Posted by: graemebird | November 20, 2009

Sun Tzu-Inspired/Public-Choice Pull-Factor Jiu Jitsu/Tax Exemptions The Matrix Blue Pill

From Catallaxy:

Thanks for that leftie. I have put a lot of thought into strategy. But so far I’ve got no support for it on the alleged right. CL had some kind things to say about one aspect of my strategy.

The key point is kindness-in-transition. The second key point is kindness doesn’t mean slowness. The main tactic is to go after the bankers, and not the left, as the main ideological enemy. And the matrix blue pill, to overide the realities of democracy and politics…..


is to replace the public choice pull-factor for spending programmes.

With a public choice pull factore for tax exemptions.

Once we have these guys lining up and ganging up and making political donations, not for spending, but instead for sunsetted tax exemptions……. then we have broken out of this dysfunction.

Because there has got to be a new tax exemption every week. And there has to be bureaucracies wound up to pay for them. And who gets first in line may be partly to do with politics and there is no avoiding that. But its also got to do with them coming up with a plan to eliminate all aspects of cronyism in their industry.



  1. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Look Warwick. Think about this Brooks fellow right? Compare his promotion by Phillip Adams. And Bahnisch for years promoting Gillard right? And Adams also promoting Rudd right? And then we have this dude from this really radical family at Louisiana State University promoting Obama years before anyone knew Obama. Before he was even State Senator I shit you not.

    So we are really talking part of the radical roccoco left club with dudes like Bahnisch, Adams, and this radical family I’m thinking of. And they always know who the closet commie is. Now the broad inner core of ex-near-Marxists have transferred their allegiance to global warming and globalism.

    Anyhow Rudd poses as this Gun owning, staunch Catholic, Fiscal Conservative right? So he’s purposely making like he’s a strong labour conservative. Like a real good bloke like Peter Walsh. A sort of wind-up wooden conservative labour type. Although conservative labour types haven’t been wooden at all by the way.

    But the word is already out on the street because !@#$%^&* Philip has been promoting this fellow for years. I mean years. And unlike anyone else there is simply no transcript to his show.

    So if Phil is helping this Brooks, then it must mean that Brooks is just there to say pretty sensible conservative things until a strategic matter comes along and then he’s there to make the lefts strategic planks bipartisan.

    This is the sort of thing that SOON and the other LJG’s fall for all the time. Once the left has manufactured a bipartisan story they think its all the revealed truth. And you cannot make sense of these people after that.

  2. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    “Yes of course Warwick. It’s virtually inconceivable that he might actually believe what he writes.”

    I think I’ve sorted you out Jason. You mistake a bipartisan position for the known truth. Thats your cognitive shortcut. But in the same way that the left can arrange for a faux-consensus science opinion, the left can rig up a bogus bipartisan opinion on anything at all. I mean Phil Adams went to the trouble of hiring this now suspected leftist for a weekly gig. And he was billed as a conservative. It was a blessed relief from his treacly behaviour to that stupid leftist chick he had on all the time. But now its starting to back up on me.

    We really should have a transcript of LNL. See how else he has pushed his commie nose into world affairs.

    Its a bit of a giveaway Jason, your nastiness to people like Palin and Manning and Ron Paul. And its not even from any real judgement of your own. Its just a “bipartisan” rigup. Because Palin is just fantastic. And if you are a non-Hawkish libertarian, then Ron Paul ought to have been your man without question. Even Humphreys was solid on this point. But you went straight for the alleged bipartisan position. Though you weren’t hawkish like CL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: