Notices
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 105

Thread: Evils of Capitalism

  1. #1 Evils of Capitalism 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    28
    The Evils of Capitalism

    Capitalism is just as evil as some religions. These are 'self serving' individuals that are responsible for the following:

    They pollute the air and waters to create health problems.

    They are destructive to the Natural environments and forests

    They corrupt governments with their use of influence dollars.

    They lower the workers to the status of robots and a commodity.

    They have no manners or morals because they will use child factories, slave labor and do business with dictators or communists.

    They are 'tax rebels' and evaders of taxes whenever they can.

    Even though they have huge unneeded surplus incomes, they will resort to dishonest bookkeeping, insider trading, manipulate stock prices if they can through various schemes, use company funds for personal use and any other such illegal tactics.

    They believe in maximizing profits to use those dollars to buy out the competitors, create mergers, downsizing the labor force to burden the rest of the workers and buy up the news outlets to censor any critics of their tactics. All these schemes cut jobs.

    They are unconstitutional because they are ‘self serving’ and only represent themselves. The kings, emperors, dictators, religious leaders, con artists, street criminals and any other such individuals do exactly the same things of serving themselves. They are the predators amongst humanity.

    An example of their greed is the 'new world order' that they have bribed governments to serve their needs. This organization can now demand unrestricted access to any member nations markets without restrictions or be taken to the 'world court' and fined for these marketing restrictions.

    Of course there are exceptions to the above. There are some good honest capitalists that treat the workers with the respect that they deserve. But these individuals are rare in our society.

    Only the workers create the REAL TANGIBLE WEALTH (RTW) that all persons buy and make use of like the houses, automobiles, clothing, food and any other such needs.
    They also create the capitalist goodies like skyscrapers, mansions, buildings for business and their personal serving staffs.
    The workers also build the government sponsored bridges, roads, hydroelectric dams, and staff the police departments, fire departments, water and sewage maintenance and any other such services.

    Since the workers create all this RTW, they deserve better and the higher wages would be good for the economy because then these workers can buy the goods they create and this increased MASS PURCHASING POWER (MPP) would only create more demand and jobs.
    My opinion is that the gross receipts should be apportioned equally between the blue collar workers and the white collar workers.
    This equal distribution would increase the MPP of the nation to promote a thriving economy.
    Unions that represent the workers are compatible with the US Constitutional mandate for representation of its citizens while on the other hand, capitalism is not a representative of the citizens.

    What I say above is NOT an endorsement of communism that I consider to be more evil than capitalism.

    Mike C


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Now you've done it. Bill Gates is going to send a professional hacker after you for sure.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    sorry, you caught me napping - did anyone call ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: Evils of Capitalism 
    Forum Junior Kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    The Evils of Capitalism

    Capitalism is just as evil as some religions. These are 'self serving' individuals that are responsible for the following:

    They pollute the air and waters to create health problems.

    They are destructive to the Natural environments and forests

    They corrupt governments with their use of influence dollars.

    They lower the workers to the status of robots and a commodity.

    They have no manners or morals because they will use child factories, slave labor and do business with dictators or communists.

    They are 'tax rebels' and evaders of taxes whenever they can.

    Even though they have huge unneeded surplus incomes, they will resort to dishonest bookkeeping, insider trading, manipulate stock prices if they can through various schemes, use company funds for personal use and any other such illegal tactics.

    They believe in maximizing profits to use those dollars to buy out the competitors, create mergers, downsizing the labor force to burden the rest of the workers and buy up the news outlets to censor any critics of their tactics. All these schemes cut jobs.

    They are unconstitutional because they are ‘self serving’ and only represent themselves. The kings, emperors, dictators, religious leaders, con artists, street criminals and any other such individuals do exactly the same things of serving themselves. They are the predators amongst humanity.

    An example of their greed is the 'new world order' that they have bribed governments to serve their needs. This organization can now demand unrestricted access to any member nations markets without restrictions or be taken to the 'world court' and fined for these marketing restrictions.

    Of course there are exceptions to the above. There are some good honest capitalists that treat the workers with the respect that they deserve. But these individuals are rare in our society.

    Only the workers create the REAL TANGIBLE WEALTH (RTW) that all persons buy and make use of like the houses, automobiles, clothing, food and any other such needs.
    They also create the capitalist goodies like skyscrapers, mansions, buildings for business and their personal serving staffs.
    The workers also build the government sponsored bridges, roads, hydroelectric dams, and staff the police departments, fire departments, water and sewage maintenance and any other such services.

    Since the workers create all this RTW, they deserve better and the higher wages would be good for the economy because then these workers can buy the goods they create and this increased MASS PURCHASING POWER (MPP) would only create more demand and jobs.
    My opinion is that the gross receipts should be apportioned equally between the blue collar workers and the white collar workers.
    This equal distribution would increase the MPP of the nation to promote a thriving economy.
    Unions that represent the workers are compatible with the US Constitutional mandate for representation of its citizens while on the other hand, capitalism is not a representative of the citizens.

    Mike C

    What you have described here is not a Capitalist but an Asshole

    .....and they can be found anywhere.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    935
    Kinda what Kolt said. Almost none (if any at all) of what you complained about are inherent properties of capitalism.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: Evils of Capitalism 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    These are 'self serving' individuals that are responsible for the following:
    They pollute the air and waters to create health problems.
    They offer goods and services that we freely choose to use for our comfort and pleasure that pollute the air and waters, etc. Guilty party - us, not the capitalist.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    They are destructive to the Natural environments and forests
    As above.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    They have no manners or morals because they will use child factories, slave labor and do business with dictators or communists.
    Now you are being silly. What's wrong with doing buisiness with dictators. Arguably the greatest success story of national development is the city state of Singapore which achieved this via the dictatorship of Lee Kuan Yew.
    And what is to prevent someone who uses child labour from being well mannered? And what possible relevance do their manners have to such a serious issue?

    etc, etc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Now you've done it. Bill Gates is going to send a professional hacker after you for sure.
    Well he has been after me for about 'two' years.

    Mind you, I DO NOT hate capitalism. Just the great IMBALANCES in the sharing of wealth that the workers (hands) produce.

    Believe it or not but when I turned on the computer yesterday, I noticed that 'My Documents' have been invaded when I tried to access my saved folders on the Evils Of Capitalism. They were 'blanked' out. No text.
    All the other documents were OK.

    Wow, this is selective proof as to who is responsible for my hackers.

    Mike C
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    28
    Ophi

    I will agree that their are some benefits from capitalism.

    My complaint is the large IMBALANES in the sharing of wealth produced by the workers.

    By sharing the wealth to pay workers higher wages actually benefits the economy because it increases the 'mass purchasing power' of the majority to boost the economic well being of the majority.

    Cheap wages cannot buy the automobiles and houses that we all want and need.

    Mike C
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Now you've done it. Bill Gates is going to send a professional hacker after you for sure.
    Well he has been after me for about 'two' years.
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean somebody isn't out to get you. I recommend a double thickness of tin foil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    To All

    Because I was so critical of some religions, capitalists and science(?), my computer was ASSASSINATED that forced me off the internet.

    I can now continue again my 'free speech' mandate that the US Constitution gives me.
    What I write is 'Truth' as I see it and I am certain that it is right and good for humanity.
    Power science (inquisitions), communism (Stalins agribussiness), capitalism without controls (current spread between workers wages and capitals unearned incoms has inflated from abour 40% to todays spread of 500%) and population explosions (Islams copy of the bibles chauvinism and the other religious factions) that are destroying GODS Nature and are not beneficial to humanities lifestyles.

    Cosmo
    Formerly Mike C
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; I follow your science post with some amazement. Since your nearly 90yo, continue to study and voice/write your opinions, it is an inspiration to this younger, but old person.

    We do disagree on most social issues, Capitalism just one. Since you have used a post slamming capitalist with what seems to be a deliberate lie, I have to call you on it. You have not been off the Internet and in fact quite active since dropping off this site 10/5/07, with out missing many days you have posted nearly daily from 9/6 to today, ELSEWHERE...

    The US system of government, allowing public ownership of all business, whether by stocks or independent ownership, gives every person regardless of anything else, the right to work hard, play by the rules and achieve what their abilities can achieve. OPPORTUNITY...

    No Corporation, started off as the entity you perceive the villain of society nor are the vast majority today or such during their growth. Ford, GM, especially Wal Mart and every company was a dream or idea of a single person, with that opportunity. They have hired and paid through time, hundreds of thousands to millions, many offering benefits which have killed them or reduced their ability to compete. In the US, all what is seen as the highest living standards on Earth today can be attributed to these ventures. As they expand into the world economy. the same is happening around the world.

    As for the Global Warming inference, you have been around long enough to see where industry has come from. In the early 20th Century, sure there were signs of environmental destruction. Smoke stacks pumped black smoke, as did trucks, cars and train locomotives. People, threw trash everywhere and every body burned their own trash. Long before EPA, Green Piece, Al Gore or any thing to dictate what to do, they and we started to clean up our act. In reality, were probably no further along than if these groups never existed. No body wants to breath bad air, drink contaminated water, drive along a littered highway or fish in a polluted stream.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    You have not been off the Internet and in fact quite active since dropping off this site 10/5/07, with out missing many days you have posted nearly daily from 9/6 to today, ELSEWHERE...
    I was amused to note Jackson, that your post count when this particular item of arcane knowledge was posted, was 666.

    Is there something you should be telling us?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Actually I did notice 666, after posting...which hit pretty hard on a friend...

    Mike, knows exactly where that info comes from, explained in my first paragraph...."I follow your science post".

    Kind of funny though, when a number pops up unexpected like this, Power Ball Lottery will include that number. Will advise if 6's play in Wednesdays 150+ million drawing...and no I don't play.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackson
    Cosmo; I follow your science post with some amazement. Since your nearly 90yo, continue to study and voice/write your opinions, it is an inspiration to this younger, but old person.

    We do disagree on most social issues, Capitalism just one. Since you have used a post slamming capitalist with what seems to be a deliberate lie, I have to call you on it. You have not been off the Internet and in fact quite active since dropping off this site 10/5/07, with out missing many days you have posted nearly daily from 9/6 to today, ELSEWHERE...

