Three disasters, one cause: profit by SignyM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
You need to look out for yourself.

So why are you grabbing your ankles and bending over?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 4:19 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

And the nominally Socialist nations are that much better? The Soviet Union failed altogether. China has massive pollution, government-funded ecological and humanitarian horrors such as the Three Gorges dam project, weekly mine disasters, and pretty much no protection for workers. The Social Welfare states in southern Europe are finding that they can't support their social programs on the taxes they collect from the capitalists.

Present a better alternative, please. One that actually has a chance of working in a world of individuals with different goals and philosophies would be nice.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 4:19 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Oops. Doubletap.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 5:13 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
One that actually has a chance of working in a world of individuals with different goals and philosophies would be nice.

Good luck with that. Probably no system is suitable for everyone at the same time. And any socio-economic system you'd care to name really only works well and stays honest on a local level.

The only way you could please everyone I think is to offer the different systems through local scale business or community model, and have people opt in to the system they want to be part of.

The benefit of having the system self contained business models makes it so there can be multiple systems in a close area. That way opting out doesn't mean leaving town. That may have problems in of itself though, I'd have to think about it.

Over here in America, we have credit unions and co-ops that basically function like a different socio-economic system in the sea of capitalism. I'm talking about a scenario where that type of business model is widespread, even on equal grounds with capitalist businesses.

China did a bad version of it, wouldn't endorse that at all, but they added a capitalist market out of necessity. Do it right, and don't have a police state overseeing the whole thing every step of the way, and that might work.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 5:27 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Advocating anything radically new is advocating a bloody revolution. If power is going to be returned primarily to individuals and cooperatives of individuals then there are many self-interested entities who are going to fight to keep it. And not 'fight' in the polite euphamistic forms of the word.

--Anthony

"On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you." --Auraptor

"This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on." --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 5:40 AM

BYTEMITE

I did think about that, actually in my previous post I had a sentence or two that I didn't think this would be possible to establish in a capitalistic nation, but then I remembered those co-ops and credit unions here in America. Those were established non-violently. It's not such a stretch to take a business like that, and build a self-sufficient community around it. That's how the cooperatives work in Spain, as I understand it.

It's possible that human apathy in that sense might work to an advantage. Sure, people with self interest might care about the potential loss of consumers, on the other hand, do it gradually, a drop in a bucket at a time, and by the time people start seeing what's happening, they kind of just have to shrug and realize that's where the market is moving. It could inspire them all to give better service to their existing costumers. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 5:51 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:

"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Ronald Reagan 1981.

Who then promptly went to work MASSIVELY increasing the size and scope of the government. All while decrying the government. And then running for re-election.

Hypocrisy much?

Mike

On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. --Auraptor

This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on. --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 5:53 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

If I don't have to move and I can pay my bills, I'll try cooperative living.

--Anthony

"On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you." --Auraptor

"This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on." --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 7:40 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
One economic meltdown, caused by banks, lenders and insurances creating money out of thin air for maximum profit.

The other environmental, caused by an oil company cutting corners and refusing to credibly prepare for disaster.

The third health, caused by for-profit treatment of sick people, bleeding our economy dry and killing people in the process.

So keep sucking up to those nice corporations, folks! They only have YOUR interests in mind! (heh heh heh)

You're blind, on all 3 accounts.

But you don't care. Your mind is made up,regardless.

" Being correct does not excuse a violation of form " - Ducky, NCIS.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 7:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

China has massive pollution, government-funded ecological and humanitarian horrors such as the Three Gorges dam project, weekly mine disasters, and pretty much no protection for workers.

Those are pretty much the same qualities you pointed out in China when you claimed that capitalism was triumphing there. And it sounds like the libertarians' idea of paradise. Massive pollution? Well, sure, once they do away with the EPA and all its intrusive regulations. Ecological and humanitarian horrors? Check - all you have to do is look to the Gulf of Mexico and a certain peanut butter factory in Texas to see those capitalist-funded horrors. Weekly mine disasters? Yuppers. Pretty much no protection for workers? Well, you'd have to talk to your libertarian buddy antimason about that; he's been lobbying for doing away with minimum wage and government protection for workers for quite some time.

So the only problem y'all seem to have with the libertarian paradise that is China is the government. If the same issues were happening here - and they are - you'd likely claim it as just the cost of doing business the American way...

Quote:

The Social Welfare states in southern Europe are finding that they can't support their social programs on the taxes they collect from the capitalists.

The social welfare states in the southern United States are noticing the same thing. They just can't keep sustaining themselves without that government money coming in from better states.

Quote:

Present a better alternative, please. One that actually has a chance of working in a world of individuals with different goals and philosophies would be nice.

"One that actually has a chance of working..."

Well, that leaves capitalism out...

Mike

On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. --Auraptor

This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on. --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 8:11 AM

MOOSE1942

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

So the only problem y'all seem to have with the libertarian paradise that is China is the government. If the same issues were happening here - and they are - you'd likely claim it as just the cost of doing business the American way...

Since when is China a libertarian paradise? There is almost NOTHING libertarian about China. In fact the only way China has become somewhat of a world power is through becoming more Capitalistic, and less communistic.

Capitalism has created more wealth for all social levels than any other system.

Are you Capitalism haters really suggesting we go to Socialism or Communism?

Give me ONE example where either of the systems hasn't resulted in ruin.

The financial crisis spoken about earlier can be directly attributed to the USA's steady march to socialism.

Look at Obama, he's nationalized the banks, the automakers and now the health care industry. What's next?

Reagan wasn't anywhere near perfect but his quote is 100% accurate. Everything that the government touches turns to crap. It's kinda like the Midas touch.

