Thread: Someone explain this to me.

I think the main problem which stems all the issues is that we have a two-party system. In my opinion, it will NEVER work again in the future of the US. Everyone votes and lobbies based on self interest and will oppose the other party at all costs.

As extremist as it sounds, the US will have to go through an overthrow of some sort before anything gets better. We keep electing criminals and horrible people because the only people who can actually afford to legitimately run are those with financial backing from the political powerhouses. Look at Ron Paul for example - I believe he'd be great and change a lot of things but because he's not favored by the party (because he's not a puppet), he gets relatively no recognition, air time, or serious consideration. I'm sure the Dems have candidates like this also of which I am unaware.

Originally Posted by Theseus

I have a friend working as anauditor for a major insurence company who said that a couple of years ago, the insurence industry were tinkering with the idea of getting a law passed to have all new production cars fitted with brethylizer starters and having older cars retro fitted with them at no cost. They had the backing of the Federal and state governments and knew they would have the backing of manysafety advocacy groups. They've shelved the idea for now though because they were getting some tension from both the auto industry and the law enforcement unions. My friend said that it is only a matter of time before the idea gets put back on the table.

I should say I don't drive over the limit, though I do at times have one or two stubbies on a long trip. :-)

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

It's funny how folks keep harping on how Govt has grown so much but I never hear about how corporations have grown so big. In fact they are the ones who sit in the background and really control things including Govt and it's because of them Govt has gotten so big in many areas.

Actually I have said it. The problem is most people think that they are two entities, no they are not, one has bought and paid for the other. The problem on the Democrat side of the aisle is that they think the Govt.(owned by banks, oil, insurance, etc) should have regulatory control over the banks, oil, insurance companies. The problem on the Republican side of the aisle is that they think Capitalism equates with free markets, individual liberty and Jesus Christ. Neither view is correct. The truth is that the corporations control the govt of the US, notice who got the stimulus? How many people are still looking for that "shovel ready job"? What we have is socialism for the sake of the Capitalists/Industrialists.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

I never hear about how corporations have grown so big

I hear it all the time

edit: kelly beat me to it

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Actually I have said it. The problem is most people think that they are two entities, no they are not, one has bought and paid for the other. The problem on the Democrat side of the aisle is that they think the Govt.(owned by banks, oil, insurance, etc) should have regulatory control over the banks, oil, insurance companies. The problem on the Republican side of the aisle is that they think Capitalism equates with free markets, individual liberty and Jesus Christ. Neither view is correct. The truth is that the corporations control the govt of the US, notice who got the stimulus? How many people are still looking for that "shovel ready job"? What we have is socialism for the sake of the Capitalists/Industrialists.

(as an outsider) of course they are the same. That's going to happen when big corporations fund the 'race'.
Capitalism equates to Jesus? Seriously? I would have thought Socialism would have been closer. I think we're starting to see the fall of Capitalism. In fact, I think we're about a 1/4 of the way into the fall...I'll give a year, tops...

Who do you think is pushing and funding the fall?

The bit about JC is to give a you a sense of the self righteousness of some of those on the right.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Who do you think is pushing and funding the fall?

The bit about JC is to give a you a sense of the self righteousness of some of those on the right.

Ummm, us?

I don't know a lot about this sort of stuff, but I read that the basics of capitalism is of course making profit and keeping the shareholders happy. That means you must either sell more stuff, or reduce costs of production. Some costs are fixed. The problem is there is technically a finite number of products consumers 'need', so you need to cajole them into buying different 'better' things, like stripy toothpaste and electric toothbrushes. But there's only so far you can push that, so you then reduce costs of production my exploiting your workers (reducing salaries and terms and conditions of employment). Of course, the 'knowledgeable' 'Western' populace only stand so much of that, so then you ship manufacturing off shore to Asia, where they're (for a time) only too happy to be exploited, because at least they have a job and don't starve. But then they get 'cashed up' to some degree, look around at what 'we' have got, and want it too. And why shouldn't they? But the planet we live on can't sustain that, so we say they can't have what we have. (and that includes food, water and shelter). The next chapter is the rampaging hoards that live mainly in the equatorial regions (those regions where the greater population live and those areas prone to extreme weather with the changing climate) come and GET what we, in the polar regions, still have, because our climate can still sustain food growth, to some extent.