    The US system of government, allowing public ownership of all business, whether by stocks or independent ownership, gives every person regardless of anything else, the right to work hard, play by the rules and achieve what their abilities can achieve. OPPORTUNITY...
    I attribute my age and good health to my reverence for Nature and what it teaches me.
    I believe in evolution and that we are 'evolved apes'.
    That means that I do not accept the bible as a religion because it promotes 'chauvinism' and the 'self' serving mentality that promotes greed.
    That does NOT mean that I refute the small businesses or individual enterprize such as inventors, copywritists and etc.

    However, current capitalism reminds me of the days when our government went after the La Cosa Nostra rackerteers to remove them from ownership of the 'casinos' because of their 'skimming' of excess wealth.

    Our major businesses in the US have no controls of how much wealth they can 'skim' off our economy. Result? Billionaires multiplying by the hundreds while workers wages are 'shrinking' to the barest subsistance levels.

    To get back to my age and health, I am a Vegan (no animal products) that is a total vegetarian. So there is NO blockages of my arteries by the animal cholesterol fats that the body rejects because it makes its 'own' cholesterol.
    My blood pressure is 110/70 that is perfect and indicates that my arteries are 'clean'. So my brain is nourished as are all other body parts.
    Do not buy this argument that we need meat in our diet.
    The largest animals on land are Vegans such as the elephant, rhinoseros and down to many smaller creatures

    By revering Nature as GOD, it teaches me that there are multiple Gods and opens up your knowledge base to see other ideas and concepts rather than the biblical teachings of just 'one' god that limits your mentality to just one dimension.
    All the material goodies that we enjoy are the products of HANDS, not the brains of capitalism, that create nothing but ideas and greed.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    As I recall, your health/diet attitudes changed at an older age, think in your 60's, also about the time you took on new interest. I have noted, most people that achieve 80 and up, a common denominator of interest or activity. Also I should mention when these interest fade, most I have known, soon passed. A good example would be spouses, when one or the other passes after 30-60years of marriage, often the other soon passes. In short I would rather folks getting up in age, keep interest in alive, even increasing them to their limits. This idea keeps the mind working, allowing other brain function (maintaining the body). This is not far from your theory, since the change in diet mentally has given you cause for longevity. Your blood pressure, indicates a very low salt diet as well, is this correct???

    Its of no importance to this discussion, but each species has developed its digestive system, independent of others. I can't visualize an Elephant or a Rhino chasing down dinner and to the vultures a ready made meal was/is always available. The human developed eating both plant and animals, but cannot digest grass. Do you take vitamins to compensate, which I understand is vital....

    Free market capitalism, has some problems while a new idea comes to life. Any monopoly of a wanted item, will produce larger profits. Sooner or later however some one will produce an equal or better product and unless the original producer has advanced the original idea or created new products with those profits, that business will fail. That is supply and demand, competition and public acceptance of a product, keep skimming or profits in check. This is particularly true with the often hated larger product oriented corporations. Oil Companies in the best of time realize a 10% or less profit on investment, Wal Mart, most grocery chains, drug stores and so on are well under 10%.

    Created wealth, is often mentioned with Capitalism. Whats rarely mentioned are the thousands of people, who have tried to advance an idea or business plan and failed. Think there were originally 40-50 different makers of automobiles over the years. Most failed. I could list hundreds of retail operations and 9 of 10 food service business have or will fail, with in two years. Success, for need, has to be rewarded. Those that do succeed or the parties who invest in those ventures, have attained wealth, to the degree of there times. Today, that means billions, opposed to millions in the 50's-70's and near a million in the teens. If nothing else, remember, those ventures in the teens catered to very few people, compared to the 150 million in the 50's or the 300 US people today and the added billions with world trade today.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16 Re: Evils of Capitalism 
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    The Evils of Capitalism...
    Wow...I can smell the tye dyed shirt and beads from here!
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Ph.D. Cat1981(England)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Downs.
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    To get back to my age and health, I am a Vegan (no animal products) that is a total vegetarian. So there is NO blockages of my arteries by the animal cholesterol fats that the body rejects because it makes its 'own' cholesterol.
    My blood pressure is 110/70 that is perfect and indicates that my arteries are 'clean'. So my brain is nourished as are all other body parts.
    Do not buy this argument that we need meat in our diet.
    The largest animals on land are Vegans such as the elephant, rhinoseros and down to many smaller creatures
    Cosmo. One of my hobbies is bushcraft which is the study and practise of surviving in the wild. In my experience it would be extremely difficult and/or close to impossible to survive without meat in a persons diet in most parts of the world. Finding the vegetables which make up a large percentage of a vegetarians diet would be extremely difficult and probable impossible considering the amount of work. Consider the time it takes an elephant or a rhinoceros to graze a days worth of food, you could could live quite happily on a similar amount of energy from a small animal and some veg. A vegan diet is extremely unnatural and it is only because of the capitalist system in which you live, which allows you to survive on a vegan diet.
    Eat Dolphin, save the Tuna!!!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    To get back to my age and health, I am a Vegan (no animal products) that is a total vegetarian. So there is NO blockages of my arteries by the animal cholesterol fats that the body rejects because it makes its 'own' cholesterol.
    My blood pressure is 110/70 that is perfect and indicates that my arteries are 'clean'. So my brain is nourished as are all other body parts.
    Hmm, well that's very interesting, because, you see, I DO eat meat, and my blood pressure (not to mention the rest of my body, save a little balding) is in perfect health, also.

    So, uh....what's your point?

    The theory that not eating meat is the only way to be healthy?

    Plthtppth! Nice try.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    I ate the 'standard American diet until 1970. So I have been a Vegan for 37 years.
    I do not promote my diet because I realize that if we all would become Vegans, the meat industry, the healthcare industry and the drug industries would all go bankrupt.

    So for the sake of our economy, I do not push this issue.

    However, I would like to add that some people that do eat meat, can reach a respectible 'old' age.

    But this is not natural to eat meat because it has to be COOKED.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat1981(England)
    Cosmo. One of my hobbies is bushcraft which is the study and practise of surviving in the wild. In my experience it would be extremely difficult and/or close to impossible to survive without meat in a persons diet in most parts of the world. Finding the vegetables which make up a large percentage of a vegetarians diet would be extremely difficult and probable impossible considering the amount of work. Consider the time it takes an elephant or a rhinoceros to graze a days worth of food, you could could live quite happily on a similar amount of energy from a small animal and some veg. A vegan diet is extremely unnatural and it is only because of the capitalist system in which you live, which allows you to survive on a vegan diet.
    Have it 'your way'. (Burger King)

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf
    Hmm, well that's very interesting, because, you see, I DO eat meat, and my blood pressure (not to mention the rest of my body, save a little balding) is in perfect health, also.

    So, uh....what's your point?

    The theory that not eating meat is the only way to be healthy?

    Plthtppth! Nice try.
    Well, there are others that have the right 'genes' to tolerate the standard American diet.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    Well, there are others that have the right 'genes' to tolerate the standard American diet.
    So it's not diet, but genetics, that dictates biological success.

    Give it up. Yer never gonna convince me that not eating any animal products will ensure me a healthier and longer life, nor a better one.

    And don't say there's never been anyone who's led a meat-free life who hasn't met a horrible death, either.

    The secret to living a healthy life is moderation. Will you get clogged arteries and a heart attack from having some bacon at breakfast? No. Will you if you eat 5 lbs of bacon left and right? Sure. But that only makes sense.

    There's a difference between eating, and gluttony. Your body is perfectly capable of handling normal amounts of "bad" things, but like any system it can't handle tons of it.

    As for capitalism, as long as there are buyers, there will be sellers. There's nothing wrong with making profit and getting rich. The only balance to be aware of is the ethical checks which must be maintained.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    My understanding is that we have an omnivore digestive system, which means there are certain nutrients that we can not get from a pure plant diet. i presume you take suppliments? elephants do not. and feal free to advocate vegan diet, the economy is safe :wink:
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    Yes, I do take a couple of suplements after meals like calcium, to replace the milk, Vitamin C to act as a antidote to thr commercial chemical in our foods that I eat at times.

    The capitalists that I criticize are the ones that come involved in management, but have not invented or created an products.

    Did you see the news on TV about those CEO's that were eased out of the management because of poor results?
    Their retirement packages added up to from 100 million to 300+ millions.
    There were about 5-6 of them.

    About the only sweat they ever produced was when they were being eased out.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Just because yer not an engineer doesn't mean you can't do any business around anything that was engineered.

    On the other side of the ball, if you go to work for a company as an engineer, it probably says in your contract that anything you create belongs to the company. That's because the company hired you to engineer. If you're not good with that, don't sign up. If you signed, tuff nuggies if you make something cool and the company keeps it. You signed on the dotted line for the ability to have equipment and a budget to engineer, and the price you pay is that your creations don't belong to you.

    If that's your "evil capitalism" well, I guess just always read the fine print, right?

    And it's easier (and tastier) to have a nice cold glass of milk, than a handful of supplements.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; To the 60-70 year old taking heart in your age/diet, its important to note, you changed in mid-life. There are many things meat or or animal by products that are required and some how need to be added.
    Was kind of thinking Mega Brain, would jump in, since his diet has no doubt changed in the recent past. Many of us with digestive problems have had to change....

    Top management of the corporate structure, is complicated. Its easy to see in professional sports, where the won-loss percentages are obvious.
    These top head coaches are paid some very high wages. There are just as FEW, good heads of a corporation.

    Forgot his name, but your thinking about the head of Citigroup, who took the rap for over playing sub-prime mortgages. He was given 100 million plus retirement package to leave. What was not mentioned, he made billions for Citigroup, their stock holders and was certainly not the only one who misjudged that market. Don't know of any other big pay offs at least back to CEO of Mobil/Exxon, which was a simple retirement after 40 years in the business, but was about 300 million...

    We have 6000 major corporations in the US and about another 20,000 registered under corporate law with 50+ employees. I am offering a guess on how many qualified by resume and/or track record could be CEO or CFO even the top 6000...100 to 200 each, with the business requirements and fewer yet with the product line knowledge. Ironically, one of these was Dick Chaney, who doubled Haliburtons market value.
    In order for a publicly owned corporation to hire a CEO or CFO, they have to go through a board of directors and a vote by the stock holders. In order to get one of the elite in business, the annual salary is secondary to pay package, which includes everything from options to performance pay on to retirement benefits. When your talking multi-billion dollar corporations, doing business around the world and the real responsibilities they have to so many people (employees/stockholders/customers) these few qualified elite only seem over paid. There are bad CE and CFO's, like that of Motorola, which was announced today. Regardless of what he gets, it will not be justified, but the process is more often justified than not...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf
    Just because yer not an engineer doesn't mean you can't do any business around anything that was engineered.

