Greatest thread to human civilization : capitalist greed - Stephen Hawkin

[Andylusion]

Its so amusing to see posters on a message board calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. He is the Einstein of our age.

He is right of course. I would add all the rest is just talk as Global Warming is the one thing we will not stop and have never seen before. Physics and chemistry are about to decide which species survive the next mass extinction, which has already begun, and which will go gone. Humans will likely suffer massive losses and if not go extinct come perilously close.

The worst part is most humans don't have a clue about what is coming and soon to arrive. Much like the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

Something wicked this way comes.

Ya. I was struck by that, too. What I will say is if one believes that the world can be a better place, and one knows the history of unfettered capitalism, then intelligent people would acknowledge that capitalism needs to be tempered... tempered by wage and hour laws; tempered by child labor laws; tempered by OSHA regulations; tempered by laws preventing monopolies.

ony people who are very ignorant or who have no sense of social responsibility think that capitalism should be unfettered. so it isn't surprising that Stephen hawking, someone who has spent his life studying the way our world works, would understand some of that. I don't know how far he goes in those beliefs though. It's an interesting discussion to have.... well, except when one has it with people who are so ignorant that they fancy themselves smarter than Stephen hawking.

Social Responsibility is what dictators use to oppress the public.

Unfettered Capitalism, is what socialists call socialism that doesn't work, so they can promote more socialism. Unfettered Capitalism is what built this country, and quite frankly, the standard of living in this country rose faster in the 1800s than it has in the 'regulated' capitalism of the 1900s, and now we're going broke.

Show that is true.

Sure, just give me an example of your claims of unfettered capitalism. I've asked for such examples before, and it is always some socialized system, that some socialist pulled out their ideological label maker, and slapped "capitalism" on it.

So go ahead. Give me your example.

 

[Brain357]

Its so amusing to see posters on a message board calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. He is the Einstein of our age.

He is right of course. I would add all the rest is just talk as Global Warming is the one thing we will not stop and have never seen before. Physics and chemistry are about to decide which species survive the next mass extinction, which has already begun, and which will go gone. Humans will likely suffer massive losses and if not go extinct come perilously close.

The worst part is most humans don't have a clue about what is coming and soon to arrive. Much like the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

Something wicked this way comes.

Ya. I was struck by that, too. What I will say is if one believes that the world can be a better place, and one knows the history of unfettered capitalism, then intelligent people would acknowledge that capitalism needs to be tempered... tempered by wage and hour laws; tempered by child labor laws; tempered by OSHA regulations; tempered by laws preventing monopolies.

ony people who are very ignorant or who have no sense of social responsibility think that capitalism should be unfettered. so it isn't surprising that Stephen hawking, someone who has spent his life studying the way our world works, would understand some of that. I don't know how far he goes in those beliefs though. It's an interesting discussion to have.... well, except when one has it with people who are so ignorant that they fancy themselves smarter than Stephen hawking.

Social Responsibility is what dictators use to oppress the public.

Unfettered Capitalism, is what socialists call socialism that doesn't work, so they can promote more socialism. Unfettered Capitalism is what built this country, and quite frankly, the standard of living in this country rose faster in the 1800s than it has in the 'regulated' capitalism of the 1900s, and now we're going broke.

Show that is true.

Sure, just give me an example of your claims of unfettered capitalism. I've asked for such examples before, and it is always some socialized system, that some socialist pulled out their ideological label maker, and slapped "capitalism" on it.

So go ahead. Give me your example.

You made a claim, I was curious what you based it on.

 

[Andylusion]

IF everything is relative, Isn't the statement "everything is relative" relative?

Why is the right uncomfortable discussing socialism? Cognitive dissonance?

========
Why is the right uncomfortable discussing socialism? Because their masters have told them it is evil and to be avoided at all costs. Why? Because it would cut down on their PROFITS -- not eliminate but cut them down a bit and they won't tolerate that even though they have more money than they can possibly spend in their lifetime.