I do try to resist Capitalism as much as I can, but I must admit I'm typing this on a brand new lap top. My move the straight razor shaving (and all things vintage; (cameras, cufflinks, fountain pens, etc etc) is related to me NOT wanting to be part of a greedy capitalist consumerist society.

OK, I'll go now...bye

(PS, the Nazi party also thought that God had given them the right to do what they did...)

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

I have seen the commercial I think it is sick. To me there is no difference between big intrusive govt and big intrusive corporations. The corporations are a little more subtle and use positive "marketing techniques" to gain voluntary behavior whereas the government hasn't any tact and the IRS is especially distrusted.

Isn't the line between the two entities getting finer every day?

IMO society, markets and governments are manipulated, and that takes money.


Edit: Cap it al ism Noun

An economic AND political system in which a country's trade and industry are CONTROLLED by private owners for profit.

This is the first definition I found on Google there are a number of others, to be fair I picked the first and did not choose. Notice in the definition that it is not just an economic system.

As an aside I wonder what does the guy that has all the money in the world want? Power? A quick study of George Soros should answer this.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Actually I have said it. The problem is most people think that they are two entities, no they are not, one has bought and paid for the other. The problem on the Democrat side of the aisle is that they think the Govt.(owned by banks, oil, insurance, etc) should have regulatory control over the banks, oil, insurance companies. The problem on the Republican side of the aisle is that they think Capitalism equates with free markets, individual liberty and Jesus Christ. Neither view is correct. The truth is that the corporations control the govt of the US, notice who got the stimulus? How many people are still looking for that "shovel ready job"? What we have is socialism for the sake of the Capitalists/Industrialists.

I can't say I disagree. Politicians and lobbyists (representing people with lots of money) do have quite a cozy and long lasting relationship. Politicians, needless to say are on the gravy train with biscuit wheels as long as they cater to special interest groups who in turn donate gobs of money above the table and God only knows how much under the table to keep politicians friendly to their interests in office. The politicians are rewarded with a career where they are paid lavish quantities of money for very little work and the special interest groups are provided with legislation that keeps their racket alive and well too. The result is pretty predictable, the interests of regular working people, who can't buy people in government to represent their interests, are alone somewhere in the middle paying for both corporate and personal welfare and struggling to get by. It is indeed a difficult problem but the idea that government can or would in any way regulate what amounts to a sweetheart deal for them, out of existence is patently ridiculous. It's like leaving a couple dozen doughnuts in the custody of a room full of fat women. "Stimulus", "shovel ready jobs" and indeed "eat the rich" and "class warfare" are all just marketing campaigns and saber rattling to ensure the appearance of having the people's best interests in mind. If I really had the answer to the problem I'd be in alot better shape than I am right now but I suspect that the key is to take the politicians out of industry and the industries out of politics. A true free market economy would be one where no business was "too big to fail". Those that excelled and made gobs of money would do so because of exemplary business practices and taking care of their people as opposed to what politicians they had in their pockets or what government money they could belly up to the trough for. In my little universe, government would take a laisez fair approach to business and visa versa. Lobbying and unions would be illegal and all politicians would be limited to two terms in office.

I've always found it a perverse irony that purely socialist countries never seem to have much of a middle class. There's filthy rich and appaulingly poor, nothing in between. The poor are, for all intent and purpose, the serfs, those that do the grunt work for the "benevolent" masters in return for whatever scraps they are thrown. No one is truly free or in charge of building their own lives and upward mobility is a pipe dream. The socialist system, whose big selling point is equality (in theory) is anything but in practice. No doubt our current system is very broken but moving toward socialism or trusting in a "benevolent" master to keep us all equal is definitely NOT the answer.

PS: For the record, I'm as right wing as they come but definitely not an evangelical. I simply believe that people should be left alone to build the best lives their talents and ambitions would allow. Government's role, in as much as they have one, is to ensure equal opportunity and NOT equal results. Far too often in the modern world, bad behavior on the part of government, industry or just individuals is rewarded and or celebrated and I just can't get on board with that.