    On the other side of the ball, if you go to work for a company as an engineer, it probably says in your contract that anything you create belongs to the company. That's because the company hired you to engineer. If you're not good with that, don't sign up. If you signed, tuff nuggies if you make something cool and the company keeps it. You signed on the dotted line for the ability to have equipment and a budget to engineer, and the price you pay is that your creations don't belong to you.

    If that's your "evil capitalism" well, I guess just always read the fine print, right?

    And it's easier (and tastier) to have a nice cold glass of milk, than a handful of supplements.
    Yes, if you engineer something while employed by a company, than you are required to comply to the employers contract.

    I drink 'soy' milk that is a good substitute if it is 'enriched' with the added nutrients like calcium, B12, Vitamin D and etc.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    Regarding your first paragraph above, meat is deficient in calcium, Vitamins A and C, while the Vegan diet has a Vitamin B12 deficiency.

    I do not oppose a management team in any business. Most CEO's enter corporations that have already been established in previous years.
    So the state of the economy can make a CEO look good or bad.

    But the 'free enterprise' system works against the workers because inflation works only for the upper individuals and downgrades the workers that create the real wealth. So I cannot endorse the free enterprise system without government controls.
    In our economy (US) this is lacking because of corruptive influence of government.
    I think the government should control the economy as a representative of the workers and all lower level employees.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; Knowing you feel a business should be required to assume some kind of life long obligation to an employee up on hiring him/her, any reply will be rejected by you, but I will try a couple points...

    The average person in the US, today is said to have or will change jobs, on average 7 times in their life...This is where our right as employee's lays. We can also leave a business and start our own, based on near a business plan of his former employer. Fred Smith, a US Postal Worker did this, founder, now head of Fed Ex the leading package carrier in the world and by the way carrier of US Mail today. Sam Walton (Wal-Mart) and many other have done this and for the most part the individual in his/her job change gains in compensation.

    What mandate, could the government dictate, under the constitution which would be equitable to all business. GM has about 273,000 employees, has lost 40 Billion $ over the last 12 months and Google has 16,000 employees but earned 15 Billion in the past twelve months. (The B- billions is not a typo). These the two current extremes, but every firm has differences with in this scope.

    Most companies of any standing, have 401K plans and many more have some kind of retirement plan which can be accessed. If nothing else and your working for a company, your personal abilities will carry you higher into that company. Suggesting that government should replace the pride and abilities of a job holder, seems to work against human nature. We already reward failure, via welfare, unemployment or a number of programs to sustain existence, which takes from those that obliged the personal responsibility principles...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Like Jackson has said, employment is so transient today that the idea of a life-long business relationship is almost rare, at least in the white-collar community. There really isn't a need for many companies to care at all about the long-term benefits and support of their employees. Chances are, in 2-3 years they'll be working somewhere else anyway.

    You just roll your 401k, insurance and health around from one employer to the next, and then sit back and try not to get fired before the next hop-point approaches.

    If you hop into a job that you like, and they like you, great. Stick around. And if it goes sour in 6 months or whatever, jump to another company.

    Today's businesses know that process. If they really want the services of a particular employee, then they'll likely try to keep them. Otherwise it's a short-term business relationship, more like a group or task force, and then you wave and part.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Ph.D. Cat1981(England)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Downs.
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    Have it 'your way'. (Burger King)

    Cosmo
    I will. And you can go and enjoy your tofu, celery and a cup of water. What i can't understand though is why you are so critical of the capitalist system when it is that system which gives you and i the luxury of picking and choosing which foods we wish to eat :?
    Eat Dolphin, save the Tuna!!!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    ...At least the omnivores never complain about anyone else. It's always the herbivores.

    :?
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1
    You are speaking about human influence on social and physical well being that is not tied to a market economy or any other form of economic structuring. The free market, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism. None of these are responsible for the worlds problems however the people in them are. You are complaining about peoples actions inside of the system and instead of blaming each person for each problem you are making sweeping statements about it.

    My response comes in the form of a question. What else is better? I mean what else is there that does not cause as many problems? All through out human history we have committed genocide, destroyed land, and had a complete disregard for the consequences of our actions. This has taken place under every type of government, economy, and form of organizing that you can think of.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Junior Kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by komplex85
    You are speaking about human influence on social and physical well being that is not tied to a market economy or any other form of economic structuring. The free market, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism. None of these are responsible for the worlds problems however the people in them are. You are complaining about peoples actions inside of the system and instead of blaming each person for each problem you are making sweeping statements about it.

    My response comes in the form of a question. What else is better? I mean what else is there that does not cause as many problems? All through out human history we have committed genocide, destroyed land, and had a complete disregard for the consequences of our actions. This has taken place under every type of government, economy, and form of organizing that you can think of.
    As far as I'm concerned this previous statement pretty much puts an end to this entire debate.


    ......In other words, don't pass the buck.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35 Free Enterprise System 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson and Wolf

    I believe in our US Constitution that promotes some degree of equality.

    Wit this FES, things are just going the wrong way. Instead of moving in the direction of equality and justice, the capitalists are inflating their share of the wealth that the workers produce, to hoard most all of it for themselves.

    Considering that all they use for this accumulation of wealth is their brains and greed to help themselves, I do not see how they can be so callous to make this happen.

    NO government controls, because oursystem allowsw their cooruption, is what I am trying to eliminate.
    However, when you consider what happened to John The Baptist and Christs attempt at reform the chauvinit capitalists, it looks like a hopeless cause.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; The constitution does promote a degree of rights. There is no right to success or failure, only those to pursue. Since its writing they have added Woman, Blacks by amending and various laws have been enacted to give additional rights (voting, ownership and so on). This should tell you, the founders were not concerned or promoted equal rights to all people.


    Komplex85; What may be better, requires a complex answer. There are many forms of governing ranging from Democratic/Republic, which means, the people vote and under a rule of law..Which is the US down to Dictatorship. Free Market/Capitalism and Socialism/Communist are the extremes in Economic Systems. No governing or economic system is pure to the meaning of a system and every Nation has a variation of both, including the USA. Each country strives to balance governing ability, the wishes of the people and the laws of their nation or when applicable under their Constitution, to an end result.

    Traditions and Cultures can play big role in how all this unfolds. Some Nations for instance have no written laws or a Constitution. Many Muslim countries, these are interpretations from their Koran as seen by the prevailing clergy. Others, under a some form of dictatorship have their laws changed amended or simply dropped by the governing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    You are equating communism with Socialism.
    This is an absolute NO NO.
    I hate communism because it is a dictatorial 'one god' concept as the bible promotes.

    My Brand of Socialism is based on our Constitutional promotion of a government representing the peoples issues.

    I do not intend to eliminate capitalism since I would allow some free enterprise. I would just limit the amount of how much the capitalists would be allowed to skim dollars off the economic system.
    They do not create the real tangible wealth that the workers create.
    Yet, in spite of this', they want it all.
    This is the kind of capitalism that I oppose.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    My objective was to give the extremes. Communism under a dictatorship would be extreme. Cuba has had such a system. The US may have the other extreme, in its Democratic-Republic...but its leaning.

    I know and understand your form of Government/Capitalism association. We have a political party, with the same idea and will likely have near total power in 2009. We have many policies in force, under these principles and are paying the price. SS/Medicare/Medicaid/Welfare/Health Care and a host of social programs. The little town I live in (40K), has 40-50 pages in a tiny phone book, listing Local/State and Federal Offices, all dedicated to make sure everyone gets their 10 cents worth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    My evaluation of our current economic system US) is that it is a papal/capitalist socialist/welfare state for those mentioned.

    The words Democracy and Republic are not the same in meaning.
    My latest Merriam/Webster dictionary defines democracy as a root from the Greek meaning 'people power'.
    On the other hand, the word republic is derived from the Latin root meaning WEALTH+public.
    These definitions fit the current party loyalties to whom the parties represent.
    The Republicans oppose political reform and cater to the religious faction.
    While on the other hand, the Democrats promote the people issues.

    If the current trend continues with the workers having to make the sactrifices to stay on the job while the management at the top makes no sacrifices, then our economy will sink to the 3rd world level.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    We are a *Federal Republic* (Union of States). Using Democratic to me infers the power through elections for that government. Maybe is out of context here...

    "Those mentioned" or the so called have nots, did not exist or as a power, when the Country and Constitution was forming or for nearly 150 years of US History. FDR, via worker programs during the depression and the Social Security act began the trend toward rewarding the non-achievers.

    IMO; The Democratic PARTY, promotes socialism, plain and simple. Redistribution of wealth, school indoctrination and power to the government over people. The Republican PARTY, prefers traditional constitutional governing, allowing individual choice. Both along with like qualities. I concede, the R is tending toward the D system day to day.

    On Religion you have to remember, this Country was founded under a religious tone, has voted such since its founding and today 80+% of the people have some belief in a God. Since so many faiths were represented at the Constitutional Congress (1774-76), along with vivid memories of the English dictating religion, it was decided to defend religion from the governing, making it a personal choice, offering only the freedom to make that choice.

    If you feel, as I do, this country today is all any other country has ever been and possibly could ever be for the most in that country, you have to give credit for the systems it rose under. As said many times, as a nation we are trending AWAY from those systems. Free Market Capitalism is one remaining system, which has evolved forward or rewarded more and more through time. Even touching World interest and the world people today in most every part of the world.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    My objective was to give the extremes. Communism under a dictatorship would be extreme. Cuba has had such a system. The US may have the other extreme, in its Democratic-Republic...but its leaning.

    I know and understand your form of Government/Capitalism association. We have a political party, with the same idea and will likely have near total power in 2009. We have many policies in force, under these principles and are paying the price. SS/Medicare/Medicaid/Welfare/Health Care and a host of social programs. The little town I live in (40K), has 40-50 pages in a tiny phone book, listing Local/State and Federal Offices, all dedicated to make sure everyone gets their 10 cents worth.
    I do not understand why you criticize the government programs but not the corporate welfare they receive from the corrupted politicians?