The convenience store attendant Republicans have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into believing that unrestricted capitalism is the ONLY way a country can run successfully. They have been taught to IGNORE the rest of the world and countries where socialism works just fine. And to never never think about the fact that this country is very socialistic and always has been. They refuse to even consider facts such as the fact that one of America's biggest " capitalistic " industries --- INSURANCE --- is nothing but socialism with a ball cap of capitalism glued on top. The insurance companies collect money from many people and pay it out to those in need. Did you ever hear anything more socialistic?

And they get a Profit on top for the service of aggravating the funds and the record keeping etc. etc.

But the base of the Insurance industry is nothing less than pure socialism.

Can I just make up crap about you? You know, like you do us? Is that how we discuss things here?

Why is the left uncomfortable discussing socialism? Because their socialist masters have told them it is evil and to be avoided at all costs. Why? Because it would cut down on their ideology -- not eliminate but cut them down a bit and they won't tolerate that even though they have more political power than they can use in their lifetime.
The convenience store attendant Democrats have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into believing that unrestricted government is the ONLY way a country can run successfully. They have been taught to IGNORE the rest of the world and countries where socialism fails horribly. And to never never think about the fact that this country is has socialism, and that's where all the problems are. They refuse to even consider facts such as the fact that one of America's biggest " socialist " industries --- INSURANCE --- is nothing but proof that socialism doesn't work. The insurance companies have to follow millions of government regulations, and that's exactly why the premiums are going up, and service is going down.

 

[Andylusion]

Its so amusing to see posters on a message board calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. He is the Einstein of our age.

He is right of course. I would add all the rest is just talk as Global Warming is the one thing we will not stop and have never seen before. Physics and chemistry are about to decide which species survive the next mass extinction, which has already begun, and which will go gone. Humans will likely suffer massive losses and if not go extinct come perilously close.

The worst part is most humans don't have a clue about what is coming and soon to arrive. Much like the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

Something wicked this way comes.

Ya. I was struck by that, too. What I will say is if one believes that the world can be a better place, and one knows the history of unfettered capitalism, then intelligent people would acknowledge that capitalism needs to be tempered... tempered by wage and hour laws; tempered by child labor laws; tempered by OSHA regulations; tempered by laws preventing monopolies.

ony people who are very ignorant or who have no sense of social responsibility think that capitalism should be unfettered. so it isn't surprising that Stephen hawking, someone who has spent his life studying the way our world works, would understand some of that. I don't know how far he goes in those beliefs though. It's an interesting discussion to have.... well, except when one has it with people who are so ignorant that they fancy themselves smarter than Stephen hawking.

Social Responsibility is what dictators use to oppress the public.

Unfettered Capitalism, is what socialists call socialism that doesn't work, so they can promote more socialism. Unfettered Capitalism is what built this country, and quite frankly, the standard of living in this country rose faster in the 1800s than it has in the 'regulated' capitalism of the 1900s, and now we're going broke.

Show that is true.

Sure, just give me an example of your claims of unfettered capitalism. I've asked for such examples before, and it is always some socialized system, that some socialist pulled out their ideological label maker, and slapped "capitalism" on it.

So go ahead. Give me your example.

You made a claim, I was curious what you based it on.

I base it on talking with people on here, who routinely, and consistently either point to countries which are capitalist to the core, and label them Socialist, or look at failures which are clearly socialized, and label them Capitalist.

I've seen it for 10 years, on this forum, and others. It is the defacto method for supporting socialism, by socialists.

 

[Andylusion]

The insurance companies collect money from many people and pay it out to those in need. Did you ever hear anything more socialistic?

100% stupid since insurance is competitive. If you don't do it well you go bankrupt according to the rules of capitalism. Govt is a monopoly , it has no competition so there is no incentive to do things well, cheaply, or efficiently. Now you know why 120 million slowly starved to death in the USSR and Red China.

Do you understand why we are positive that liberalism is based in pure and deadly ignorance?

California is the most liberal state in the Union and its economy is twice the size of the next closest state, Texas. Not bad for a bunch of liberals eh.

And California did go into debt during the Bush Great Recession like many states did but California is now running a 5 billion dollar surplus and is well on its way back, as are many states. We all survived the 2008 Republican recession.

