Hillary: Advertisers Want To Put Chips In Kid's Heads

CharlestonChad said:
No

No

No


I have seen MANY parents do this, which is why I said what I said.

Why aren't you going to do this when you become a parent? If it is easier..how is it that you are going to be able to stand your ground and be a good parent?

What makes you different than any other parent?

If you can do it, don't you think they can do it?
 
GotZoom said:
Why aren't you going to do this when you become a parent? If it is easier..how is it that you are going to be able to stand your ground and be a good parent?

What makes you different than any other parent?

If you can do it, don't you think they can do it?


His belief that liberals (like himself) are so much smarter then everyone else
 
CC, you seem to be making the assumption that supporting the concept of a free market economy is the same thing as supporting greed. A free market economy means that people can make informed choices about what they consume, not a government bureaucrat. Soviet Government bureaucrats decided what and how much to produce and the results on that country's economic system were catastrophic.

I know exactly what a free market economy is and how it operates. A blend of laissez-faire and command economics is the equillibrium that is needed to keep companies in check. "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"-Orwell. If the companies have unregulated power, 8 year olds will be smoking and drinking. If the gov has unregulated power, it will be Soviet Russia all over again.

Actually, I could also say many voters are dumb and uninformed and political candidates will promise them anything they want. So, should we take away the right to vote? Of course not. Freedom requires responsibility.

No, we should get to vote. But we should also be able to hold candidates accountable for their "promises".

I could also say the same thing about government officials who will stop at nothing to get power, so they contrive fantastic doomsday scenarios e.g. Bush is trying to kill senior citizens, or Bush's veto of stem cell research will set western civilizaiton back 500 years (I heard that someone made that claim on CNN!). My assertion is that the government should not be given more authority over our lives. We should be free to make informed choices, then take responsibility for the consequences (that is also my definition of a "grown up", if you ever have kids, feel free to use it when you explain things to them! :) ). Yes, some people are bad parents, in fact bad parents have been around since time immemorial. Are we going to set up a government agency to teach manners to kids too?

All I'm getting at is that young children are not able to make responsible decisions, so their parents make the decisions which have results that negatively effect the children who don't know any better.

My mom and dad had a simple cure for this. It was called "the back of the hand across the mouth". A lot of parents did it when I was a kid. Child abuse? Certainly! But it helps to raise a generation of adults who learn to delay immediate self gratification for the good of their future (like saving for the future)

So the question really is: If all the whippings ya'll got when you were kids had such positive influences on the baby boomers, then why didn't you guys do it to your own kids?

At the cost of jobs exported to India because of over regulation, the price of goods and services going up for the consumer and the standard of living going down. There's no free lunch CC, every choice we make has a cost (I tell my kid that one, too. Feel free to use that if you ever become a parent! )

The SofL should go up by outsourcing, at least for the middle and upper class. Are those the only people the conservatives care about?

Outsourcing forces the work force to seek higher education. That result is good for some, and bad for others, but we're in the wrong forum to go that deep into economic theories.
 
CharlestonChad said:
I know exactly what a free market economy is and how it operates. A blend of laissez-faire and command economics is the equillibrium that is needed to keep companies in check. "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"-Orwell. If the companies have unregulated power, 8 year olds will be smoking and drinking. If the gov has unregulated power, it will be Soviet Russia all over again.
True, both sides need regulation. The question is a matter of degree. It seems like you don't trust corporations just as much as I don't trust big government.

All I'm getting at is that young children are not able to make responsible decisions, so their parents make the decisions which have results that negatively effect the children who don't know any better.
There is such a thing as free will. Should the government become a surrogate parent? That sounds pretty Orwellian to me.

So the question really is: If all the whippings ya'll got when you were kids had such positive influences on the baby boomers, then why didn't you guys do it to your own kids?
That's a good question. I guess it's now considered child abuse if you do!
 
KarlMarx said:
CharlestonChad said:
There is such a thing as free will. Should the government become a surrogate parent? That sounds pretty Orwellian to me.


It already is, to an extent. The gov tries to keep alcohol and tobacco out of the hands of teens and young kids. I agree with the alcohol regulations, but tobacco is no more harmful than eating junk food and playing video games all day. Both will result in premature deaths.
 
CharlestonChad said:
KarlMarx said:
It already is, to an extent. The gov tries to keep alcohol and tobacco out of the hands of teens and young kids. I agree with the alcohol regulations, but tobacco is no more harmful than eating junk food and playing video games all day. Both will result in premature deaths.

Ahem.

Post # 41.
 

Forum List

Back
Top