GE and Crony Capitalism - We should all be against this

#76
#76
You have to look at it case-by-case... We aren't getting fed'd up across the board, but in general we are. Depends on exactly what you're talking about though.

If there's anything you can learn from reading this forum, it's that tending to make blanket statements about most things makes you look foolish.
 
#77
#77
sjt18 said:
You keep recognizing the right problem then prescribing the same "solution" that created the problem to start with. Gov't being a player rather than referree IS THE PROBLEM. Your solutions do nothing but make them a bigger player and determiner of outcomes than they are now.

Free Markets... not necessarily the capitalist system as it now exists... IS THE SOLUTION.

For you and other Dems or Dem leaners, which "big business" companies come to mind when you think "no competition/too big to fail/etc"? Who do they tend to support politically?

That's right... go ahead... you can admit it.
Click to expand...

I'm neither a Dem nor a Dem leaner, I'm afraid.

In my lifetime it has been the Big Banks, whether Reagan's bailout of the S&Ls (which happened quite quickly after deregulation), the failure of Long Term Capital which also endangered the system, and, of course, the current Crisis of Capitalism.

Wall Street certainly backed Obama in the last election. However, they were hedging their bets either way. And, given the two right wings of American politics, it was like choosing between Folgers or Maxwell House. As we are seeing, not a dime's worth of difference between the policies, although Obama does have a certain composure and public presentation.
 
#78
#78
BigPapaVol said:
Anathema to his lunacy. I've been saying that since everyone started blathering about relative income, but it typically just ends it until another time.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...


Interesting.

Part of the philosophy behind that, however, is that the folks on the relative bottom a) don't fall so far behind that they don't go after the folks at the relative top with pitch forks; and b) that the folks on the relative bottom have the same opportunity to end up in the relative top as everyone else.

Now, if you could come up with a system that accomplished b, I'd love to hear about it. As is, us folks in the relative top need to quit rationalizing the increasing disparity with such catch phrases as "a rising tide raises all boats." Because it does not translate so well for a lot at the relative bottom.
 
#79
#79
nbakerld said:
Honestly I hate to bring the discussion to this, but you are absolutely insane if you think government is becoming less involved (whether socially or economically). Everyday they get more and more involved. On Stossel the other day they talked about 63 or so federal financial education programs and they can't even accurately tell us how much the programs cost. Ain't that some irony?

If you think we are deregulating I am not sure we can have an intelligent conversation about his. These departments are growing in number and adding regulations every year. Not reducing them.

List of United States federal agencies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

And I hate to bring the discussion to this, but if you don't believe deregulation has not been the norm since 1970, you are denying what is standard bourgeois history.

Deregulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is worth noting the wikipedia article does not mention the removal of Glass-Steagal either. It does mention some biggies, like the Telecom act though. The 1980 Depository Institutions Act would lead to the S&L bailout.

http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_conservative_origins_of_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis

I am VERY concerned about the growth of the coercive powers of the government. You seem to be concerned about growth, not regulation. I think that is the disconnect.
 
Last edited:
#80
#80
and in your opinion the lower class in this country is about to grab the pitch forks?
 
#81
#81
droski said:
and in your opinion the lower class in this country is about to grab the pitch forks?
Click to expand...

Hate to even indulge the discussion at this point, but IMO Americans in general are too passive and afraid of government for it to come to that.
 
#82
#82
utgibbs said:
In my lifetime it has been the Big Banks, whether Reagan's bailout of the S&Ls (which happened quite quickly after deregulation), the failure of Long Term Capital which also endangered the system, and, of course, the current Crisis of Capitalism.
Click to expand...
You certainly have a dreamy, delusional view of the world... unfortunately for you facts are intransigent things.

The S&L crisis was under Bush, not Reagan. It did not occur because of deregulation but a failure to enforce regulations and close loops holes. It was also the politically connected that benefitted and in a few cases paid the price. It was not because gov't was a bad referree... It was because gov't was a player.

Wall Street certainly backed Obama in the last election. However, they were hedging their bets either way.
Click to expand...
They usually do but the "super rich" of the big business world are pretty consistently Dem... and rightly so. They love your solution. Put all the power in one place... then they can easily attain through politics what is very difficult to attain through competition.
And, given the two right wings of American politics, it was like choosing between Folgers or Maxwell House. As we are seeing, not a dime's worth of difference between the policies, although Obama does have a certain composure and public presentation.
Click to expand...

Correct. Outside of tax cuts, Bush II turned out to be a pretty consistent Keynesian... grew entitlements, bailed out business, agreed to the first round of stimulus, etc.

The right wing/left wing model is almost always insufficient and used to set up some very effectively used false dichotomies. Three dimensions are required. y = 9.... low social freedom, high economic freedom, x = 9... low economic freedom, high social freedom, x and y = 9... libertarianism, x and y = 0... statism.

In practice, the first two options do not really exist except as an ideal. The Chinese seem to want economic freedom without social freedom. Mahrer and his ilk seem to want social freedom with no economic freedom/responsibility.

Progressives and other statists in both parties have been driving us toward (0,0) since the early 1900's. Your solution to the problems that has caused.... MORE OF THE SAME.
 
#84
#84
lawgator1 said:
Interesting.