And those liberals in Hollywood make some great movies yes? Or do cons not watch 'liberal' movies? lol Where is the con movie industry? You'd think Mel Gibson and Rupert Murdoch would have started a con movie industry to offset Hollywood. Or is it that conservative movies have no market.

Ahhhh, the capitalist market, it does work doesn't it.

Yeah, given the fact that every aspect of that California economy is only due to Capitalism.

LOL! You took "some Econ." Yeah, you blew an Econ major in the bathroom is probably what you meant.
Your posts indicate deep ignorance of the Bernouli Curve and Stromboli Theorem.

oh no. A peerless, unemployed professor draws curves that makes him conclude that protection doesn't include exports, no matter what reality says.

Protection doesn't include exports because of the definition of protection, nimrod. Who does limiting exports "protect?"

I'm referring to the trade restriction on exporting crude oil. This policy benefits US refiners and is part of our energy and national security policy. It's a very significant player when it comes to the price of energy. Our strategic oil reserves play roles from national security to currency here in the U.S.

How does restricting oil exports benefit U.S. refineries?

This promotes localizing refinement of our oil to the United States in the first place. There's always going to be competition for U.S. refiners, but there's always going to be a market. Essentially this makes BP a US refinery when they want to exploit our resources. Before this Rabbi guy got all crazy, I made the point that consumer economies (of which energy we are) favor contrary trade policy to export driven economies.

First off, if everything you said was true, then all of the major US based oil companies wouldn't be calling for the oil export ban to be lifted.

Second, exporting oil, would bring money back into the US economy. Everyone screams about how the Saudis are rich off of us buying their oil. Why should we not get rich off selling our own oil?

Third, many of our refineries are foreign owned. So protecting refineries that are sending money back to their own countries anyway, isn't very compelling to me.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Otherwise you're just a sanctimonious thug.

its true, nothing justifies liberal violence more than their sanctimony!!

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."--- C.S. Lewis

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."--- C.S. Lewis

This is the founding principle of Isis and every religion on Earth.

But to then leap to 'robber barons are great, aka wealthy overlords, is ridiculous in its entirety. Neither is acceptable in any sense.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your definition of socialism is yours alone.

Taxpayers pay for the uninsured and did so well before the passage of the PPACA. That you don't understand that simple fact is proof positive you too are clueless.

It involves redistribution of wealth and that is a major tenet of socialism. Try looking it up.

I understand that taxpayers paid for it before. It was wrong then. Since Obamacare did nothing to change that fact, what good did it do to solve the problem of one person being forced to support another? Like I said, if you aren't willing to voluntarily do what you say is OK to force others to do, that's proof you're nothing more than a loud mouth bleeding heart good for nothing.
Tell me why taxpayers should be forced to fund healthcare for anyone? What's wrong with those of you who say someone that doesn't have getting it funding it yourself?

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

 

[Andylusion]

It involves redistribution of wealth and that is a major tenet of socialism. Try looking it up.

I understand that taxpayers paid for it before. It was wrong then. Since Obamacare did nothing to change that fact, what good did it do to solve the problem of one person being forced to support another? Like I said, if you aren't willing to voluntarily do what you say is OK to force others to do, that's proof you're nothing more than a loud mouth bleeding heart good for nothing.
Tell me why taxpayers should be forced to fund healthcare for anyone? What's wrong with those of you who say someone that doesn't have getting it funding it yourself?

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Yes, cotton was a good business with slaves doing the work. Very profitable.

Profiteering during a war or a natural disaster is lucrative, when the country and the people are desperate for the means to survive.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Roads are paid for by everyone so that cars can benefit the common good. Research is done in Universities to provide better crops more resistant to disease and insects, for the common good.

There is this bizarre need for conservatives to believe they don't get help from, or are part of, any society. They live outside a population. You can only exist if other people do things both for profit and to benefit other people without profit.

The U.S. Senate is the embodiment of social socialism. Equal voice and power for the many and for the few. The House of Representatives represents political capitalism, the Senate political socialism. The founders understood the balance needed.

Naked capitalism is like a nuclear reactor, without control rods it quickly melts down because of the unbridled greed of the few. Hence we have laws against monopolies and anti-trust laws.

And if you think you pay for your part of the roads, please research how much it costs to pave 1/4 mile of road, then tally up all the taxes you've paid in your life. You won't be close.

 

[Andylusion]

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Yes, cotton was a good business with slaves doing the work. Very profitable.

Profiteering during a war or a natural disaster is lucrative, when the country and the people are desperate for the means to survive.

Michael Munger, They Clapped: Can Price-Gouging Laws Prohibit Scarcity? | Library of Economics and Liberty

In 1996, hurricane Fran hit North Carolina.

Raleigh was hit, among other cities, and had shortages of all kinds of material including ice.

While there was a shortage of supplies in Raleigh, there was a surplus in Charlotte, which had expected to get hit, but was largely spared.

Question.... did supplies in Charlotte move to Raleigh? You know... for the common good?

Answer: No it did not. No attempt was made by the vast majority of the public to move supplies from where they had a surplus, to where they had a shortage and desperate need.

Why? To illustrate why, we look at four guys from Goldsboro, that rented a freezer truck, chainsaws (to clear downed trees on the roads), and drove into Raleigh, where they sold the ice, at $8 a bag on the side of the road.

Guess what happened? People got mad, called the police, who arrested the men, and impounded the vehicles. North Carolina has anti-gouging laws.

The ice melted away, when the police turned the trucks off and left them in the impound lot. And of course no one ever brought anymore ice or supplies of any kind, into Raleigh again.

Tell me, which situation would you consider the better one? People with ice, but possibly expensive (after all they rented trucks, bought gas, rented chainsaws, and bought the ice)? Or no one charging $8 for a bag of ice, and.... no ice?

Between the two options.... which did more for the common good? No greedy people, supplying nothing? Or some guys making a quick buck while selling much needed ice?

I've heard similar stories from other events. For example in 2005, after Katrina hit, I read about a store owner who sold power generators. After Katrina, he contacted stores outside the area which still had generators and bought them, and hired trucks to deliver them to his store, where he sold them at 10% under cost. So he was losing money on each generator he sold. But after the first dozen generators were sold at $100 over sticker, people were so angry at his good deed, that he canceled all other orders, and later said he'll never do anything like that ever again during an emergency. He'll just close the store, and go on vacation until the crisis is over.

Tell me.... which result did more of the common good? Selling generators at $100 over sticker? Or just closing the store.... which of course isn't a greedy action?

You people on the left always talk like you are the more caring, but in fact your policies are the least caring, and do the most harm.

 

[Andylusion]

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Roads are paid for by everyone so that cars can benefit the common good. Research is done in Universities to provide better crops more resistant to disease and insects, for the common good.

There is this bizarre need for conservatives to believe they don't get help from, or are part of, any society. They live outside a population. You can only exist if other people do things both for profit and to benefit other people without profit.

The U.S. Senate is the embodiment of social socialism. Equal voice and power for the many and for the few. The House of Representatives represents political capitalism, the Senate political socialism. The founders understood the balance needed.

Naked capitalism is like a nuclear reactor, without control rods it quickly melts down because of the unbridled greed of the few. Hence we have laws against monopolies and anti-trust laws.

And if you think you pay for your part of the roads, please research how much it costs to pave 1/4 mile of road, then tally up all the taxes you've paid in your life. You won't be close.

Road, and all the materials in them, only exist because someone somewhere wanted to make a profit. Without profit, there would be no roads. There would be no machines to make the roads. There would be no supplies of sand, dirt, gravel, asphalt to make the roads with.

And quite frankly, without profit, you wouldn't need roads, because there would be no cars and trucks that need them.

Research is done everywhere. Last year, $675 Billion dollars was spent by companies into research and development for all kinds of things, from health care, to food crops, to energy, to transportation, and on and on and on.

Now that isn't to minimize, or ignore the benefits that do come from Universities. But this idea that somehow no one would do research if not for them, is garbage.

Further, you should look at how much money is blown on absolutely useless research. Try the Ignoble Awards for endless laughs of infuriating waste.

