Is Democracy lost amonst Americans?

[jon_forward]

The other parties must not have any viable issues that need to be discussed....they have been bashing G.W. for so long thats all they know....remember when elections were held in a positive light??? these folks seem to take great pride in their attempts to under-mine the CIC...no matter that he has presided over one of the roughest times in the history of our nation, done very well IMHO..the way they rant on and on is to the point of being un-American.

 

[Psychoblues]

That's OK, I go with what I think is best for me and I fully expect you to do the same. Yow yow all you want but facts is facts and facts is what most Americans are feeling right now. The issues of health care, education, jobs and fairness are what most Americans have on their minds. We'll see how the Republicans respond to those issues if only in their campaign speeches.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Juvenile is as juvenile does. Considering the lengths and lies that were accomplished in 2000 by the Republicans it's a no-holds-barred race at this point. Even then, the Dems will honorably accept the election of 2004. This is much more than the plans of the Republicans in 2000 and this is not unnoticed by most of us.

Just like you accepted the outcome of 2000? by continuing to lie about and knowingly misrepresent it's outcome?

 

[Psychoblues]

And just how have I lied or misrepresented anything, rtwngAvngr? That's an old and traditional (read Republican) tactic. Attack the messenger when you have no basis for attacking the message. I see it everyday in every hour in our supposedly free press and from every angle. It takes more thought and reasoning to discern this than you are obviously capable of, don't you agree?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
And just how have I lied or misrepresented anything, rtwngAvngr?

Why does this sound familiar? I guess it's ok when you guys say the same crap about Bush though!

Psycho is a liar!

 

[eric]

This theme is really becoming warn out !

Our government has one responsiblity and that is to provide equal opportunity for all its citizens, a level playing field so to speak. Beyond this I see little responsibility the government has to assure that we have jobs. We live in a capitalist society, thank god, and it is every man's responsiblity to find work for himself. I am so tired of the childish bitching and moaning that no jobs are available or people are not making the salaries they were because Uncle Sam is not doing what he should. Opportunity is everywhere for those who can see it and are willing to pay the price to attain it !

 

[Bullypulpit]

...Of the 2000 Florida election results, go here:

<center>http://www.gregpalast.com/printerfriendly.cfm?artid=29</center>

Greg Palast did an excellent job.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by eric
This theme is really becoming warn out !

Our government has one responsiblity and that is to provide equal opportunity for all its citizens, a level playing field so to speak. Beyond this I see little responsibility the government has to assure that we have jobs. We live in a capitalist society, thank god, and it is every man's responsiblity to find work for himself. I am so tired of the childish bitching and moaning that no jobs are available or people are not making the salaries they were because Uncle Sam is not doing what he should. Opportunity is everywhere for those who can see it and are willing to pay the price to attain it !

Unregulated free markets presuppose a rational society...something we clearly lack.

 

[eric]

First of all my statement has nothing to do with government regulation, which by the way costs small to mid size business astronomical amounts of money for compliance, and I would be more than happy to supply the national figures. I don't think I need to explain the detremental effects on the economy which these regulation procure.

Recessions are cyclic events which no government call possibly prevent, it is a unavoidable consequence of a capitalistic economy. People need to understand this and wisen up and become more responsible in their financial management ! During the Regan years when money was free flowing thru the economy how many people honestly planned for when the party was going to end, which inevitably it must.

Business is dynamic and fluid, and because of global communications and technology a paradigm shift in global economics has occured. It is up to us, the people, to come up with new ways of doing business, we must not rely on Uncle Sam !

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by eric
First of all my statement has nothing to do with government regulation, which by the way costs small to mid size business astronomical amounts of money for compliance, and I would be more than happy to supply the national figures. I don't think I need to explain the detremental effects on the economy which these regulation procure.

Recessions are cyclic events which no government call possibly prevent, it is a unavoidable consequence of a capitalistic economy. People need to understand this and wisen up and become more responsible in their financial management ! During the Regan years when money was free flowing thru the economy how many people honestly planned for when the party was going to end, which inevitably it must.

Business is dynamic and fluid, and because of global communications and technology a paradigm shift in global economics has occured. It is up to us, the people, to come up with new ways of doing business, we must not rely on Uncle Sam !

No real argument there, but I reiterate...Unregulated free markets presuppose a rational society. Until, or rather if, we reach that goal, there is a need for some regulation to prevent the worst excesses of capitalism...i.e. willful discharge of toxic materials into the environment, worker safety, product safety etc.

And business, like the societies it operates in, is a dynamic and rapidly changing enviroment. Stagnation is deadly to both business and society. Unfortunately, there seems to be, not so much an interest in the free flow of capital in the current administration, as there is in securing that capital for no other purpose than amassing wealth...for a few. Which will lead, ultimately, to economic and social stagnation.

Capitalism is, without a doubt, the most lberating of economic systems. But it requires a working democratic form of government, and, lacking a rational society, thoughtful and balanced regulation. Unfortunately, with the distortions in our current government wrought by money politics, that kind of regulation is not possible.