Why oh why do you socialists think that a government that can't run a "Cash for Clunkers" deal can run our economy without causing it to crash and burn?

Guess what Dems... "I can see November from my house!"

Come read my stories, http://alonekingofone.wordpress.com/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 9:37 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I see Crazy Eddie has been all over this thread.

I think folk are beginning to realize, that reality has no impact on the minds of certain folk, they quite literally can not be reasoned with.

And that means there's only one other option, doesn't it ?

Thankfully folks completely immune to reason are rare, and self-destructive as hell, hopefully saving us the trouble.

Anthony, ponder for a while this point - those individuals are not exactly a threat without their little jackboot cuddling hordes, and they're in for a very rude shock when someone else who knows exactly how to do it says all the right keywords, flips all the right switches, and their pre-programmed horde turns on them because they've given in to that conditioning for so long they wouldn't know what free will was if you handed it to em on a plate, and never wanted it much in the first place.

And sometimes, the best use of a dangerous resource, is to use it up.

Sorry for being vague, but this is also an example for DT of how RWAs have certain tremendous gaps in their thinking that prevent them from effectively using intelligence cause they can't put it together, cannot make the logical assumptions with their plug-n-play, no-compare mindset, and so it comes across as gibberish to them, nor do they believe in their own vulnerabilities, so it's pointless to get all cloak and dagger about something you can tell em right to their faces and have them dismiss it, then having dismissed it, keep doing so on economy of effort right up till they get blindsided - you'll see.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 10:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MOOSE1942:

Since when is China a libertarian paradise? There is almost NOTHING libertarian about China. In fact the only way China has become somewhat of a world power is through becoming more Capitalistic, and less communistic.

Yes, and look at the problems THAT has led to for them. I point out their libertarian streak in the complete lack of workers' rights, lack of any kind of regulation in the workplace, lack of environmental regulation, rampant pollution, man-made ecological and humanitarian horrors, etc.

You didn't get that I was calling it a libertarian paradise in a mocking, sarcastic tone? Do you Republicans just not get sarcasm? Oh, that's right - you really don't; that's why y'all invited Stephen Colbert to the White House Correspondents' Dinner as the keynote speaker! You honestly thought he was one of you, and didn't realize until far, far too late that he has been mocking you for years.

Quote:

Capitalism has created more wealth for all social levels than any other system.

Well, it's certainly funneled more wealth to the top 1% than all other systems...

Quote:

Are you Capitalism haters really suggesting we go to Socialism or Communism?

If you've been paying attention, I've been pointing out for years that we're already a socialist society. Only the truly, aggressively stupid - those with their heads buried in the sand, or somewhere else - could say that this hasn't been the case.

Quote:

Give me ONE example where either of the systems hasn't resulted in ruin.

Just as soon as you give me one example of where pure capitalism hasn't resulted in the same.

Quote:

The financial crisis spoken about earlier can be directly attributed to the USA's steady march to socialism.

BBZZZZTTT! Wrong-O, Boy-O. The direct cause was DE-regulation, not OVER-regulation.

Quote:

Look at Obama, he's nationalized the banks, the automakers and now the health care industry. What's next?

He has? He "nationalized" the banks, automakers, and the entire health care industry? So I couldn't buy an American car if I wanted one, unless I bought it from the U.S. Government? I can't put my money in any bank or credit union that isn't wholly owned and run by the government? I no longer have the ability to go to a doctor and pay cash? I can't buy my own insurance?

Are you sure? Or are you lying? Oh, I'm sorry - that was harsh; are you EXAGGERATING in an untruthful way?

Quote:

Reagan wasn't anywhere near perfect but his quote is 100% accurate. Everything that the government touches turns to crap. It's kinda like the Midas touch.

Actually, that's called "the Midas touch in reverse". The Midas touch would be a better thing. And why is it that you would support ANYONE running for office in this country, if you think that everything the government touches, it turns to shit? Obviously you think Reagan was a piece of shit, then. He touched the government, and it sure as hell touched him. In fact, that "nationalized" socialist health care system that he got saved his life. I'm sure you wish it hadn't, right? ;)

Truth is, everything the REPUBLICANS touch turns to shit. Look at the deficit - Bush took us from a surplus to a $1.2 trillion yearly deficit in only 8 short years! He turned our military to shit. He turned Iraq to shit. He turned Afghanistan to shit. He turned out international reputation to shit. He turned our economy to shit. And all on borrowed money! What an accomplishment for you; you must be very proud. You corporatist toadies took the most robust economy in the world, and turned us into a third-world laughingstock, in less than 8 years. Amazing.

Every single time a Republican gets into office in the last 30 years, debts soar, deficits skyrocket, and they talk a line of bullshit about cutting spending and cutting the size of the government. It's never once happened, not in Reagan's time, not in either Bush's terms... but if only we'd give you a chance, you'd CHANGE, right? Yeah, right!

Quote:

Why oh why do you socialists think that a government that can't run a "Cash for Clunkers" deal can run our economy without causing it to crash and burn?

Why oh why do you corporatists think that a for-profit-at-all-costs financial system that bilks millions of people out of trillions of dollars can do it any better?

Quote:

Guess what Dems... "I can see November from my house!"

Guess what, dummies - it's not looking any better for you this year than it did in '08!

I'll pass on your website and your other ramblings. I've seen quite enough fiction from you already!

Mike

On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. --Auraptor

This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on. --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 11:58 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Guess what, dummies - it's not looking any better for you this year than it did in '08

The delusion of the day..no, week.... year ?

Who is it looking better for then. Democrats are reeling from blunder after blunder by this administration and their leadership.