    There is nothing in our Constitution that says corporations are people or citizens of our country.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat1981(England)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    Have it 'your way'. (Burger King)

    Cosmo
    I will. And you can go and enjoy your tofu, celery and a cup of water. What i can't understand though is why you are so critical of the capitalist system when it is that system which gives you and i the luxury of picking and choosing which foods we wish to eat :?
    It does not give us the luxury of choice.
    The commercial agribusiness (offshoot of communism?) produces those foods with chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, preservatives, artificial colors and etc that forced me to go 'organic' (natural cultivation).
    This business involved the small farmers.

    With this organic business growing, the agribusinesses entered the field.
    So now I have to wonder whether they will follow the rules?
    With the government involved now, I am sure they will?

    If you say the capitalist system gives us the choice, then why are the senior citizens here in the US forced to 'buy American' when it involves drugs while the corporations are allowed to buy cheap labor abroad?
    Is this your idea of 'choice?

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    ..
    I do not understand why you criticize the government programs but not the corporate welfare they receive from the corrupted politicians?

    There is nothing in our Constitution that says corporations are people or citizens of our country. Cosmo[/quote]

    In short, its not governments place in the US to equalize achievements of their people to that of the failed. Protecting the rights to achieve, yes...

    Government, having the responsibility to defend the country and provide for the best interest of the total, has responsibility to protect industry, but to a degree. They can let contracts, buy products (planes-ships-tanks-desk-computers, etc), but are not allowed to own or manage the firms that produce them. In doing so, these are not grants or corporate welfare.
    Likewise with research and development, which general has the welfare of the populace in mind or in some manner the security of the Nation, also not corporate welfare. Personally I oppose bail-outs and justify the Federal Reserve, only as a following of current affairs. That is they adjust and operate, but the markets have nearly always been ahead of any action.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Ph.D. Cat1981(England)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    South Downs.
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    It does not give us the luxury of choice.
    The commercial agribusiness (offshoot of communism?) produces those foods with chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, preservatives, artificial colors and etc that forced me to go 'organic' (natural cultivation).
    This business involved the small farmers.

    With this organic business growing, the agribusinesses entered the field.
    So now I have to wonder whether they will follow the rules?
    With the government involved now, I am sure they will?
    Well they should do, thats why we have laws to prevent such things happening. You still have a choice though, and sadly chemicals are necessary to maintain our levels of food production. It was only 100 years ago some people in the west were still dieing from starvation after a bad summer or two.

    If you say the capitalist system gives us the choice, then why are the senior citizens here in the US forced to 'buy American' when it involves drugs while the corporations are allowed to buy cheap labor abroad?
    Is this your idea of 'choice?
    No thats not my idea of choice. And the example you have given goes against the free market capitalist system, perhaps the US government is more left wing then you think :wink: .
    Eat Dolphin, save the Tuna!!!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    As soon as you start thinking the world will or can become "equal" it's all over.

    Society in any form is a choreographed balance of sacrifice and gain. There is no satisfactory uniformity, and the opposite is non-existence. We must always be somewhere in-between.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    As soon as you start thinking the world will or can become "equal" it's all over.

    Society in any form is a choreographed balance of sacrifice and gain. There is no satisfactory uniformity, and the opposite is non-existence. We must always be somewhere in-between.
    Some Matrix-Philosophy that actually makes sense :wink:
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat
    No thats not my idea of choice. And the example you have given goes against the free market capitalist system, perhaps the US government is more left wing then you think
    When a government works for capitalisms benefit, than that government is considered to be 'right wing' that is wrong.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    ..
    I do not understand why you criticize the government programs but not the corporate welfare they receive from the corrupted politicians?

    There is nothing in our Constitution that says corporations are people or citizens of our country. Cosmo
    In short, its not governments place in the US to equalize achievements of their people to that of the failed. Protecting the rights to achieve, yes...

    Government, having the responsibility to defend the country and provide for the best interest of the total, has responsibility to protect industry, but to a degree. They can let contracts, buy products (planes-ships-tanks-desk-computers, etc), but are not allowed to own or manage the firms that produce them. In doing so, these are not grants or corporate welfare.
    Likewise with research and development, which general has the welfare of the populace in mind or in some manner the security of the Nation, also not corporate welfare. Personally I oppose bail-outs and justify the Federal Reserve, only as a following of current affairs. That is they adjust and operate, but the markets have nearly always been ahead of any action.[/quote]

    It is the responsibility of government to protect the citizens from exploitation, abuse, hazards and any other such use of its citizens by industry or any other such organixzations in the US.

    Corporations use workers in hazardous jobs is one example and they do not comply to most safety rules and regulations.

    The minimum wage laws were also ignored for decades until recently.
    Now with the depreciation of the dollars, all prices are rising. So we do need another wage increase to keep up with this latest inflation of the cpommodity prices.

    Most corporations can afford to raise the wages without making sacrifices that effect the upper level income earners.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo;

    The Law protects folks from illegal activity, not the constitution. Regulation and protection ie. the EPA or other offices concerned with such affairs came along well after the constitution. I worked for years as a child for near nothing, think you did as well and neither of us was concerned with what the next person made...

    In todays society, its hard to imagine workers being put in jeopardy by corporations. The last factory I visited, had about 50 signs, advising of rights from minimum wage to where to complain about anything.

    Minimum wage, is a political tool. The very few entry level jobs left, actually pay more the MW and have for years. The average wage of an American worker in 18.00 per hour or so, which does not include what a business pays out on behalf that employee or any benefits.

    Most corporations, pay whats required to keep good employees and according to their productivity with in the company. Also most of these same corporations now outsource menial jobs, maintenance, cleaning, bookkeeping, food service and the like to prevent paying company standards and the cost of paperwork to the government. I dread the day when government can tell any business (small or large) what they should or mandate a wage...any wage, high or low.

    I might add, since you continuously leave out the investors, which far out number employees, will pull that investment if the company goes PC on its obligations.

    Mike, think I have mentioned this before. My Dad was in management with GM, for 30 years. In my work days, I have worked for others, but was self employed most my life, working 10 to 100 employees in a variety of business. I can tell you stories from my Dads viewpoint, to mine that would boggle your mind, when government gets involved. One short one;
    With a small grocery in South Texas, I worked 10 girls all with the (non-Hispanic names) The Federal government first send a letter, saying I had to hire more Hispanics, followed by phone calls and then a personal visit from the closest office. It was his intent to shut that little store down. He then found out, as I had advised the letter writer, the phone callers, some by way of a hired attorney, that all my employees were in fact Latino. They had been or were married to Anglos and there was no way to increase 100%. Keep government out of business....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    The law and Constitution may do that stuff guys, but our government doesn't follow it very well, now, do they?
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    I will admit that the government is prone to err. My opinion is that any Lationo workers that are not citizens should not be protected by our Constitutional Laws except for social crimes like homicide and etc.

    Things I oppose currently that were forced on everyone is the dual language, lack of making English our official language, welfare for the Latinos that are not citizens and other such welfare that they get.

    The creation of monopolies without controls for the inventors and the copywriters and other such government priveleges.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; Those Latino girls were all American, probably going back before the forming of the US. The town was built on *King Ranch* property which is another story.

    I am surprised no one has started an *Illegal Immigration* thread. Maybe I will under the new Politics section. However our Constitution and Laws do protect *people* regardless where they are from. This actually the problem, when rights are concerned to the Citizens. I agree on an official language, but there is a precedent. Think was at the Constitutional Congress, a vote was taken on what the *official language* should be for the then Colonies. English won out over French and by a grand total of ONE vote....Its not mentioned in the Declaration or Constitution, but as so many things a certain intent of those founders.

    Also, I agree with you on social rights given to illegals, but then this goes to laws, which again do not require a residency.

    Government does have authority over monopolies. Mergers and Acquisitions, require congressional approval, unless its a new product or service.

    Wolf; The constitution has *checks and balances* built into it, via the *Three Branches*, Executive, Judicial and Legislator. The newest congress under the Democrat Party, has instituted nearly 1000 over site hearings on the Executive, in its first session. Specific problems could be addressed if known, but during *Wartime* the executive branch has additional powers over peacetime, which media and the loyal opposition in an election year have played up....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    I'm not talking about just the current war-time bit.

    If you think the US government is and always has been playing strictly by the rules, yer living in a dream world.

    And the only actual checks and balances that exist are the American public...and that power is limited by what money and media dictate.

    Congress is having a flip'n fit trying to get all the agencies to play by the rules. And the upper-tier politicians are doing their best to keep/advance their political careers and bank accounts as much as they can, while just skimming above the line between a lynching or political suicide.

    (This is probably a pretty flammable example, but...) Do you think Cheney is sitting in his office going "Gee, how can I help the American people today?" No. He's sitting there going, "I wonder how much I can exploit the system to get rich, before the public gets ticked off enough to boot me?"

    You think Congress is sitting there twiddling its thumbs, and all of a sudden someone says "Hmm, let's go check to make sure the minorities are okay." or "Gee, I hope those industries are following the standards." or "Let's go looking for monopolies!" Ha. The law only gets flexed when something happens. And even then it's only a (usually) carefully choreographed allocation of blame based on what is more beneficial to those who stand to lose or benefit, not what is outlined in the laws.

    The idea that the US government is some finely tuned machine made up solely by the behaviors written in law, is nuts.

    I'm not trying to be a political hippie. A democracy runs like that. The US's "corruption" is directly proportional to the speed at which those within it can corrupt. From the dawning days of the colonies, till today, American politicians have been bending the rules to get their way.

    I'm not saying it's good or bad, but this isn't a utopia of law.

    You might even be able to argue that we've ALWAYS been a capitalist democracy. People are going to try to make as much money, and have as much success as they can, until someone tells them they have to stop. Before that point, they're limited only by their own personal restrictions (morals, ethics). After that point, they're limited only by their relational value to others with the same intentions. And, of course, those in the political seats are just the same, so it only goes to say that they're doing it to.