 

[DKSuddeth]

free markets are great but there does need to be government regulation to avoid anti-comptetiveness. Otherwise you'll see global companies eat the small guys for snacks after the medium guys for lunch

 

[eric]

Unregulated free markets presuppose a rational society

I'm not sure what you mean by a rational society. Obviously I know what the word means, but I'm not sure of your application of it.

i.e. willful discharge of toxic materials into the environment, worker safety, product safety etc

No argument here either, these are necessary regulations, and I am not advocating allowing corps to endanger our environment or the safety of it's workers or customers. These were not the regulations I was speaking of.

Unfortunately, there seems to be, not so much an interest in the free flow of capital in the current administration, as there is in securing that capital for no other purpose than amassing wealth...for a few

That is a very broad statement, can you be a little more specific ?

 

[eric]

regulation to avoid anti-comptetiveness

I have no problem with anti-trust regulations, being small business is still the heart and soul of the American economy.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
And just how have I lied or misrepresented anything, rtwngAvngr? That's an old and traditional (read Republican) tactic. Attack the messenger when you have no basis for attacking the message. I see it everyday in every hour in our supposedly free press and from every angle. It takes more thought and reasoning to discern this than you are obviously capable of, don't you agree?

Gore was not allowed to conduct his bogus recount with different tallying standards for selected counties. All unofficial recounts by media orgs found that Bush won. That is all. Saying the election was stolen is a lie.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by eric
I'm not sure what you mean by a rational society. Obviously I know what the word means, but I'm not sure of your application of it.

No argument here either, these are necessary regulations, and I am not advocating allowing corps to endanger our environment or the safety of it's workers or customers. These were not the regulations I was speaking of.

That is a very broad statement, can you be a little more specific ?

By a rational society, I refer to a society whose members consider the consequences of their actions upon other members of society, and upon society as a whole, as far as they are able.

Allow me to paraphrase an old Buddhist discourse to clarify:

<i>Think you, "Will this action I am contemplating lead to the harm of myself?...Another?...Both?" If so, its fruit is anguish, its yield is suffering and it is not to be done. Think also, "Will the action I am contemplating be of benefit of myself?...Another?...Both?" If so, its fruit is happiness, its yield is joy, and it may be freely undertaken.</i>

Unfortunately, we do not seem to be a society given over to much reflection.

Administration policies, from what I have observed, really don't do anything to keep money in the hands of those who spend it, the middle class. Wealth continues to concentrate in the hands of those we label as wealthy, at least in a material sense. For example, the administration drive to eliminate the "death tax". Eliminating the estate tax will lead to a "dynastic" concentrarion of wealth similar to that of England in the 18th and 19th centuries. A landed gentry, an aristocracy, if you will. Such is antithetical to a democratic society.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
By a rational society, I refer to a society whose members consider the consequences of their actions upon other members of society, and upon society as a whole, as far as they are able.

If you vote for democrats, they will repeal the Bush tax cuts, possibly causing the economy to stagnate. Isn't that a bad effect of one's actions? Or do you still not believe that lower taxes stimulate the economy, and that overall tax revenues will still rise as the economy grows?

Or do you really not care about people and job creation. Real job creation. Not government makework/income redistribution and destructive protectionism.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit


Administration policies, from what I have observed, really don't do anything to keep money in the hands of those who spend it, the middle class. Wealth continues to concentrate in the hands of those we label as wealthy, at least in a material sense. For example, the administration drive to eliminate the "death tax". Eliminating the estate tax will lead to a "dynastic" concentrarion of wealth similar to that of England in the 18th and 19th centuries. A landed gentry, an aristocracy, if you will. Such is antithetical to a democratic society. [/B]

Except the landed gentry maintained control through force and paying off/fighting off whatever asshole king with delusions of grandeur arose from a distant fiefdom.

Modern fortunes are created through providing superior goods and services, not through force. Capitalism has focused the will to power towards prosocial ends.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Modern fortunes are created through providing superior goods and services, not through force. Capitalism has focused the will to power towards prosocial ends.

Not anymore, Capitalism is dying a slow death with tens of millions of casualties due to inefficient oversight of anti-trust powers.

When a fortune 10 company in a global market can undercut a 5 store market retailer because he can negotiate for lower prices and business exclusionary clauses its no longer capitalism.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Not anymore, Capitalism is dying a slow death with tens of millions of casualties due to inefficient oversight of anti-trust powers.

When a fortune 10 company in a global market can undercut a 5 store market retailer because he can negotiate for lower prices and business exclusionary clauses its no longer capitalism.

The 5 store market retailer needs to find a new line of work. Business services, IT, healthcare, and professional resume preparation are booming industries.

"Greed is good" -- Gordon Gecko

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The 5 store market retailer needs to find a new line of work. Business services, IT, healthcare, and professional resume preparation are booming industries.

A new line of work is not the answer. all of the markets that you have mentioned are themselves victims of the anti-competitiveness that I talked about. As we speak, contracts are negotiated on a daily basis that the provider knowingly and willingly takes a loss on the first half of the contract in order to ensure its obtaining the contract. While this in itself may be technically legal it is certainly not ethical or competitive. Not only that, but no matter what line of business the small to medium business owner starts or already owns, there can be little to no competition on a global scale if the environment is not regulated to be a fair opportunity to begin with.