Part of the philosophy behind that, however, is that the folks on the relative bottom a) don't fall so far behind that they don't go after the folks at the relative top with pitch forks; and b) that the folks on the relative bottom have the same opportunity to end up in the relative top as everyone else.

Now, if you could come up with a system that accomplished b, I'd love to hear about it. As is, us folks in the relative top need to quit rationalizing the increasing disparity with such catch phrases as "a rising tide raises all boats." Because it does not translate so well for a lot at the relative bottom.
Click to expand...

Well said. Also, I hate the notion that cell phones are abundant now as a measure that people are better off. I'm not sure how Capital improved the toolkit of Clovis Man.
 
#85
#85
droski said:
and in your opinion the lower class in this country is about to grab the pitch forks?
Click to expand...


One could argue that the election of Obama and the aggressive resistance you see to the effort to kill the unions are the opening shots ...
 
#88
#88
utgibbs said:
And I hate to bring the discussion to this, but if you don't believe deregulation has not been the norm since 1970, you are denying what is standard bourgeois history.
Click to expand...
You can reach a point where the weight of bureaucracy actually defeats regulation. We have certainly had and still have that. The problem is that gov't is a player trying to determine outcomes rather than a referree that blindly enforces the same rules for all then lets the "players" (free and sovereign individuals) determine outcomes.
I am VERY concerned about the growth of the coercive powers of the government. You seem to be concerned about growth, not regulation. I think that is the disconnect.
Click to expand...

Really? Yet you want gov't to take complete control of health care... like more power will suddenly make them less coercive.... like access to the most private of all our business will make them more benign.

Where have you suggested disempowering gov't or decentralizing authority? Education? No. Business? No. Environment? No. Healthcare? No. Taxation? No.
 
#89
#89
droski said:
or maybe life here ain't really that bad?
Click to expand...

Meh. I've traveled a bit to Europe and Asia, and am starting on some graduate level studies on public health systems this term. Certainly better than any levels that would incite revolutions, but we're outclassed in most areas by most other first world countries in QoL and SoL for the average person.
 
#91
#91
milohimself said:
Meh. I've traveled a bit to Europe and Asia, and am starting on some graduate level studies on public health systems this term. Certainly better than any levels that would incite revolutions, but we're outclassed in most areas by most other first world countries in QoL and SoL for the average person.
Click to expand...

please tell me where in europe and asia that you feel are better so i can mock you. thanks much.
 
#94
#94
milohimself said:
Just to stick to basics, a simple glance at life expectancy and infant mortality should tell you enough.

Thanks much.
Click to expand...

You can't equate life expectancy with the quality of life. There are people all over this country with the resources to have whatever they need that still die young because they are not interested in taking care of themselves.
 
Last edited:
#95
#95
milohimself said:
Just to stick to basics, a simple glance at life expectancy and infant mortality should tell you enough.

Thanks much.
Click to expand...

i see and in your opinion life expectancy and infant mortality are directly related to quality of life? singapore has one of the highest life expectancies in the world. it also has 20% of it's young girls in prostitution.
 
#96
#96
kptvol said:
You can't equate life expectancy with the quality of medical care. There are people all over this country with the resources to have whatever they need that still die young because they are not interested in taking care of themselves.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I'm not speaking to the quality of medical care alone. Awareness, mental health and the like are all part of the big picture. Those who can afford it enjoy a very high level of quality of health care, which is nice. I enjoy my Blue Cross plan. But saying we have a pervasive problem and limiting it to gov't vs. HMO's or any such debate isn't looking at the whole picture.
 
#97
#97
droski said:
i see and in your opinion life expectancy and infant mortality are directly related to quality of life? singapore has one of the highest life expectancies in the world. it also has 20% of it's young girls in prostitution.
Click to expand...

Of course the general feeling of QoL/SoL isn't going to fall in line with the statistics 100 times out of 100. I didn't cite singapore for the same reason I didn't cite Cuba having similar life expectancy and infant mortality as the US. Does it mean I want to move to Cuba? Hell no. Does it mean I want socialized, cradle to grave government care? More hell no.

Just saying that things aren't so bad in the US, but we're far from being the shiz.
 
#98
#98
milohimself said:
I agree, and I'm not speaking to the quality of medical care alone. Awareness, mental health and the like are all part of the big picture. Those who can afford it enjoy a very high level of quality of health care, which is nice. I enjoy my Blue Cross plan. But saying we have a pervasive problem and limiting it to gov't vs. HMO's or any such debate isn't looking at the whole picture.
Click to expand...

I've been to Europe and Asia. There are some nice spots in Europe, but I don't think the average bloke has it any better than anyone over here. I'm really struggling to see where Asia has us beat in quality of life.
 
#100
#100
milohimself said:
Of course the general feeling of QoL/SoL isn't going to fall in line with the statistics 100 times out of 100. I didn't cite singapore for the same reason I didn't cite Cuba having similar life expectancy and infant mortality as the US. Does it mean I want to move to Cuba? Hell no. Does it mean I want socialized, cradle to grave government care? More hell no.

Just saying that things aren't so bad in the US, but we're far from being the shiz.
Click to expand...

and we are far from being the shiz because of healthcare? seriously?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top