    So yeah, we could punish that capitalist company for putting out a bad product, but we'll just blame the contracted manufacturers instead, since punishing the company might hurt the industry and cause strife with a political ally. It's my job to uphold the law, but if no one votes for me and funds me, I won't be able to do this job! Heeheehee...
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Most Americans, have no idea what government entails. Many do vote, fewer know what they are voting for and less yet are concerned, until the next election cycle comes around. In any event, an opinion almost to all citizens, is related to their own interest. The power to maintain an orderly performance in government was set up with this in mind and allowed representatives from the States to see to the publics interest.

    VP Chaney, probably concerns himself with daily medication and when his fifth heart attack may happen. He has political views near the President and has done a great job as VP. Why he took a massive pay cut, just to be a punching bag for the *Capitalist* haters, has always puzzled me...

    There may be a few in Congress or in the Bush administration, that break or skirt the law for personal gains. However I feel, for the most part most of each party are in some manner concerned with National or International (Domestic/Foreign) affairs and their primary focus is for the Citizens of the State that sent them to Washington. If you want to get into ideology, general function of government or party platforms, the differences are real...This is what you see day to day, not the actual functions which do run very efficient. The same holds true for "getting their way" which in 99% of cases is for their constituents, Congress for their state or the Executive branch, for the country.

    Government officials, make hundreds of decisions on a daily basis. The President, makes thousands daily via his/her staff or directly form the office. I don't care who it is from the corner grocer to the President, no one decision made will please everyone. The decisions made, though are from one person in a Nation of 300 million, if important based on advise of special advisor's. Since your taking this to our founding, then this was just as true.
    I prefer to look at it historically or the results of those decisions, years later. Up to and including Reagan and over all, we as a Nation have elected the right people for the times they served....IMO.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    VP Chaney, probably concerns himself with daily medication and when his fifth heart attack may happen. He has political views near the President and has done a great job as VP. Why he took a massive pay cut, just to be a punching bag for the *Capitalist* haters, has always puzzled me...
    I'm not gonna get back into this just right now. The topic is a bit too flammable at the moment.

    However, as for ol' Cheney. What's the current salary for the VP? 200k?

    Whatever it is, do you really think it hurt ol Dicky to "give up" that money?



    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    VP Chaney, receives 208,100 + a taxable 10,000 expense account each year. Interesting fact; The first VP, in 1789 was paid 25,000 per year. Am not sure but think that 25k would be about a million in todays dollars.

    When Chaney, left Haliburton, he received a 20 Million Dollar retirement package. I haven't seen an annual salary stated, but would guess was in the 2-5 Million range per year. His management skills are said top grade and likely would have done much better in private industry than his VP salary....over the past 8 years.

    The man is a patriot, believes in his country and has a lifetime of dedication, serving under many presidents in various capacities. To him and many like him, its a duty when called and not a question of whats best for himself...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    VP Chaney, receives 208,100 + a taxable 10,000 expense account each year. Interesting fact; The first VP, in 1789 was paid 25,000 per year. Am not sure but think that 25k would be about a million in todays dollars.
    It's actually only close to between 300-600k.

    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    When Chaney, left Haliburton, he received a 20 Million Dollar retirement package. I haven't seen an annual salary stated, but would guess was in the 2-5 Million range per year. His management skills are said top grade and likely would have done much better in private industry than his VP salary....over the past 8 years.
    I'm not sure what yer getting at with all this. Are you trying to prove my point that giving up the bulk of his salary as VP wasn't a sacrifice?
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Financially, was a significant sacrifice. Even more so in hind sight, as that 20M package would be worth much more, plus the additional eight year salary.

    Am not going to argue, monetary values of 1789 and 2007, but think you will find 25k in 1789 would buy what it would take a million for today. There are a number of ways (% of GDP to wages) to figure. Based on pure wage difference, your probably correct...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    200k compared to a millionaire with massive influential power and stocks, is nothing. I'm not sure how that equates to a sacrifice. :?

    Cheney isn't exactly strapped for cash. His so called "sacrifice" was a farce to hopefully lead the general public to believe he was doing something wonderful.

    Have him drop all his various incomes, work COMPLETELY for free as a steward of the American people, and THEN I might consider it a "noble" sacrifice.

    I'm not much impressed when someone dumps a few nickles on the table and says "there, I sacrificed."
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf
    200k compared to a millionaire with massive influential power and stocks, is nothing. I'm not sure how that equates to a sacrifice. :?

    Cheney isn't exactly strapped for cash. His so called "sacrifice" was a farce to hopefully lead the general public to believe he was doing something wonderful.

    Have him drop all his various incomes, work COMPLETELY for free as a steward of the American people, and THEN I might consider it a "noble" sacrifice.

    I'm not much impressed when someone dumps a few nickles on the table and says "there, I sacrificed."
    I agree.
    He has enough accumulated wealth to retire now without even sacrificing his 'luxurious' lifestyle in retirement.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Wolf/Cosmo;

    Cheney will be 68 Jan 30, 2008. He has served his State (Wyoming) where born, met his wife and maintains a home today, has served under three Presidents of the US. Ford 77-79, Bush I 88-93 and Bush II 01-09. He was CEO of Haliburton 1995-2000. Haliburton in 1995 had about a 10 billion $ market cap, which had been for 10 years or more and left the company with a 25 Billion $ cap. Its now about 32.31 $....

    Most his wealth has come from his tenure with Haliburton. He took a dieing oil exploration company (very low oil prices 95-1999) combined it with Dresser Industries, Pool Company and a variety of service industries to make it the Worldwide leader in todays market place and the only one which can now handle major/large projects from start to finish.

    I don't understand the greed factor of the above resume or how his loyalty to his country can be questioned.

    Now...any heart doctor and I have seen three reports, will tell you any person with his heart condition, SHOULD NOT take a job with any stress what so ever, much less the jobs he has taken. On a personal level, since I am just a little older, just when does the desire for fame and fortune leave the human spirit. Many people never live the *Rich and Famous* lifestyle with a great deal of wealth...Warren Buffet and Sam Walton come to mind and hundreds more if not thousands (especially entertainers) drives for these things fade or stop early in life.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Yer missing the point, Jackson...completely.

    You keep explaining to us how Cheney got his wealth, but that's irrelevant to our argument.

    The point is that he gave up the sum of money, when he was already a hugely wealthy person. It meant nothing to him, because the loss of $200k is so low a percentage of his gross income.

    I'm assuming you make money of your own. Imagine if you went up to someone and told them to think you were a great person because you refused to accept a single ($1) dollar from your boss in this month's paycheck.

    If Cheney ONLY made 200k a year, or heck, let's say he makes $400k gross a year...THEN that would be some kind of sacrifice.

    But the guy makes MANY times that amount a year. He's so able to toss that sum aside that it probably didn't even phase him.

    It's just cheap tricks from another politician, set out to lure people in.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    No. I don't think I missed your point. In short Cheney is a greedy person, has been and enjoys the power of fame and fortune.

    Rather than being over dramatic, I simply laid out his history in politics and business. His sacrifice, was knowing or certainly being told, the stress involved would likely kill him. His political history shows no greed and few have devoted this much of their life to their country. Obviously he has/had some understanding of how business runs and could just as well been up there with the biggies and would have joined Gates and Buffet in the charitable goals....My opinion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    So he gave up the money for personal reasons, or to try and fool Americans into thinking he's some great guy by giving up his salary. It's still a cheap shot either way.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cheney, in his political life has served at the pleasure of a President. He has had no reason to try or maintain a public image of performing these duties as a sacrifice. His public life has been well known since first serving the Ford Administration. In his business life there is only one measure of achievment and that is success.

    Cheney, like thousands that have/do/will serve in all levels of governing or serving currently in the armed forces have a built in trait to serve either their country, their fellow citizens or in some cases both. I did serve under the threat of being drafted, never in politics and cannot speak for that trait.

    Cheap shots, are taking aim at motivations of honest, sincere people. What they have achieved, or have not, is not an issue. I would think if Cheney, was in good health, showed an interest in the Presidency there would not be the scamble to become the new US governing force and Cheney would have been the favorite, with a 51-49% chance of winning the office...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66 Re: Evils of Capitalism 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    The Evils of Capitalism

    Capitalism is just as evil as some religions. These are 'self serving' individuals that are responsible for the following:

    They pollute the air and waters to create health problems.

    They are destructive to the Natural environments and forests

    They corrupt governments with their use of influence dollars.

    They lower the workers to the status of robots and a commodity.

    They have no manners or morals because they will use child factories, slave labor and do business with dictators or communists.

    They are 'tax rebels' and evaders of taxes whenever they can.

    Even though they have huge unneeded surplus incomes, they will resort to dishonest bookkeeping, insider trading, manipulate stock prices if they can through various schemes, use company funds for personal use and any other such illegal tactics.

    They believe in maximizing profits to use those dollars to buy out the competitors, create mergers, downsizing the labor force to burden the rest of the workers and buy up the news outlets to censor any critics of their tactics. All these schemes cut jobs.

    They are unconstitutional because they are ‘self serving’ and only represent themselves. The kings, emperors, dictators, religious leaders, con artists, street criminals and any other such individuals do exactly the same things of serving themselves. They are the predators amongst humanity.

    An example of their greed is the 'new world order' that they have bribed governments to serve their needs. This organization can now demand unrestricted access to any member nations markets without restrictions or be taken to the 'world court' and fined for these marketing restrictions.

    Of course there are exceptions to the above. There are some good honest capitalists that treat the workers with the respect that they deserve. But these individuals are rare in our society.

    Only the workers create the REAL TANGIBLE WEALTH (RTW) that all persons buy and make use of like the houses, automobiles, clothing, food and any other such needs.
    They also create the capitalist goodies like skyscrapers, mansions, buildings for business and their personal serving staffs.
    The workers also build the government sponsored bridges, roads, hydroelectric dams, and staff the police departments, fire departments, water and sewage maintenance and any other such services.

    Since the workers create all this RTW, they deserve better and the higher wages would be good for the economy because then these workers can buy the goods they create and this increased MASS PURCHASING POWER (MPP) would only create more demand and jobs.
    My opinion is that the gross receipts should be apportioned equally between the blue collar workers and the white collar workers.
    This equal distribution would increase the MPP of the nation to promote a thriving economy.
    Unions that represent the workers are compatible with the US Constitutional mandate for representation of its citizens while on the other hand, capitalism is not a representative of the citizens.

    What I say above is NOT an endorsement of communism that I consider to be more evil than capitalism.