Not sure what'll be more priceless come Nov 3rd. Your precious expression that morning because you had no idea, or because you knew, and just didn't want to accept it.

" Being correct does not excuse a violation of form " - Ducky, NCIS.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 12:04 PM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Sig hates corporations... no surprise here.

I even agree, to an extent with what she has to say.

Corporations are giant douches. But what keeps them in checK? Free markets.

Sorry, its true.

They act the assclown, don't buy their products. Cut off their oxygen, so to speak.

But that requires a free-market. Where people are FREE NOT to buy their shit.

How Sig can rail against corporations, then support government required revenue TO them just saddens me.

"I hate the horror that medical insurance comapanies are doing.... but I support ObamaCare"

WTF?

Seriously...

WTF???

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 12:29 PM

Signy, good point. Corporations can really screw things up.

But, if you want to kill millions of people, in a war, or a genocide, you need a government. Of course, if you want to start a plague, or enslave the planet debt, you need a global charity.

I agree they could be reigned in, especially if you don't have to hand more power to someone more evil than corporations. Important that one not kill the progress of medicine and technology in the aim to control abuse.

All that said, solutions?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 12:55 PM

Quote:
I've been pointing out for years that we're already a socialist society.

Mike, good point. Of course, its important to remember that our govt will fuck anything it does up. Most large govts will. The swedes are likely to get it right, which is why socialism doesn't kill sweden. It's on large and small states with no stability that i think its really dangerous. Surely, so is capitalism, I'm sure there are some more stable ideas.

Frem,

I don't think that it's stupidity. I think they're being dishonest. In part, it's understandable, people feel so under attack, they defend things they wouldn't normally, but for the manipulative members, it's just dishonesty.

I find the term RWA is fairly objectionable. It has no basis in history and is used to shove all things evil onto the other half of the population. It's propagandistic, and serves authoritarians by giving the other half of the population a free pass, allowing them to be as authoritarian and abusive as they want. I read that book that promoted the term which was posted here. I respectfully disagree with the theory. I've found no difference on the herding or shepherding behaviors of the right and left over the years.

So, surely, I take your point, but I hope you can see that this absolutely goes on across the political spectrum, and that it is just as geared towards misinformation for stealth promotion of authoritarian dystopia on the left as I admit it is on the right.

Also, I humbly suggest that a large amount of what we might tnk of as manipulative operative behavior is actually just circular thought. If you only ever listen to, support and compromise with those who agree with you, and are close to your political perspective, you can head towards filtering out information and idea which come from an alien perspective.

If, on the other hand, you are willing to take the word of those whom you disagree, even in the extreme, like say, Osama bin Laden, then you fail to gain wisdom through a study of his analysis of the situation, even if you are predetermined to disagree with his conclusions.

I would certainly agree that there are a fair number on the right who do this, but I don't think they are operatives or authoritarians, they are just caught in cyclical thought, tot he point where their judicious pondering with the help of like minded folk has rendered them little more than parrots.

I also think it's safe to say that such thought patterns exists in equal quantities on the left as they do on the right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 12:56 PM

Anthony,

Not necessarily. It's possible to propose an alternative which does not interfere with the current system, and so reaches no opposition.

I live in the middle of a couple of societies that function on a different left. To the east of me are the satmars, conservative orthodox Hasidim. They run their lawn separate system while influencing local govt. to let them be, and get by with minor interference. To the west of me are the amish, and other menonites, who work on their kwn terms by assuaging the capitalist system with productive added value to business. Each works in part to the benefit of one of our extent systems, and by doing so, does not draw fire. Then, internally, each is allowed to do their own thing.

Btw, it wasn't until I got to your post that I realized that everyone, including myself, in their response attacked the govt, as the alternative. I suppose there are number of alternatives, like the two I just mentioned, which are both essentially theocracies.

Curious side note: in both societies, women where full cover clothing, all black in the case of the satmars, and in both, women wear headscarves. The point of this being why do I hear so much about "ragheads?" maybe SC wants to ban Christians from public office. Also, in the middle of a Hasidic colony there was an Islamic cultural resource center. I have to say that someone has balls of steel.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 2:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Guess what, dummies - it's not looking any better for you this year than it did in '08

The delusion of the day..no, week.... year ?

Who is it looking better for then. Democrats are reeling from blunder after blunder by this administration and their leadership.

Not sure what'll be more priceless come Nov 3rd. Your precious expression that morning because you had no idea, or because you knew, and just didn't want to accept it.

You should go look up the "It's Palin" post from '08. Your words were really hilarious. "McCain just won the election. Game over!"

What's really going to be funny on November 3rd is the expression on your face when you realize that Obama is still President.

Wanna put some money on whether the Democrats keep one or both Houses of Congress? Or did you think that the tea-baggers were going to sweep complete control of Congress from them? That is just PRECIOUS! Hell, the tea-baggers just handed Harry Reid an easy victory by backing a prohibitionist, IN NEVADA of all places! (So much for keeping government out of your business, eh?)

Mike

On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. --Auraptor

This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on. --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 2:31 PM

Sig, your right on. Oil has us right by the throat. We have so many problems because of oil. Lately I am just sick of it all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 2:31 PM

Sig, your right on. Oil has us right by the throat. We have so many problems because of oil. Lately I am just sick of it all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 2:32 PM

Sig, your right on. Oil has us right by the throat. We have so many problems because of oil. Lately I am just sick of it all.

That's odd it led me to an error page whoops double post.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 2:52 PM

Cat:

It's a site issue. New server, I think. Just hit the submit ("Post My Response") button ONCE, and trust that the reply made it through.

