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.
How do you reconcile hands-off style Capitalism..........................(ASSUMING YOU'RE FOR)
With bought-and-paid-for (back room deal-based) Government? (ASSUMING YOU'RE AGAINST)
Lemme know.
How do you reconcile hands-off style Capitalism..........................(ASSUMING YOU'RE FOR)
With bought-and-paid-for (back room deal-based) Government? (ASSUMING YOU'RE AGAINST)
Lemme know.
You cannot reconcile it, but you can write it all off as original sin playing out in very complex ways in a very complex society.
Not very comforting, I admit, but at least that explanation makes sense.
If this thread was a hooker, you'd be the pimp.
Your thread isn't getting much action I think because you've asked one of those questions that everybody has to answer the same way or look like an idiot.
Let's put it this way:
1) Would you favor unrestricted capitalism if. . . . .
2) It included sufficient regulation to prevent any person or entity from infringing on the Constitutional, legal, civil, or human rights of any other person or entity. . . . and . . . .
3) It was accompanied by iron clad laws preventing Congress or the Administation from dispensing any form of charity, benevolence, benefit, or advantage to ANY person or entity?
Your thread isn't getting much action I think because you've asked one of those questions that everybody has to answer the same way or look like an idiot.
Let's put it this way:
1) Would you favor unrestricted capitalism if. . . . .
2) It included sufficient regulation to prevent any person or entity from infringing on the Constitutional, legal, civil, or human rights of any other person or entity. . . . and . . . .
3) It was accompanied by iron clad laws preventing Congress or the Administation from dispensing any form of charity, benevolence, benefit, or advantage to ANY person or entity?
I have a possible solution that some people wouldn't want to hear, that would make it a LITTLE less corrupt of a process.
This is 2010, right?
Money shouldn't have anything to do with Campaigns.
Candidates should get equal face-time on a public access channel, a 10-minute bio, perhaps, we'll iron out the details later.......................and a few debates.
No bought and paid for publicity, or travelling for speaches, etc.
Just that public access channel. That's all.
Your thread isn't getting much action I think because you've asked one of those questions that everybody has to answer the same way or look like an idiot.
Let's put it this way:
1) Would you favor unrestricted capitalism if. . . . .
2) It included sufficient regulation to prevent any person or entity from infringing on the Constitutional, legal, civil, or human rights of any other person or entity. . . . and . . . .
3) It was accompanied by iron clad laws preventing Congress or the Administation from dispensing any form of charity, benevolence, benefit, or advantage to ANY person or entity?
I have a possible solution that some people wouldn't want to hear, that would make it a LITTLE less corrupt of a process.
This is 2010, right?
Money shouldn't have anything to do with Campaigns.
Candidates should get equal face-time on a public access channel, a 10-minute bio, perhaps, we'll iron out the details later.......................and a few debates.
No bought and paid for publicity, or travelling for speaches, etc.
Just that public access channel. That's all.
I couldn't agree to this because it would be an infringement on free speech and also make it impossible for a relative unknown but competent contender to compete with the well known candidate. The unknown has to have the means to get his name out there and those of us who want that well-known candidate defeated and gone should be able to participate in that process.
Far better to put the restraints on them after they are elected, and I think that would automatically rein in a lot of campaign excesses. There wouldn't be much use in funneling a gazillion dollars to a candidate if that candidate was prohibited by law from paying you off later.
If this thread was a hooker, you'd be the pimp.
If this thread were a product, I'd be the commercial
How do you reconcile hands-off style Capitalism..........................(ASSUMING YOU'RE FOR)
With bought-and-paid-for (back room deal-based) Government? (ASSUMING YOU'RE AGAINST)
Lemme know.
How do you reconcile hands-off style Capitalism..........................(ASSUMING YOU'RE FOR)
With bought-and-paid-for (back room deal-based) Government? (ASSUMING YOU'RE AGAINST)
Lemme know.
The first is allowing the market to make decisions based on the economics of supply and demand. The second is allowing the government to make those same decision based on bribery and dishonesty. What exactly do I need to reconcile? Do you have to reconcile your support of police with the fact that some police commit criminal acts?