!