I think what's happening is that it throws up the error message, so people go back and hit submit again, causing the double-postiness.

Meanwhile, I'm sure Haken is working on it.

I notice the notifications are turned off, which is usually a sign that he's working on stuffs. :)

Meanwhile, we hold.

Mike

On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. --Auraptor

This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on. --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 3:51 PM

Thanks Kwicko, I was wondering what was going on. I've been moving around the last 9 months. Just now started posting again.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 4:20 PM

Mit be the browser also. The form doesn't have a lock against double submit, which, haken , if your lurking, can be done with a message id as a unique hidden variable, stick it on the form submit.

But now, the new browsers are refresh happy, which is annoying as he'll, because kits of things just auto fail, ESP Ajax pages. Disabling refresh would be nice, I wonder if you can do that from the server side. Anyway, if it reloads the submit page, or you double click the button, it double posts. It hasn't happened to me for a while until recently, I just assumed it s iPad, because it double clicks, and safari reloads.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 5:45 PM

DT, I'm thinking not browser. I've run into the same issues with Explorer, Firefox, and Safari.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:37 To Fremdfirma:
Yeah, Frem. You miserable piece of shit.
" Daddy, did you plug the hole yet ? "
C'mere, Malia...

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
...oh, go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 9, 2010 7:27 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
One economic meltdown, caused by banks, lenders and insurances creating money out of thin air for maximum profit.

The other environmental, caused by an oil company cutting corners and refusing to credibly prepare for disaster.

The third health, caused by for-profit treatment of sick people, bleeding our economy dry and killing people in the process.

So keep sucking up to those nice corporations, folks! They only have YOUR interests in mind! (heh heh heh)

Hey Signy,

What's the difference between an authoritarian and an anti-authoritarian if they both think of the world in the same exact terms, only the authoritarian likes what he sees and the anti-authoritarian doesn't? We need a new paradigm. I don't see a few hundred profiteers running the world for good or ill, I see thousands upon thousands upon millions of wage earners and underlings, y'know, folks, just trying to get by, trying to get through the day, implementing these corrupt policies, day in and day out, not questioning, not interfering.

The problem isn't that the world is run by sociopaths, the problem is that the the world is run by fear. The sociopaths just do REALLY WELL in an environment of fear. They don't want things to change, that's for sure. And if we wanna believe that the sociopaths run the place, they aren't about to argue with us--as long as you and I continue believing that we're powerless against all that incredible and amazing power of theirs, they're good to go.

From where I sit, blaming the world's problems on a few hundred (?) CEO's is exactly like blaming the world's problems on "the terrorists." It goes deeper than that--in both cases. Sure, they're all bad men doing bad things, but all that effort we put into fighting them, eradicating either of 'em, doesn't change the paradigm, it just shuffles the deck and when the smoke clears we're right back where we started.

I say fear and alienation in the guise of comfort seeking and consumerism, moralities based on punishment and reward, the institutionalized abuse we accept as "education," are far more instrumental in bringing about these horrendous tragedies than mere ideology. "Profit," after all, is just a motive.

The folks you're talking to, the usual suspects, those people worship "profit" as a religion and all we do when we blame our troubles on "profit" is spit on their holy of holies. So, o' course, they cry "commie"--it's just their version of "infidel."

It's kinda like you're an atheist arguing not that God doesn't exist, but rather that God is a really, really bad guy. We gotta move outside the Authoritarian paradigm if we wanna make a dent in authoritarian thinking--even if it's just our own!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 10, 2010 2:07 AM

HKC: Thank you for that. It puts the real problem into pretty sharp focus, and is a point that bears repeating. As you pointed out, we keep going after "the bad guys" - this week it's BP, last year it was Goldman Sachs and AIG - but we never go after WHY they're the bad guys. We clear them out, and the next bad guy in line thanks us and picks up where those guys left off.

So how do we stop the cycle?

Mike

On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. --Auraptor

This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on. --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 10, 2010 3:09 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
You're blind, on all 3 accounts. But you don't care. Your mind is made up,regardless.

Uh huh. THIS from the guy who insisted that the UN approved the USA's invasion of Iraq, who kept referring to an old UN Resolution, all the while stubbornly ignoring the fact that UN resolutions supersede each other?

Who was convinced... convinced I tell you!.... that Saddam's WMD posed a credible threat, and who crowed over each decades-old bit of scrap as evidence that Saddam was a threat which required immediate invasion?

Who kept insisting (despite OMB's own records, which date back to the early 1900s) that Federal tax decreases increased revenues? ("I don't know about inflation adjustment and all that")

Who clung to the fact that the economy was ON FIRE, even as I and others were telling you it was in bad shape and going over the cliff? (Well, I guess in a sense you were right: It WAS "on fire", but not in the way you meant!)

Rappy, your blind faith in.... whatever it is you put your blind faith in.... is legion. We ALL know how you cherry pick your facts, ignore reality, and plow on despite the many warning signs from the evidence around you... warning signs which we TRY to clue you in on, but which you resolutely refuse to see. As far as I'm concerned, your feeble name calling is just another example of "Rappy refusing to address reality".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 10, 2010 4:08 AM

BYTEMITE

HK, I'm with Kwicko, good points.

Profit and ambition themselves are not bad motivations... Within reason, like a number of things. Even competition is not necessarily bad.

It's why I proposed keeping capitalism around in some form or another above, it's not for everyone, so we do need other options, but some people do cotton to it. Maybe as more options come around and people's mindsets change from beat the other guy into dust, it'll become less popular, maybe not and it'll always be around in some capacity. At any rate, we need to get off a completely capitalist system, into something more flexible where people have choices, and the best way to do it is gradually.