    Mike C
    I decided to ressurect this site from the archives because of the current state of our US economy that is moving into a ressession.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67 Re: Evils of Capitalism 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    I live in Bertrand Russells teapot!
    Posts
    902
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike C
    The Evils of Capitalism

    Capitalism is just as evil as some religions. These are 'self serving' individuals that are responsible for the following:

    They pollute the air and waters to create health problems.

    They are destructive to the Natural environments and forests

    They corrupt governments with their use of influence dollars.

    They lower the workers to the status of robots and a commodity.

    They have no manners or morals because they will use child factories, slave labor and do business with dictators or communists.

    They are 'tax rebels' and evaders of taxes whenever they can.

    Even though they have huge unneeded surplus incomes, they will resort to dishonest bookkeeping, insider trading, manipulate stock prices if they can through various schemes, use company funds for personal use and any other such illegal tactics.

    They believe in maximizing profits to use those dollars to buy out the competitors, create mergers, downsizing the labor force to burden the rest of the workers and buy up the news outlets to censor any critics of their tactics. All these schemes cut jobs.

    They are unconstitutional because they are ‘self serving’ and only represent themselves. The kings, emperors, dictators, religious leaders, con artists, street criminals and any other such individuals do exactly the same things of serving themselves. They are the predators amongst humanity.

    An example of their greed is the 'new world order' that they have bribed governments to serve their needs. This organization can now demand unrestricted access to any member nations markets without restrictions or be taken to the 'world court' and fined for these marketing restrictions.

    Of course there are exceptions to the above. There are some good honest capitalists that treat the workers with the respect that they deserve. But these individuals are rare in our society.

    Only the workers create the REAL TANGIBLE WEALTH (RTW) that all persons buy and make use of like the houses, automobiles, clothing, food and any other such needs.
    They also create the capitalist goodies like skyscrapers, mansions, buildings for business and their personal serving staffs.
    The workers also build the government sponsored bridges, roads, hydroelectric dams, and staff the police departments, fire departments, water and sewage maintenance and any other such services.

    Since the workers create all this RTW, they deserve better and the higher wages would be good for the economy because then these workers can buy the goods they create and this increased MASS PURCHASING POWER (MPP) would only create more demand and jobs.
    My opinion is that the gross receipts should be apportioned equally between the blue collar workers and the white collar workers.
    This equal distribution would increase the MPP of the nation to promote a thriving economy.
    Unions that represent the workers are compatible with the US Constitutional mandate for representation of its citizens while on the other hand, capitalism is not a representative of the citizens.

    What I say above is NOT an endorsement of communism that I consider to be more evil than capitalism.

    Mike C
    I decided to ressurect this site from the archives because of the current state of our US economy that is moving into a ressession.

    Cosmo
    It's a mistake to think the economy has a will of it's own and is beyond anyones control, as much as Governments try to persuade us otherwise.

    The economy is not a chaotic uncontrollable force like the weather. It's a man-made invention and is controlled by such.

    There is always some 'body' manipulating the economy.

    Look for the possible reasons for recession.

    Some 'body' somewhere will be gaining and not losing
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    A recession, 2 quarters (3 month periods) or more where the OVERALL economy does NOT increase, but decreases.

    Economy, in brief the exchange of money for goods or services. The world economy 65 TRILLION US$ per year, the US and the European Community 14+ TRILLION each. This not including, all the world underground or barter trade, exchange of Equities (stocks/bonds that finance industry) or all the commodities which combined are into the trillions, on a DAILY basis.

    Governments who support FREE TRADE CAPITALISM, have a total budget of no more than 12-14 trillion per YEAR, most of it going or social or domestic programs. How could government on any level, do anything to keep that engine moving, quarter by quarter by quarter for endless increases. IT DOES NOT, work that way.

    Cosmo: you have probably forgotten, but I predicted this very minor set back on the economy, over a year ago to you on FC. Every election year back to about 1916 has government going out of its way to keep it strong and in many cases caused the problems you see today. Now that its such a massive, UNCONTROLLABLE part of life any attempts to slow or stop a perfectly natural slowdown, results only in making it worse. The ultimate attempts were made in the late 20's, early 30's which nearly took out all the fledgling industrial base, over the next 15 years.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    I cant believe what I'm reading

    Cheney an honest, sincere man? Is this a joke?

    He got 5 deferments to avoid serving in vietnam and then becomes Defense Secretary (which should be called Agressive War Secretary)

    He's corrupt, made millions with Halliburton who got No Bid Contracts worth Billions

    He's sold Chemical and Biological production materials to countries the US government had banned (so he's a criminal within a criminal state)

    He's against Treaties to ban chemical weapons

    He's a neocon warmongering nutcase who's signed the PNAC document that says a Pearl Harbor event would accelerate transformation and that Biological weapons that can target a specific genome is a useful political tool.

    He's LIED to the american people and knowingly mislead the american people, with Saddam's WMD, phoney links and inuendos of links between Osama/911 and Iraq/Saddam. He told you it would be a cakewalk, when he knew full well invading Iraq would be hell in a handbasket he had said so in the 90s, you can see it on YouTube.

    Over 4000 americans have died because of his lies, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqui civilians have been murdered, hes a war criminal that would be hanged if a Nuremberg trial was held.

    HE changed the interception Protocols before 911, held military exercises on 911 with the same scenario as 911! Most military analysts outside the US knew something was fishy when planes were not intercepted including a plane that is said to have circled the capital to then crash in the pentagon, the CIA and Mossad are behind 911 but Cheney was a central figure to make sure the planes hit their targets without being intercepted

    I'm sure if we asked Germans about Himler in 1940 some of them would Praise him the way you praise Cheney, but Cheney is an evil corrupt draft-dodging shotgun-in-the-face neocon-weasel chemical-weapon-loving liing double-faced war-criminal piece of shite, hanging's too good for him, burning's to good for him, he should be torn into itsy bitsy pieces and burried alive!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Tell us how you really feel....

    And before jackson comes on, better find the asbestos mittens.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Ice; I really don't want to go over Chaney's career again and most of my thoughts you have probably read. I would argue any one of your points, however in the end, there is no way I can convince you, just how wrong you are or what Government/Capitalism actually is, in the US.

    Since you took time to post;
    I hold a special admiration, for any person who has chose to serve his/her nation, whether in Military or Government. Chaney, Clinton or who ever and regardless of motivation, IMO deserves a certain respect.
    No doubt, if you picked a person from the American History Political structure, I could give you the dark side of that person, but power has always changed hands, the constitution always prevailed and the system has worked. With this in mind and that knowledge to them, even to enter a field for high office, the person gains a bulls eye target, an automatic 50-50 acceptance to anything said (at the very best), become the cause for every little problem - every person can use for their own failure and subjected to a remaining life of being a national target. There were 20 plus candidates this cycle, many good, honest and trust worthy people. Each of the 17 failed attempts generated personal problems most people will never see.

    If Clinton/Obama and their chosen pick for VP were to win, I will not like it, historians will determine their influence, life will go on and that admiration will still be due and given....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    "hold a special admiration, for any person who has chose to serve his/her nation, whether in Military or Government."
    Given that Hitler, Himler, and other Nazis would have been considered to 'serve their nation' at the time, this to me warrents no special admiration.

    I have no respect for Himler, nor for Cheney, nor for any officials be they Government or Military for simply serving a state if its at the expense of their people or of people abroad or done by breaking international laws geneva conventions human rights etc. I know propagnada is powerful, Edward Bernaise would be proud and the Nazi propaganda would be put to shame compared to the subtle US Propaganda, and you might not know about the millions of men,women and children the US has killed in the past decades, the coup and terrorist acts performed by the CIA to topple elected government, of the death squads informed of democratic government troop movements by the US so they could go murder civilians in distant villages, even if you dont know any of that, you have to see that Iraq War is a War Crime by the Nuremberg definition, That torture is being allowed, that secret wire taps and secret detentions are a fact, it almost seems like you will never be able to see fascism right in front of your own eyes unless they start to fly a swastika flag.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Ice; "But the power has always changed hands" is the point of my post. As a Nation our power as a people, is placed on those we elect. I could give you a list of 50 reasons why Ted Kennedy (probably 100 others through history) should in my opinion not be serving. The people of his State re-elect him and until they chose not to, he maintains there power.
    Hitler, Stalin, Castro and through world history many leaders, not only refuse to allow a change but have used that power to maintain themselves. Monarchies, Totalitarian States or whatever...there is a difference.

    Chaney, is not over in Iraq, killing anyone nor has he personally broke any US or International laws. Your personal interpretations of some laws are shared by many that simply do not understand our Constitution under or in times of War. You have no idea what those powers could be today, have been and were used in history or that he Bush administration has just not used near the powers prescribed his office.

    I am aware of your arguments, have addressed over the years many times, some even on this forum. It usually comes down to hatred of our basic Capitalistic/Free Market system, a dislike for the current government, a preference for anarchy or just preferring socialism. I really don't want to pursue your objectives, but would bet its one of those reasons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Ice

    I agree with you since Cheney is a republican.
    It is the republican duo (Ragan/Bush I) that were the first to promote the idea of a 'new world order'.

    Clinton went along because of the campaign contributions essential in winning elections.

    So my opinion is that we need REFORM to eliminate those corrupting campaign dollars that influence the politicians.

    Otherwise, our economy will continue to sink deeper into a 3rd world economy.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Unfortunately that's the joy of democracy. It's always a good-ol'-boys club. The illusion of the deciding public vote masks the intentions of those with their own agendas.
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    By 'New World Order', I suppose were talking about a world where people from various societies can get along under an 'Economical System'. As depressing as some of you feel about that scenario, its been building since the late 1930's. The isolation theories, demonstrated by US governments after WWI, began to decline with WWII and today are very much part of both parties today.

    Here we go again on those mean lobbyist, those dirty rotten people that represent, in many ways every individual in the US, even around the world on numerous issues. If you live in the US, are from the US, have business/investment interest in the US or rely on any entity of business or government in the US, those rotten people are there to protect those interest. They are your voice, between elections and are very effective.

