In response to:

The GOP -- Not a Club For Christians

Caveat emptor Wrote: Dec 12, 2012 5:46 PM
Nawlins, it's funny that I defended the use of come central planning. Explane how you get prosperity without government? Do you have a single example from history of a nation of 300,000,000+ who prospered without some central athurity at the very least planning a legal structure within which free trade could exist? That is what I mean by central planning. I don't mean command economics. I'll admit you're conflation of the two was cleaver for the sake of winning points. It simply wasn't meaningfully and peed down you know it was disingenuous.
nawlins72 Wrote: Dec 12, 2012 5:52 PM
Sorry, Caveat but I didn't conflate central planning with core functions of the State, such as laws and defense. You EXPLICITLY argued for central planning right here:

"it can impartially evaluate the ability of such markets to deliver individual and social promises and determine if some goods require other market coordination mechanisms, regulation or insentive alignments."

This is command economics 101.
Caveat emptor Wrote: Dec 12, 2012 6:00 PM
No command economics differs from the quote you posted in that under a command economy the state does not just evaluate markets, it desilves markets entirely.

There is no market under command economics, there is simply production and distribution by the corporate state.

In the scramble to make the GOP more diverse, a lot of people are looking at Asian Americans, whom many believe are a natural constituency for the party. I would love it if Asian Americans converted en masse to the Republican Party, but the challenge for Republicans is harder than many appreciate.

President Obama did spectacularly well with Asian Americans, garnering nearly three-quarters of their vote. This runs counter to a lot of conventional wisdom on both the left and the right. On average, Asian American family income is higher and poverty is lower than it is for non-Latino whites....