And lastly, even the research that does happen there..... still doesn't contradict my point. All of the research is placed into commercial.... read profitable products. Without which, you wouldn't benefit from any of the research.

Secondly, you are freaking nutz on your math. According to Ohio Department of Transportation, it cost about $60,000 to pave 1/4 of a mile of two lane road.

In my life time, I've paid about $80,000 in taxes in my life.

And by the way.... that's with expensive, wasteful, high cost Union contracts through the government.

You go with a private firm, you can get a 1/4 mile of two lane road built for about $26,000.

You people..... you say the most wacky stuff sometimes.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Roads are paid for by everyone so that cars can benefit the common good. Research is done in Universities to provide better crops more resistant to disease and insects, for the common good.

There is this bizarre need for conservatives to believe they don't get help from, or are part of, any society. They live outside a population. You can only exist if other people do things both for profit and to benefit other people without profit.

The U.S. Senate is the embodiment of social socialism. Equal voice and power for the many and for the few. The House of Representatives represents political capitalism, the Senate political socialism. The founders understood the balance needed.

Naked capitalism is like a nuclear reactor, without control rods it quickly melts down because of the unbridled greed of the few. Hence we have laws against monopolies and anti-trust laws.

And if you think you pay for your part of the roads, please research how much it costs to pave 1/4 mile of road, then tally up all the taxes you've paid in your life. You won't be close.

Road, and all the materials in them, only exist because someone somewhere wanted to make a profit. Without profit, there would be no roads. There would be no machines to make the roads. There would be no supplies of sand, dirt, gravel, asphalt to make the roads with.

And quite frankly, without profit, you wouldn't need roads, because there would be no cars and trucks that need them.

Research is done everywhere. Last year, $675 Billion dollars was spent by companies into research and development for all kinds of things, from health care, to food crops, to energy, to transportation, and on and on and on.

Now that isn't to minimize, or ignore the benefits that do come from Universities. But this idea that somehow no one would do research if not for them, is garbage.

Further, you should look at how much money is blown on absolutely useless research. Try the Ignoble Awards for endless laughs of infuriating waste.

And lastly, even the research that does happen there..... still doesn't contradict my point. All of the research is placed into commercial.... read profitable products. Without which, you wouldn't benefit from any of the research.

Secondly, you are freaking nutz on your math. According to Ohio Department of Transportation, it cost about $60,000 to pave 1/4 of a mile of two lane road.

In my life time, I've paid about $80,000 in taxes in my life.

And by the way.... that's with expensive, wasteful, high cost Union contracts through the government.

You go with a private firm, you can get a 1/4 mile of two lane road built for about $26,000.

You people..... you say the most wacky stuff sometimes.

Nah, you are just entrenched in the narrowest of view of life. Every person on Earth participates in work, buying, paying bills.

It is just conservatives who think themselves heroes for it because it makes you feel good. And that is so sad.

 

[bripat9643]

LOL! You took "some Econ." Yeah, you blew an Econ major in the bathroom is probably what you meant.
Your posts indicate deep ignorance of the Bernouli Curve and Stromboli Theorem.

oh no. A peerless, unemployed professor draws curves that makes him conclude that protection doesn't include exports, no matter what reality says.

Protection doesn't include exports because of the definition of protection, nimrod. Who does limiting exports "protect?"

I'm referring to the trade restriction on exporting crude oil. This policy benefits US refiners and is part of our energy and national security policy. It's a very significant player when it comes to the price of energy. Our strategic oil reserves play roles from national security to currency here in the U.S.

How does restricting oil exports benefit U.S. refineries?

This promotes localizing refinement of our oil to the United States in the first place. There's always going to be competition for U.S. refiners, but there's always going to be a market. Essentially this makes BP a US refinery when they want to exploit our resources. Before this Rabbi guy got all crazy, I made the point that consumer economies (of which energy we are) favor contrary trade policy to export driven economies.

