JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,522
- 2,165
- Banned
- #121
OK. I believe that you think business should be unregulated by government. I am not attacking you, I just want to make sure that I understand your philosophy.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Shhhhhhh...
To conservatives any regulation= SOCIALISM
Anyone who believes that is fries short of a Happy Meal. And if they want to prove they mean it and aren't just a bunch of loudmouths, I'm buy them a ticket on the first boat to Somalia, aka utopia in the minds of libertarians (after all, no government is the smallest possible government).
anarchists tend to believe in no government
Libertarians tend to believe in limited government
While I agree, no gov't is an impossibility, limited gov't was supported by most of the Founding Fathers of the US
OK. I believe that you think business should be unregulated by government. I am not attacking you, I just want to make sure that I understand your philosophy.
Anyone who believes that is fries short of a Happy Meal. And if they want to prove they mean it and aren't just a bunch of loudmouths, I'm buy them a ticket on the first boat to Somalia, aka utopia in the minds of libertarians (after all, no government is the smallest possible government).
anarchists tend to believe in no government
Libertarians tend to believe in limited government
While I agree, no gov't is an impossibility, limited gov't was supported by most of the Founding Fathers of the US
If the founders had agreed with the modern day anti-government kooks on the right, they would have formed 13 countries.
What direction? Explain what Obama has done to take us in the "direction" of socialism?
I do NOT agree, because it's pretty clear that most Americans don't know what socialism is. I'm definitely not a socialist - I'm a Keynesian Capitalist - but I haven't seen Obama advocate for worker-ownership, or a managed economy, and the rhetorical claims of "Socialism!" are just a further example of the dumbing down of political discourse.
Not to split hairs here, but he did fire the head of GM, is regulating the incomes of business executives, is regulating the decisions of the institutions in hock to the bail outs, has engineereed a bailout of the UAW, is trying mightily to nationalize the insurance industry and is engaged in promoting the passage of Cap and Trade.
With what he has done and what he wants to do there absolutely nothing done for profit in the USA that the government would not have direct oversight of or intersection with.
In short, everything he has done since he moved from the podium that said ofice of the president elect to the podium that says office of the president has been aimed creating a managed economy.
What have you noticed him doing that does NOT contribute to that goal?
So he is regulating the businesses that got bailed out in an attempt to ensure that they don't need another bailout as executives walk away with huge undeserved compensation. I don't see the problem nor how that translates into control over the entirety of all compaines as you seem to imply.
Then in the second half of your rant you create a fictitious "goal", assign that to obama without offering proof that is what he has done and then ask others to disprove your argument when you offer nothing of substance to support it?? But I thought the burden of proof was on the one making the claim?? So do you have any proof or not?
anarchists tend to believe in no government
Libertarians tend to believe in limited government
While I agree, no gov't is an impossibility, limited gov't was supported by most of the Founding Fathers of the US
If the founders had agreed with the modern day anti-government kooks on the right, they would have formed 13 countries.
If the founders had agreed with the modern day leftwing fisters kooks on the left, they never would have made a Constitution
The liberals, neo, were Hamilton, Washington, Franklin, and a good 2/3rds of the Founders who wanted a strong constitution. In fact, government and business interaction and regulation began with the first US bank: 20% of the capital and 20% of the directors were federal.
Unregulated markets lead to monopolies. The balance of regulation is that which is critical, not too much and not to little.
Pretty good- they still controlled congress
No they lost Congress and the Senate in the next election, and the presidency in the next election.
Btw, if according to this nonsense only 21% of Americans think they're liberal, and Obama got 52% of the vote, that means that 60% of the voters who chose a liberal Democrat for president aren't themselves liberal??
These self-indentifications are nonsense. If 37%, or 40%, of the country were really conservative, in the purist/litmus test sense of that word (or by the definition of the so-called 'real' conservatives) we wouldn't have Democrats in control of the government at every level from the federal on down.
The last election was a referedum on GWB, the War in Iraq and the celebration of a post racial Black man with wisdom beyond his years.
Turns out, the Big 0 did not have the answers he claimed to have. He's been wrong on everything he has tried. Gitmo is still open. Another couple trillion have evaporated and no good came of it.
The Dems have been exposed as only slightly more corrupt than a group of kleptomaniac Catholic priests stealing the collection plates to buy chocolate chip cookies and ice cream.
The Big 0 told us that if we bailed out GM, they would avoid bankruptcy. We did. They didn't. If we enacted a trillion dollar stimulus, that unemployment would not go over 8%. We did and it did. If we elected him, we'd have universal healthcare and no tax increase on the middle class. The healthcare is NOT universal, the tax increases are universal and the tax increses affect everyone and the healthcare will NOT cover everyone, but everyone will be subject to the penalties for not carrying it.
You may enjoy being swindeled and lied to, but quite a few people get mad, real mad, when this happens to them.
They felt that GWB lied to them. Now they feel that the Big 0 is lying to them. Do you think that their reaction will be less severe with the Big 0?
GOP Lead Slips to Five on Generic Ballot - Rasmussen Reports
Despite the decline, the latest numbers highlight a remarkable change in the political environment during 2009. When President Obama was inaugurated, the Democrats enjoyed a seven-point advantage on the Generic Ballot. That means the GOP has made a net gain of 12-percentage points over the course of the year. Support for Democrats has declined four points since the inauguration while Republican support is up eight points.
This isn't really a surprise to me. I remember a poll a little while back that had more Democrats defining themselves as Conservative than Liberal.
From your own link:
Thus far in 2009, Gallup has found an average of 36% of Americans considering themselves Democratic, 28% Republican, and 37% independent. When independents are pressed to say which party they lean toward, 51% of Americans identify as Democrats, 39% as Republicans, and only 9% as pure independents.
That only means our infiltration program is beginning to work. Soon you will only have a choice between conservative and conservative.
I believe Norman Thomas (Socialist Party presidential candidate in the 1940's) said it the best: The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But ...
It's interesting you link me with Lenin, neotrotsky, when probably 100 million other folks have said the same thing. The inference is dishonest, my friend. Modern imperialism was one of the reasons for the rise of large corporations, and, eventually, monopolies. I
In fact, health insurance companies have created a monster industry that resists viciously any infringement on its profit margin while it grows increasingly more lucrative as it denies insurance to the the sick and ill.
Yes, it is time for reform, and because my party did not pro-actively encourage the industry to reform on its own. Neo, folks are not happy with the state of accessibility and affordability. All Americans need that accessibility and affordability. Such a belief is not communistic and not socialistic. It is a humanistic and realistic.
Let's get you right before you get left (that's funny!), neotrotsky.
There was no need for the comment about Lenin.
You have a mistaken notion of just what imperialism was and its effect on the growth of late 19th and 20th century corporations.
The only worthwhile comparison with the health insurance industry would be the construction industry; the others are not industries by themselves.
No one said it was a "right".
My party could have passed tort reform, could have passed portable laws. It didn't.