    Each States in this 50 State Union, sets its own election laws, with a small input from the Federal Government, through the Congress (Financing after nomination). The cost for any one person to obtain the right to run for National Office, maintain local offices in those States (usually required), be placed on the ballots differ in each States, are complicated in each State and requires a good deal of financing. Any restrictions on any one person to obtain this financing, and by any means otherwise legal is illegal under the US Constitution-First Amendment. The McCain 'Finance Reform Act' would fail if some one contested and taken to the Supreme Court. Factually, in todays world that act has opened up other means for influencing a pro-con influence of any candidate, through the many forms of 'media' still available to ANY person or group of persons...

    The 'Good ole boys club"; Well, that describes the founding fathers (framers), the intent of them and the practice of politics in this country until the early 20th century. They feared people WITHOUT a vested interest in the outcomes of decision, would vote their own wallets. Long story short, that original system, allowed White, Male, Land/Business owners, alone to participate.

    Indirectly what most liberal/socialist mindsets are suggesting, is allowing a free run, at the Presidency, each entitled to Federal assistance, free press or media and the removal of all others, personal rights. Basically under a serious of 'Fairness Legislation'. If they ever were to get this I would predict 10,000 Presidential Candidates, from every walk of life, at a total cost to each tax payer, that would make rival 'Social Spending' at least for that year...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Sorry, I left my rose-colored glasses in another reality...
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    I used to reckon people get the government they deserve. But I find it isn't so, neither through junta, representative election, or anything between. I was in Japan during national elections, marveling at the dedicated and very sympathetic role of government, and the pathetic indifference to politics shown by common people. How can people get better governance than they deserve?

    I don't understand it.

    Nearly every American I talk to feels their government is grossly unrepresentative. Clearly they deserve "better", whatever that is, or was I should say because a lot of them have lost hope.

    Reconcile these contradictions?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf
    Unfortunately that's the joy of democracy. It's always a good-ol'-boys club. The illusion of the deciding public vote masks the intentions of those with their own agendas.
    The current system of electing our government official is not working the way the US Constitution dictates.

    It seems like 'money talks '.

    So our current 'republic' is not a democracy as the USC dictates.

    Democracy from the Greek root is defined as 'people power'.

    Republic from the Latin root is defined as 'WEALTH+ public'.

    So our current government is a republican government that promoted the 'new world order' that our country belongs to now.

    So the world market for cheap labor is in force now. Result?
    Lost jobs in the US or reduced wages to force the workers to compete with the outsiders.

    In the meantime, the billionaire population is exploding with their cheap labor and no benifits like healthcare or pensions.

    But, when it comes to opening the world market to the seniors to buy their presription drugd, they are forced to 'buy american'.

    FYI, the republicans opposed reforming of the influence dollars to be
    restricted.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    OK; Lets look at a different time in US History. In the late 30's nearly 25% of the working class not working, war was raging in Europe -75% of American not wanting to help out and there were very few government (any form) agencies to assist the general public. Help was available through private and religious groups, in every county of all 48 States.
    FDR, against the peoples will, began building a war machine, first for export to England and France. Drafting began against the peoples will, the closer war appeared to come demands were increasingly demanded of industry. Pearl Harbor happened, Congress declared war and FDR, took over the entire government per his title 'Commander in Chief'. By 1943 65 Million of a 120 million population was on active duty in the US, the rest (women/children) were working in factories which the government virtually ran. Quotas were placed on every commodity with many not available to the general public. Most public activities were canceled (Baseball etc) and personal rights limited. Japanese/65% American born, were sent to camps and national curfews imposed.

    Pong; No one complained, people reacted to demand of their elected government more out a sense of loyalty than fear. Freedoms were then an object to fight over, they did and were rewarded with additional freedoms shortly after the war, an economy and IMO the beginning of the American rise to a world power.

    On the lost feelings of representation; No I don't think MOST feel that way.
    On any given day, the average person probably does 100 things, which some city/state or local government has provided. Setting the trash out for pick up, the drive to work, getting the mail, sending the kids to school, along with most other activity. On the Federal Level, they have opinions/views on some of the many issues and they are of real importance on very few. Even here, some of these issues are 'hand me downs' from generation gone by, Abortion, Gun Control and so on. They realize issues which have split meanings of peoples from other areas to theirs are real. If problems do come up, the States, in most cases can and do create laws to their liking, in some cases down to City levels.

    Wolf; I may ware 'Rose Colored Glasses' and I may be a little to proud of my country, for the things I feel it has done for my society or in the world society. But there are still quite a few like me, many more who take the time to understand and learn our history, are coming around to the realizations I was fortunate enough to live through. Even in my mind, its never been perfect, will likely never be but its as close to perfect any system has ever been...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; While writing the above post, I wondered a few times where you were when all that was going on, or what could have happened in your life to so hate its traditional values.

    This from the Chinese Constitution, adopted December 1982...

    Article ONE; Socialist State. The Peoples Republic of China is a socialist state, under the peoples democratic dictatorship, led by the working class, based on the alliance of the workers and peasants.
    Article Two; Power belongs to the people. All power of the PRC belongs to the people...

    It goes on, sounding very much like what you preach. I ran across this as a comparison the the USC, while rechecking to see if your version of our Constitution has some how been missed, in my few hundred readings of the document. It's just not there...

    The elderly are advised to buy American 'Medications' and have a multitude of options via government/Wal Mart/Suppliers to assist in cost, all with the knowledge of getting whats expected, rather than a possible
    counterfeit.

    Fifty years ago, a good business idea would reap you millions from a US population or if from elsewhere the populations of that nation. Today, with international exposure to any idea, a good one will earn you billions. Its as simple as that...The latest top earner (no. 1 Billionaire) I think is from Mexico and overtook Gates position. Russians are showing up on that list and probably a few Chinese will show up shortly...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    Those declarations by the Chinese communists as having a peoples government is ludicrous.
    They are about as credible as capitalism.

    Do you believe those billionaires actually earn and deserve those billions?

    Like I said, only the workers (hands) create the real tangible wealth.
    And they are being 'short-changed'.

    I do not oppose capitalism entirely. I just believe it should be controlled by limitations as to how much they can 'skim' off the economy.
    I believe that workers should be paid a more equitable wage that they deserve more than anyone else since they are the creators of the RTW.

    BTW, the last I saw on the news, Warren Buffet was no 1 in this race for who can skim the most.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    Jackson

    Those declarations by the Chinese communists as having a peoples government is ludicrous.
    They are about as credible as capitalism.

    Do you believe those billionaires actually earn and deserve those billions?

    Like I said, only the workers (hands) create the real tangible wealth.
    And they are being 'short-changed'.

    I do not oppose capitalism entirely. I just believe it should be controlled by limitations as to how much they can 'skim' off the economy.
    I believe that workers should be paid a more equitable wage that they deserve more than anyone else since they are the creators of the RTW.

    BTW, the last I saw on the news, Warren Buffet was no 1 in this race for who can skim the most.

    Cosmo
    Of course, the Chinese declarations are ludicrous. Unlike the US Constitution, freedoms are not mentioned. Capitalism is not a government, rather a business practice and I might add conducted by the public (not government) and the public , which can gain or lose by its success.

    Buffett shows as No. 1 with 62 B on latest Forbes list. Think it was on Jim Cramer's, Mad Money, a CNBC financial show, where the sale of an asset would have taken this person over that 62 B; Carlos Slim Helu, listed No 2 with 60+ B (2008 list), from Mexico, 67yo (youngster), in communications. The sale was with in the past two weeks.

    Only 2 of the top ten are from US, 5 of the top 25. No.'s 4-5-6-8 are from India and no. 11 from Hong Kong. An idea today will reap the profits, on an International Scale and was my point.

    YES, if you have an idea, one that a large number of people will enjoy or benefit from, then you should be rewarded from those that use your idea.
    Remember, many today take an idea and are involved not only in the conception of the idea, but the process to accessibility.

    As said, Capitalism is a business concept. The over whelming number of projects are small independent individuals, generally all aspiring to become the next Gates, Buffett or Walton. From farming operations, to the small town corner grocer. They hire and work 70% of the US working population, not to skim their labor, but to achieve that dream. Those are the people, whether through some form of equalizing incomes or from simple critical dialog you and others are trying to bring down. They are not bad people, they are following a path to achieve what many classify today and in the history of the US, THE AMERICAN DREAM...IMO.

    Off topic; HBO has been airing 'John Adams' a historical documentary. They are up to part 5 of a seven part series. It covers what led up to the Declaration of Independence through the deaths of Adams and Jefferson, arch rivals in the diplomatic field. I hope you have been watching, but is available on demand and I feel sure will be aired for months, if you get all HBO's channels.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    I do not have HBO.

    You will notice that I do not condemn the small business owners or even the small time millionaires.

    To live a millionaires luxurious lifestyle, all you need is a one million a year income.

    So how do you justify those one hundred million dollar a year incomes?

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo
    Jackson

    I do not have HBO.

    You will notice that I do not condemn the small business owners or even the small time millionaires.

    To live a millionaires luxurious lifestyle, all you need is a one million a year income.

    So how do you justify those one hundred million dollar a year incomes?
    Cosmo
    There are IMO some mis-understandings of this country, its Constitution and traditions, covered in that documentary, which I wish you could see. Sorry you don't get HBO.

    Most all those Billionaires were millionaires before and likely average income earners before that. Are you suggesting they should turn off their ingenuity to conform to some socialistic mentality or possible government should step in to prevent additional wealth. Condemnation by degree really doesn't make sense.

    The vast majority of large or for that matter small lottery winners, lose the entire amount and/or file bankruptcy in short periods of time. There is a mentality to having wealth, which drives some people and not others. You can draw the same conclusions from individuals at any income level.
    That new TV or keeping the wine cellar full are more important than gaining (investing) additional wealth.

    Justifying a persons income, in this country is not a requirment...Tiger Woods, earns about 10 million per year as a golfer, his profession. However, he earns much more with his name (trademark) and much more than that on investments. His total incomes in any given year are probably well over that 100 million. Any given person, has a reason why high levels of income are achieved, they are not alike and government is never the direct reason. There are far more that have earned millions, yet die in poverty.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackson
    Most all those Billionaires were millionaires before and likely average income earners before that. Are you suggesting they should turn off their ingenuity to conform to some socialistic mentality or possible government should step in to prevent additional wealth. Condemnation by degree really doesn't make sense.
    Yes, government should step in and tax those UNneeded surpluses to distribute this extra wealth to the workers that created it in the first place and it could also use it to balance the budget that is in a deficit state.