You failed to explain how it benefits refineries. What do they care if the oil they refine is domestic or imported? They make the same amount of money in either case. How does "making BP a domestic refinery" benefit BP? The distinction between "consumer economies" and "export driven economies" is entirely superfluous. Some countries have high tariffs. Some countries have low tariffs. Consumers in the former have to pay higher prices on imported goods. That's the only distinction.

 

[bripat9643]

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Roads are paid for by everyone so that cars can benefit the common good. Research is done in Universities to provide better crops more resistant to disease and insects, for the common good.

There is this bizarre need for conservatives to believe they don't get help from, or are part of, any society. They live outside a population. You can only exist if other people do things both for profit and to benefit other people without profit.

The U.S. Senate is the embodiment of social socialism. Equal voice and power for the many and for the few. The House of Representatives represents political capitalism, the Senate political socialism. The founders understood the balance needed.

Naked capitalism is like a nuclear reactor, without control rods it quickly melts down because of the unbridled greed of the few. Hence we have laws against monopolies and anti-trust laws.

And if you think you pay for your part of the roads, please research how much it costs to pave 1/4 mile of road, then tally up all the taxes you've paid in your life. You won't be close.

Road, and all the materials in them, only exist because someone somewhere wanted to make a profit. Without profit, there would be no roads. There would be no machines to make the roads. There would be no supplies of sand, dirt, gravel, asphalt to make the roads with.

And quite frankly, without profit, you wouldn't need roads, because there would be no cars and trucks that need them.

Research is done everywhere. Last year, $675 Billion dollars was spent by companies into research and development for all kinds of things, from health care, to food crops, to energy, to transportation, and on and on and on.

Now that isn't to minimize, or ignore the benefits that do come from Universities. But this idea that somehow no one would do research if not for them, is garbage.

Further, you should look at how much money is blown on absolutely useless research. Try the Ignoble Awards for endless laughs of infuriating waste.

And lastly, even the research that does happen there..... still doesn't contradict my point. All of the research is placed into commercial.... read profitable products. Without which, you wouldn't benefit from any of the research.

Secondly, you are freaking nutz on your math. According to Ohio Department of Transportation, it cost about $60,000 to pave 1/4 of a mile of two lane road.

In my life time, I've paid about $80,000 in taxes in my life.

And by the way.... that's with expensive, wasteful, high cost Union contracts through the government.

You go with a private firm, you can get a 1/4 mile of two lane road built for about $26,000.

You people..... you say the most wacky stuff sometimes.

Nah, you are just entrenched in the narrowest of view of life. Every person on Earth participates in work, buying, paying bills.

It is just conservatives who think themselves heroes for it because it makes you feel good. And that is so sad.

If you produce a product or service that people value, why aren't you a hero? You're certainly better than some tick on the government payroll who produces nothing anyone is willing to pay for voluntarily.

 

[bripat9643]

Otherwise you're just a sanctimonious thug.

its true, nothing justifies liberal violence more than their sanctimony!!

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."--- C.S. Lewis

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."--- C.S. Lewis

This is the founding principle of Isis and every religion on Earth.

But to then leap to 'robber barons are great, aka wealthy overlords, is ridiculous in its entirety. Neither is acceptable in any sense.

"Robber Barons" are a myth. The people labelled "robber barons" where the greatest benefactors of mankind that have ever appeared on this woeful planet.

 

[bripat9643]

It involves redistribution of wealth and that is a major tenet of socialism. Try looking it up.

I understand that taxpayers paid for it before. It was wrong then. Since Obamacare did nothing to change that fact, what good did it do to solve the problem of one person being forced to support another? Like I said, if you aren't willing to voluntarily do what you say is OK to force others to do, that's proof you're nothing more than a loud mouth bleeding heart good for nothing.
Tell me why taxpayers should be forced to fund healthcare for anyone? What's wrong with those of you who say someone that doesn't have getting it funding it yourself?

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

Horseshit. Does the common man benefit from the automobile? Television? Cell phones? Computers?

You have to be the world's biggest idiot to believe capitalism doesn't provide for the common good.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Yes, cotton was a good business with slaves doing the work. Very profitable.

Profiteering during a war or a natural disaster is lucrative, when the country and the people are desperate for the means to survive.