When the way someone competes is shortsighted, ruthless, and cutthroat, with no mind for consequences around them that they cause, that's when it's gone too far. I think all of us, even the strongest capitalists here, barring political message, would decry when a business behaves unethically or irresponsibly. Even AURaptor is upset with BP, though he's also very angry with Obama (surprise).

The question is, is that a necessary consequence of the capitalist system itself (Sig would say yes), or do the other factors you mentioned create the monsters as well as their frightened peons to serve them?

Many of these higher ups it could be argued come from dynasties. They've been groomed. So long as they continue to get into power (and the system is set up to only allow THEM into power), they'll continue to set the standards for ineffective education and punishment-based morality, as it's in their interests to do so.

Change the general population, what changes in the long term? Most people in the population are aware that mindless consumerism is not a path to happiness. Some others are even aware that finding a partner to "complete you" and marriage and childbirth leading to debt slavery isn't necessarily a path to happiness either, guff about "twue wuv" not withstanding. (marriage and childbirth aren't BAD, and can lead to happiness, but it's also a way that people allow themselves to be controlled and taken advantage of). So there's already an element out there that sees through it all, willing to work outside the system, but not big enough to make changes. Say you change enough of the general population, what then? What about the part of the general population so indoctrinated that they can't and won't change? I guarantee they'll struggle and resist you, because they'll be terrified of YOU, they don't know what to do without someone telling them, and you're a threat to the people controlling them.

I'm not sure the general population is the real source of the problem, which is why people focus so much on CEOs and politicians. You want to cut off the head. Problem is, you're right, it's a hydra.

So how do you stop new heads from spawning? I think Frem's got some of it, in that the real monsters undergo a lot of abuse and emotional nglect. But I think there maybe be something else there, too. In America, emotionally neglected kids shoot up a high school rather than become a CEO/politician, not unless they're already FROM a certain social class.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 10, 2010 5:46 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Been away, so in one fell swoop:

Let me note for the record that a CEOs now have "golden coffins", as well as golden parachutes and golden commodes. It used to be only kings had that. Also, BP has bought up the google term "oil spill".

Quote:
BP isn't too fond of people using search engines to check up on its Gulf of Mexico misadventures. The company has bought up some Google and Yahoo phrases in order to scuttle efforts to find news reports using such words.

This has bearing on how money is used to create a new morality. (see below)

Quote:
PIZMOBEACH: So what's your plan?

SIGNY: Thank you for asking. I'll get to that later.

Quote:
MOOSE1942: So what do you suggest governmental control of everything? That's the quickest way to poverty.

SIGNY: And you think most of us aren't poor now? And getting poorer?

Quote:
MOOSE: I'm going to let you in on a little secret Signy. Nobody is looking out for you. You need to look out for yourself. Trusting ANYONE or ANYTHING completely is bad Ju Ju.The government had a HUGE hand in the economic meltdown. Look up Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. Both government run lending institutions that really screwed us over.

SIGNY: Bull, and disproved many times over. Economists have looked it over, and found that Fannie and Freddie combined made up less than 10% of the problem, specifically because THEY were required (by law) to make sound loans. I'm willing to go into depth on this if you are, because I looked at the whole meltdown in great detail.... the explosion of poorly-secured loans not only by banks but by lenders like Countrywide, the dissolution of the Glass Steagal Act, the creation of Credit Default Swaps (CDSs) as a separate entity specifically designed to be unregulated either as loan OR as insurance... Care to go toe-to-toe on this one? 'Cause I guarantee, if we do this on a fact-to-fact comparison, you're gonna lose.

Quote:
MOOSE: Environmental? Nobody knows what caused the explosion yet. I haven't ruled out sabotage. Plus president Obama gave the Deepwater Horizon a safety award a couple of months before the incident. Plus there are currently MILES of oil barrier sitting in a warehouse but the government after inspecting it and knowing it would help contain the oil so it could be skimmed up decided not to buy it. No explanation was given. The government is letting the oil hit the shores because IMHO they WANT the crisis.

SIGNY: You're being illogical. On the one hand, you say that industry is golden. On the other hand, you blame to government for being too business-friendly. And- finally- you toss in an off-the-wall conspiracy in which somehow government is NOT stepping in to save industry from its own worse excesses... in order to discredit industry. My head is spinning! What ARE you saying?

Quote:
MOOSE: Health? Insurance companies have a big portion of the blame that's for sure, but so do people defaulting on their bills. As well as... wait for it... the government. Many doctors don't want to take Medicaid because the government isn't paying what they've promised to pay.

SIGNY: So now you're saying the government isn't involved ENOUGH in health care?

Quote:
MOOSE: So what is a one of the common threads among all three of these problems? Government.

SIGNY: Given your incredibly confused logic which is twisted whichever way it needs to be in order to reach a "BLAME GOVERNMENT" conclusion... I'm not surprised!

Quote:
GEEZER: And the nominally Socialist nations are that much better? The Soviet Union failed altogether. China has massive pollution, government-funded ecological and humanitarian horrors such as the Three Gorges dam project, weekly mine disasters, and pretty much no protection for workers. The Social Welfare states in southern Europe are finding that they can't support their social programs on the taxes they collect from the capitalists. Present a better alternative, please. One that actually has a chance of working in a world of individuals with different goals and philosophies would be nice.

SIGNY: Been there, done that. Can't help it if you can't read. Do you know what the difference between me and you is, Geezer? I see problems and think of ways to fix them. You see problems and excuse them.

