Thread: Someone explain this to me.

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.