What does slavery have to do with anything? Leftists turds like you just can't resist bringing in slavery and blaming it on capitalism. That's your "get our of jail free" card whenever you're getting slammed in an argument.

What an asshole.

BTW. people do benefit from so-called "profiteers." If it wasn't for "profiteers" who brought water, food and electric generators to New Orleans after Katrina from places as far away Michigan, the people there wouldn't have had water, food or electricity.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Roads are paid for by everyone so that cars can benefit the common good. Research is done in Universities to provide better crops more resistant to disease and insects, for the common good.

There is this bizarre need for conservatives to believe they don't get help from, or are part of, any society. They live outside a population. You can only exist if other people do things both for profit and to benefit other people without profit.

The U.S. Senate is the embodiment of social socialism. Equal voice and power for the many and for the few. The House of Representatives represents political capitalism, the Senate political socialism. The founders understood the balance needed.

Naked capitalism is like a nuclear reactor, without control rods it quickly melts down because of the unbridled greed of the few. Hence we have laws against monopolies and anti-trust laws.

And if you think you pay for your part of the roads, please research how much it costs to pave 1/4 mile of road, then tally up all the taxes you've paid in your life. You won't be close.

What a giant load of horseshit.

 

[Andylusion]

How did socialism save civilization? Precisely the opposite is the case.

Socialism provides for the common good that capitalism has no interest in.

The reason we have automobiles, isn't for the common good. It's for profit, and yet automobiles provide for the common good.

Farmers do not farm for the common good, and yet their food results in the common good.

Everything that exists..... does not exist for the common good. It exists because someone profited. And yet those things all provide for the common good.

Roads are paid for by everyone so that cars can benefit the common good. Research is done in Universities to provide better crops more resistant to disease and insects, for the common good.

There is this bizarre need for conservatives to believe they don't get help from, or are part of, any society. They live outside a population. You can only exist if other people do things both for profit and to benefit other people without profit.

The U.S. Senate is the embodiment of social socialism. Equal voice and power for the many and for the few. The House of Representatives represents political capitalism, the Senate political socialism. The founders understood the balance needed.

Naked capitalism is like a nuclear reactor, without control rods it quickly melts down because of the unbridled greed of the few. Hence we have laws against monopolies and anti-trust laws.

And if you think you pay for your part of the roads, please research how much it costs to pave 1/4 mile of road, then tally up all the taxes you've paid in your life. You won't be close.

Road, and all the materials in them, only exist because someone somewhere wanted to make a profit. Without profit, there would be no roads. There would be no machines to make the roads. There would be no supplies of sand, dirt, gravel, asphalt to make the roads with.

And quite frankly, without profit, you wouldn't need roads, because there would be no cars and trucks that need them.

Research is done everywhere. Last year, $675 Billion dollars was spent by companies into research and development for all kinds of things, from health care, to food crops, to energy, to transportation, and on and on and on.

Now that isn't to minimize, or ignore the benefits that do come from Universities. But this idea that somehow no one would do research if not for them, is garbage.

Further, you should look at how much money is blown on absolutely useless research. Try the Ignoble Awards for endless laughs of infuriating waste.

And lastly, even the research that does happen there..... still doesn't contradict my point. All of the research is placed into commercial.... read profitable products. Without which, you wouldn't benefit from any of the research.

Secondly, you are freaking nutz on your math. According to Ohio Department of Transportation, it cost about $60,000 to pave 1/4 of a mile of two lane road.

In my life time, I've paid about $80,000 in taxes in my life.

And by the way.... that's with expensive, wasteful, high cost Union contracts through the government.

You go with a private firm, you can get a 1/4 mile of two lane road built for about $26,000.

You people..... you say the most wacky stuff sometimes.

Nah, you are just entrenched in the narrowest of view of life. Every person on Earth participates in work, buying, paying bills.

It is just conservatives who think themselves heroes for it because it makes you feel good. And that is so sad.

Nothing of what you said, even came close to contradicting, or even addressing the points I made.

Of course that's not surprising because.... you can't. I'm right, and I know it.

Thanks for stopping by. Have a nice day.