Quote:
WULF: Sig hates corporations... no surprise here. I even agree, to an extent with what she has to say. Corporations are giant douches. But what keeps them in checK? Free markets. Sorry, its true. They act the assclown, don't buy their products. Cut off their oxygen, so to speak. But that requires a free-market. Where people are FREE NOT to buy their shit. How Sig can rail against corporations, then support government required revenue TO them just saddens me.

SIGNY: WULF, you are sadly mistaken about the so-called "free market" and I suggest that you read some economic history and theory. Look at this from the businessman's POV: The PRIMARY drive of the capitalist is to ELIMINATE COMPETITION by driving competitors out of business and gaining market share.... hopefully (from his or her POV) total market dominance. In addition, due to economies of scale* (*cheaper to produce a thousand widgets per item than it is to produce one) a company which is somewhat larger has an intrinsic advantage over others in the same sector. Vertical and horizontal monopolies are much more efficient than their individually-controlled counterparts. So small-business capitalism contains fundamental, intrinsic, impossible-to-root-out drivers impelling it towards big-business corporatism and monopolism. That already happened, Wulf. It occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s even when our government was small. It happens without government help. Also, for the record: I WAS AND CONTINUE TO BE AGAINST GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS AND AGAINST MANDATED PRIVATE INSURANCE. Why you keep misrepresenting me is... ???? I mean, really... WTF???? Get with the program Wulf! If you're going to argue with me, argue with ME, not with the voices in your head! And FINALLY... As for "cutting off their oxygen"... BWAHAHAHAHA!!! Go ahead! Stop buying oil products. Get off the grid. Don't buy either Microsoft OR Apple. Stop using money. Be my guest! Feel free to do all that!

Quote:
DREATMROVE: Signy, good point. Corporations can really screw things up. But, if you want to kill millions of people, in a war, or a genocide, you need a government.

SIGNY: I disagree. Starvation kills an awful lot of people, and that has more to do with uneven distribution of capital than anything else.

Quote:
DREAMTROVE: Of course, if you want to start a plague, or enslave the planet debt, you need a global charity. I agree they could be reigned in, especially if you don't have to hand more power to someone more evil than corporations. Important that one
not kill the progress of medicine and technology in the aim to control abuse. All that said, solutions?

SIGNY: Several. I wish I had more time, the best I can do is toss out a few ideas (at the bottom)

Quote:
CATPIRATE: Sig, your right on. Oil has us right by the throat. We have so many problems because of oil. Lately I am just sick of it all. That's odd it led me to an error page whoops double post.

SIGNY: Yeah, me too.

Quote:
HKC: Hey Signy, What's the difference between an authoritarian and an anti-authoritarian if they both think of the world in the same exact terms, only the authoritarian likes what he sees and the anti-authoritarian doesn't? We need a new paradigm. I don't see a few hundred profiteers running the world for good or ill, I see thousands upon thousands upon millions of wage earners and underlings, y'know, folks, just trying to get by, trying to get through the day, implementing these corrupt policies, day in and day out, not questioning, not interfering. The problem isn't that the world is run by sociopaths, the problem is that the the world is run by fear. The sociopaths just do REALLY WELL in an environment of fear. They don't want things to change, that's for sure. And if we wanna believe that the sociopaths run the place, they aren't about to argue with us--as long as you and I continue believing that we're powerless against all that incredible and amazing power of theirs, they're good to go. From where I sit, blaming the world's problems on a few hundred (?) CEO's is exactly like blaming the world's problems on "the terrorists." It goes deeper than that--in both cases. Sure, they're all bad men doing
bad things, but all that effort we put into fighting them, eradicating either of 'em, doesn't change the paradigm, it just shuffles the deck and when the smoke clears we're right back where we started. I say fear and alienation in the guise of comfort seeking and
consumerism, moralities based on punishment and reward, the institutionalized abuse we accept as "education," are far more instrumental in bringing about these horrendous tragedies than mere ideology. "Profit," after all, is just a motive. The folks you're talking to, the usual suspects, those people worship "profit" as a religion and all we do when we blame our troubles on "profit" is spit on their holy of holies. So, o' course, they cry "commie"--it's just their version of "infidel." It's kinda like you're an atheist arguing not that God doesn't exist, but rather that God is a really, really bad guy. We gotta move outside the Authoritarian paradigm if we wanna make a dent in authoritarian thinking--even if it's just our own!

KWICKO: Thank you for that. It puts the real problem into pretty sharp focus, and is a point that bears repeating. As you pointed out, we keep going after "the bad guys" - this week it's BP, last year it was Goldman Sachs and AIG - but we never go after WHY they're the bad guys. We clear them out, and the next bad guy in line thanks us and picks up where those guys left off.

HKC... I'm not normally one to point to "human nature", but there do seem to be some irreducible reactions among homo sapiens which are both our strength and our downfall. Also, there are some undeniable forces at work.

FIRST, for the most part WE ARE A SOCIAL SPECIES. We are not wolves, bears, eagles, or tigers, much as some like to identify with/ idolize/ totemize them, and any storyline beginning with "man the mighty hunter" or "man the fierce warrior" is already way off-base. MOST people. are women. And the hugely vast majority of all of us just want to get along with a modicum of comfort, control, and predictability in our lives. We willingly accept hierarchies... overall, most people identify with "winners" not "losers" ... a milder version of Stockholm Syndrome, which I think we're suffering from have on a worldwide scale. And I think this response has been selected for by evolution. Larger societies are more efficient, and can support more people. But larger societies need tighter integration and greater collectivization. Smaller societies made of less cooperative individuals would be overwhelmed.

SECOND: We're driven by CONCEPTS more than reality. We have memes and paradigms... internal stories embedded in our artifacts, culture, and language... which are more real to us than what we actually see on a day-to-day basis. It means that we can work with ideas like "gravity" and "electrons" and pass them on generation-to-generation. It also means "religion" and "purple dragons" have the same power and durability. Ideologies tend to trump reality... at least, until reality stomps on destructive ideologies. These concepts reflect our society, not reality. (Long story)

THIRD: We RATIONALIZE, we're not really conscious or rational. Our decisions are context-based; rarely does one decision cross a contextual barrier to bump into a similar process which resulted in a contradictory decision. That is why the creationist can live in a society made possible only by science, and why the "rugged individualist" can live in a society AT ALL, and deny the fundamental contradiction in their own thinking. (SargeX, are you out there?) So the creationist can deny science but flick on a lightswitch without a moment's cognitive dissonance.

FOURTH: We are PERCEPTUALLY AND CONCEPTUALLY LIMITED. We don't see the full spectrum. We only live a finite number of years. We are, in fact, rather small compared to our surroundings and our society. Many of our institutions (corporations, religions, economies, memes etc) live hundreds of years, and even though WE created them we have about as much of chance of perceiving them as a skin cell does of perceiving the body in which it lives. We tend to think of tomorrow, or the next day... not the next year of the next hundred.

FIFTH: EFFICIENT ECONOMIES WHICH USE MORE POWER WILL OVERTAKE LESS EFFICIENT/ POWER-FILLED ONES. The only fundamental "stop" to this process is literally catastrophe. Efficient societies are not robust because there is no redundancy; so any disruption in supply will cause a meltdown.

SIXTH: POWER CONCENTRATES. Unlike water which seeks the lowest level and gases which diffuse, money and power tend to aggregate. It's a non-entropic process. For example: A lord with a few more soldiers will, if intelligent, grab more land. That land provides more food, which allows an even greater army. With enough resources, one can pay for flattering recordkeeping and communication. Eventually, they bend the morality of those around them by bending the church (or the law) to suit their needs. That is why emperors were thought of as (literally) gods.

SOLUTIONS: If we are to come up with robust solutions to our problems, we have to take all of these factors into account.

And... out of time. More later.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 10, 2010 7:09 PM

HK

Well said, I think I'll ditch my own analysis in favor of yours. Of course the organizations that hold people are just made up of people, it doesn't matter what form of organization they choose. But if you really want to end the fear and ignorance, the best cure for dark shadows is light. We need tl shine a little more information on the problem. Make sure people aren't afraid of new information, and that people aren't filtering our information, or if they are, make sure that we know how and to what end they filter it, and make sure that we have multiple sources so we can get different filters, and cover the gaps of what has been filtered out.

Stepping outside of their power structure and economy might be a another tack, but don't think of it as commie, because I assure you, the poweres that be, the people called by some here "right wing authoritarians" a term I find personally offensive, please, I thought we agreed on this, TPTB, anyway, they most definitely OWN communism. Honestly isn't anyone wondering why china is a commie capitalist lovefest? Well hey, wasn't the USSR? Hey, isn't this always the case. Gee, I wonder why that could be.

Instead, I give you the freegans. I propose something close to this, not a cooperation that involves tanks rolling into town forcing mindless assimilation on the slave-masses.

Quote:

SIGNY: I disagree. Starvation kills an awful lot of people, and that has more to do with uneven distribution of capital than anything else.

Sig, this just simply isn't true. Famines are caused by govts as part of genocidal programs. I'm pretty sure this is damn close to 100% of the time. It's like looking for a natural desert or a non economic war, a peaceful empire or an anarchist state. Sure, the small random example may exist, but it's dwarfed by the gargantuan trend in the other direction. It's sort of like saying that BP is an oil cleaner upper, because, y'know, it is. But that would just imply that they weren't a more major mess maker, which wouldn't be the case.

Avoiding the part where blaming wealth disparity is a lot like blaming the victim here, more to the point, it's simply not the case. Famines result from govt. Interference in food production and distribution networks, and almost all the time they know damn well exactly what they're doing which is why they set up the systems in the first place, to prevent the people from having oral control over their own food. This is why I say, hey, forget the firearms, go to the farms. No one is coming after you with guns, historically, it's very unlikely. Starve you out, well, that's something they might try. Like they did in russia and the Ukraine, and Ireland, and the USA, and all over east Asia, and even more in Africa, and they're still doing it in Africa, right now. In the Sudan, in ethiopia, somalia, and Zimbabwe, and its looking suspiciously like that's what's going on in Gaza. Hey, it's what Clinton did in Iraq, and it killed more people tha the war. Because that's what famine does, it kills more people than war. And when you look into it, and look real long and hard, I'll tell you what you'll find: you'll find that famine *is* war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:28 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"Famines are caused by govts as part of genocidal programs. "

Hello,

Some famines are simply caused by poor planning. No genocidal scheme. Just planning X and getting Y.

--Anthony

"On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you." --Auraptor

"This vile and revolting malice - this is their true colors, always has been, you're just seeing it without the mask of justifications and excuses they hide it behind, is all. Make sure to remember it once they put the mask back on." --Fremdfirma

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 11, 2010 3:47 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

DT: war and famine often go together... but not always. You generally don't hear about non-violent starvation bc it's not newsworthy to corporate media. There was a HUGE famine in NW Brazil some decades ago... millions starved while working the boss' plantations. Children even today are starving to death all over the world without any conflict. Look at Haiti. Farmers in India are committing suicide, having entered into pacts with Roundup-Ready. The so-called Green Revolution (brought to you by Monsanto ^TM) only benefits the companies which created it.

Starvation occurs because people don't have access to what they need to grow food: enough land, water, fertilizer, and (yes) security. There was a rather long story about hunger in Africa; the FIRST issue is that the land is divided equally among all boy children, leading to smaller and smaller and smaller plots which were not owned by the people who actually worked them (women).

The SECOND problem is - believe it or not- lack of markets. How does the saying go? When the crops don't fail, the prices do. Farmers in good years should be able to sell to government granaries at good prices. (Farmers themselves don't have the capacity to store grain from year to year... it goes moldy and becomes infested.) This is the government's fault per se, except that it DOESN'T intervene when it should. Quite honestly, this is the IMF/ World Bank plan, same as Haiti.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 11, 2010 5:02 AM

Signy: ™ is typed easily in Windows by holding down the "Alt" key and hitting "0153" on the number pad. No need to superscript it, which didn't seem to take.

On a Mac, you just hit "Option-2".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 11, 2010 11:00 AM

Sig

the problem is that all the things you state actually do occur, and yet are not the cause of the problem. I do study the subject a fair amount because i farm and all my neighbors also farm. Theres a reason were not big on the communism. Actually, there are a fair number of folk who are on subsidies, but thats largely agribusiness, and dont get me started on that...

but the simple fact is that the sheer numbers of death of the major famines of the world come down to one thing:

Government run food distribution.

Keep food local, and keep govt as far away from it as possible, and everything will be fine.

BTW, when crops fail, prices soar.

I'm sure that there are examples of what you say being the controlling factor, I'll look into the Brazilian famine, do you have details?

I hope you acknowledge the threat of centralized food distribution. Major famines that were preceded by the institution of government run food distribution have resulted in millions of deaths on several points in history, as the system inevitably fails. It's such a bad idea, that I have to think that I have to at least consider the possibility the people who set it up have genocide as a goal.

Here are some

Stalin with Trotsky and Kruschev
Mao
Mugabe
Mengistu of ethiopia (also eritrea, somalia, and tigre) things didnt improve much with Zenawi
Hoover
Clinton with complacency of Saddam Hussein

I also have to ask myself: Is this what Netanyahu has in mind for Palestine?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 5:17 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Mike: I don't use Windows or Apple. I was hoping a straight html command would work... apparently not! But thanks for the suggestion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 5:19 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

DT: I think we mostly agree on what causes starvation, we're just talking about the proportions. I'm thinking 50/50, you're thinking 90/10. In my book, that's pretty close.

WULF, I'm especially interested in your reply to: You are sadly mistaken about the so-called "free market" and I suggest that you read some economic history and theory. Look at this from the businessman's POV: The PRIMARY drive of the capitalist is to ELIMINATE COMPETITION by driving competitors out of business and gaining market share.... hopefully (from his or her POV) total market dominance. In addition, due to economies of scale* (*cheaper to produce a thousand widgets per item than it is to produce one) a company which is somewhat larger has an intrinsic advantage over others in the same sector. Vertical and horizontal monopolies are much more efficient than their individually-controlled counterparts. So small-business capitalism contains fundamental, intrinsic, impossible-to-root-out drivers impelling it towards big-business corporatism and monopolism. That already happened, Wulf. It occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s even when our government was small. It happens without government help. Also, for the record: I WAS AND CONTINUE TO BE AGAINST GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS AND AGAINST MANDATED PRIVATE INSURANCE. Why you keep misrepresenting me is... ???? I mean, really... WTF???? Get with the program! If you're going to argue with me, argue with ME, not with the voices in your head! And FINALLY... As for "cutting off their oxygen"... BWAHAHAHAHA!!! Go ahead! Stop buying oil products. Get off the grid. Don't buy either Microsoft OR Apple. Stop using money. Be my guest! Feel free to do all that! How far have you gotten with cutting off their oxygen, btw?

MOOSE, and in YOUR reply to You're being illogical. On the one hand, you say that industry is golden. On the other hand, you blame to government for being too business-friendly. And- finally- you toss in an off-the-wall conspiracy in which somehow government is NOT stepping in to save industry from its own worse excesses... in order to discredit industry. My head is spinning! What ARE you saying? So... what ARE you saying?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
The Social Welfare states in southern Europe are finding that they can't support their social programs on the taxes they collect from the capitalists.

While other European social welfare states still have higher social mobility and GDP per capita than the US. Hows keeping up with the public debt going for the capitalist united states?

The one that had to be vastly expanded to save Capitalism I mean.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:07 AM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:17 AM

WHOZIT

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
The Social Welfare states in southern Europe are finding that they can't support their social programs on the taxes they collect from the capitalists.

While other European social welfare states still have higher social mobility and GDP per capita than the US. Hows keeping up with the public debt going for the capitalist united states?

The one that had to be vastly expanded to save Capitalism I mean.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

And the "World Cup" is stupid too.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
And the "World Cup" is stupid too.

And England is lousy at it, we've not won since the 60's! You Yanks are good at that World Series thing though, you win every year I hear.

--------------------------------------------------

If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 4:34 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
While other European social welfare states still have higher social mobility and GDP per capita than the US.

First, few European social welfare states have higher GDP per capita that the U.S. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_percap-economy-gdp-per-capit
a
Note that these stats are 2006, and I'd bet Iceland's GDP per capita has dropped a bit.

I'd appreciate a cite of social mobility by nation.

Also, the social welfare states of Europe depend on taxes paid by the capitalist enterprises and their employees to support their social welfare.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 4:36 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Do you know what the difference between me and you is, Geezer? I see problems and think of ways to fix them.

So enlighten me. Better not be Socialism.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:19 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Better not be Socialism.

Why not? That would be a big improvement over what we've got now!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 13, 2010 1:04 AM