    The wealthy can give up this surplus income without sufferring any hardships since their luxurious lifestyle would not be affected.

    The living costs would be deductible, so they can live as lavish a life as they choose without having that portion taxed.

    Paying taxes is a 'patriotic' duty.
    The total population pays taxes at the same level as the wealthy.
    All the other taxes like gas, liquor, property and etc are all flat taxes paid at the same rate by all.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87 US Constitution & Todays US Government... 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Overview; IN THE USA, today we are face with a pending problem which basically involves the concepts of government itself. Purpose, authority over INDIVIDUALS and control over both that individual or industry. Our Constitution, was never intended to do or be involved in matters, its currently being used for these interventions. Most issues, under that Constitution, were deliberately delegated to States, by intentionally not addressing in those original documents. Some issues were in fact known in the late 18th century and those who wrote the Constitution, knew full well, that other issues would develop over time, allowing amendments to be added and gave the process for them.

    Many people, not understanding those basic principles, seeing examples of Welfare/Social Programs/Educational/Crime and many issues originally intended for State guidance are seeing Federal involvement where never intended. Then assuming other issues should also be addressed. Those that have been addressed, some mentioned above, have come through a devised system called 'Grants'. First used by FDR and strongly advanced with Eisenhower, with dramatic increases made by Lyndon Johnson and each President since. This includes Carter, Reagan, Both Bush's and Clinton. It has nothing to do with party, rather effective politics. When a grant is offered, whether for Highway Funds, Agriculture Funding Bills, Educational Assistance or one of the many for the current Domestic War on Terror, there are added requirements of issues our Federal Government has imposed itself. Accept these requirements or lose the grant. IMO; This is nothing short of State 'Blackmail', illegal under the Constitution, where the will of the people for perceived personal gains has left the problem go un-addressed or tested in th Supreme Court.

    Cosmo, is reflecting a near majority of Americans today, in many of his ideas here and elsewhere in the 'forum world'. Many Countries have long adopted many of the programs he would accept for Americans and many have been added here over the past few years. Hillary Clinton, Obama and to some degree McCain, all agree on many of his ideas and will be leading the USA for at least four years.

    Administration; If Cosmo would agree, you are welcome to make this post a new thread.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo

    Yes, government should step in and tax those UNneeded surpluses to distribute this extra wealth to the workers that created it in the first place and it could also use it to balance the budget that is in a deficit state.

    The wealthy can give up this surplus income without sufferring any hardships since their luxurious lifestyle would not be affected.

    The living costs would be deductible, so they can live as lavish a life as they choose without having that portion taxed.

    Paying taxes is a 'patriotic' duty.
    The total population pays taxes at the same level as the wealthy.
    All the other taxes like gas, liquor, property and etc are all flat taxes paid at the same rate by all.
    Cosmo
    I really don't think anyone would want Government to tell them, how to live, in what lifestyle or what would then become a limit on them. Talk about lavish lifestyles, I wonder what that would be, if paying taxes for less would be a result.

    The US has always been 'deficit state'. In fact, in order to barrow monies to finance the Revolutionary War, they assumed State Debts, in get financing from, (think) Holland and 5 Million dollars.

    Actually, the poorer a family is (by income) the more percentage of income goes for taxes of all taxing authorities. Renters pay the owners tax's, are taxed for SS/Medicare at equal rates to about 97k and generally buy products with super high rates (Cigarettes/Beer/Gasoline/Entertainment etc...).

    No, taxes are an obligation. Mentioned in the Constitution and an amendment for clarification. Same with State Taxes, whether based on Incomes or property/sales/schools or whatever.

    Since you keep mentioning labors right to a percentage of profits; Google was making billions of dollars, when 1500 people worked for the company. (Has increased lately)..GM on the other hand has 50k employees, while losing billions. Are you saying (to be FAIR) google should have given their employees part of those billions and GM employees should have paid to work.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackson
    Since you keep mentioning labors right to a percentage of profits; Google was making billions of dollars, when 1500 people worked for the company. (Has increased lately)..GM on the other hand has 50k employees, while losing billions. Are you saying (to be FAIR) google should have given their employees part of those billions and GM employees should have paid to work.
    The Constitution does not cover all aspects of the peoples lives such as marraiges, property taxes, criminal punishment and etc.
    Such issues are delegated to the states.
    However, the states are not allowed to violate any of the USC's Amendments that outlaws discrimination in any government facilities or such as higher subsidised education that get federal dollars and other such facilies.
    But I think it also includes discrimination in the workplaces that may be entirely private.

    There are no government laws that mandate the industries distribution of their profits.
    The only requirement for the industry is to donate an equal amount to the employees contribution toward their SS retirement plan.
    There is also the National Labor Relations Board that has some authority in this field.

    The Google employees , I am sure, are very well paid in the computer programming field to be satisfied with their paychecks.
    However, employee imputs with ideas that improve the system should be given bonuses for their contributions.

    The GM employees are paying to remain in the working ranks with the sacrifices they are required to make rather than accepting the buyouts offerred them.

    But I do not see what sacrifices the CEO's are making.
    I saw in the news recently that the CEO's are still getting salaries of 20 million (2 examples at Fords).
    The CEO's can sacrifice all earnings over 3-4 million that would not reduce their living expenses one iota.
    I do not see that happening.

    Many industries do have 'profit sharing' plans for the employees.
    All industries should have this plan.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo;

    USC and State Rights; Anything not mentioned in the document itself or the 27 amendments, are left to each independent State, if laws or guidance deemed a necessity. There is nothing in that USC, giving authority to fund or mandate education. NOTHING...In order for the Education Department to operate it relies on the process I described earlier, by linking there really quite small (2-5% of said cost of total to educate one child) funding to such things as Testing, Busing, Special Education (Blind, disabled or challenged) which came about through the amendments you mention. A good example on how this works can be seen in 'Home Schooling' where some 20 States have no laws and the remaining (about 30) have various restrictions or requirements. The Supreme Court has ruled (several times) that the idea HS, is LEGAL, but cannot rule on its operation. (No authority)...

    Federal Government, can regulate some business through a variety of regulation involving 'interstate activity'. It can also require certain things where public safety is concerned or where National Security could be effected. Air Traffic controllers, found this out the hard way...

    The main reason Capitalism works better than government, is simple productivity. US business, for 40 years has excelled with this statistic.
    US Postal, Amtract, all government program offices rank the lowest per man hour worked. People with good ideas, in most cases, will be promoted, however I have always found loyalty to an employer more important.

    Yes, GM Employees have had it rough. There are one million former auto workers, most GM which are forced to live on a retirement package, worth more today, than any one earned if retired over 10 years ago. Then there are about 50-60k that were paid 100k plus to just quit, with those already vested (20-30 years service) would still receive part to all that same package. The remaining poor folks, still working work for 30-45 per hour, including benefits. Every person who buys a GM vehicle in the US or in the World (only expanding market) pays about 1500.00 to maintain that status.

    Suppose your talking about the new CEO of Ford Motor, Mulally who did receive via several incentive to take the job, some 28 Million, during his first four months in 2007, 2m actual salary. Henry Ford III, preceded him was earning 1.00 per year. On the other side, since were talking salary, Google has three major heads of company. Eric Schmidth CEO and co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Each works annually for 1.00 per year. Also Steve Jobs, head of Apple and I am sure many more. Keep in mind however, these and most high level management, are not working for their salary, but the performance expectancy of their board of directors or stock holders. Their gross pay then, based on that...

    To give you an idea what these CEO's have to contend with General Electric, lost 42 BILLION last Friday alone, in value to the Company Stock. Google has dropped 75 Billion in one day and GM and Ford are worth today a small fraction of their peak values.

    Yes, most major corporations, are involve with 401's or some company stock program. They are transferable (if vested) and there is choice where these investments are made. Basically what Bush wanted to do was make some of SS, the same for all employees of any business, large or small. If FDR, had set up SS on that basis to begin with, we would have no retirement package under 2-3k per month today, based on actual performance and probably would have reduced that National Debt by another 5 trillion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Jackson

    As I have said, I have no animosity for capitalism if it is limited by government as to how much they should be allowed to 'skim' off the economy.

    You, on the other hand want a free market economy.

    Well, in Nature, that is the only FME that exists and everything is FREE.
    You just simply help your self to its gifts.
    That is what capitalism does. It cuts down trees, mines the Earth minerals with impunity in spite of regulations that they generally ignore.

    So all the problems we have today are the result of their tactics of using dollars to 'control' governments and people.
    With their use of dollars, they have created 'runaway' capitalism. Result?
    The 'new world order' that has us now embroiled in a unwinable war and their yo yo market tactics are the problem with our economy and security today.

    Thus run away capitalism avoids taxes in several ways, their dollar stuffing conpetition among themselves is degrading to the workers livelyhoods and this results in reducing the mass purchasing power of the workers that reduces demands for the goods the workers buy. So now the companies, as a result of their yo yo market, has created the housing market that now leads to bankruptcies that only they can be blemed for.

    So their greed for power (NWO) and their FME are problems that they alone have created.

    Cosmo.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #92  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Cosmo; By not limiting or a over controlled business model, you are offered the cheapest and best of products, services to chose from. Not only do I want a 'free market', I attempt to hold back socialism which in itself will destroy that market.

    Its my understanding all things come from nature. Six and a half BILLION individuals, would have a hard time competing with all the animals in a survival of the fittest, to pick from nature what they want. Industry, from the California very large agricultural complexes, to the Texas Feed lots, to dairy/hog/cattle/fish/egg-chicken and other farms, then on to mass production of all products in packaging to the product, we have access to what no number of small industry could supply.

    There is no difference in one family chopping down a tree to keep warm, or picking berries for food or in fact killing a wild turkey for meat, than all being done for them so millions can enjoy the same. Spreading these functions to other places, so they to can benefit. Socialism in any form, under any government, with any purpose (agenda- good or bad) takes from the human spirit to improve anything...IMO.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #93  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Cosmo; By not limiting or a over controlled business model, you are offered the cheapest and best of products, services to chose from.
    Tell that to the people who lost their life savings in Enron, or that are about to go bankrupt because there was no effective consumer protection with the subprime mess. Lack of regulations lead to fraud and abuse, massive price gauging and economic catastrophe.

    Watch this episode to see the impending mess that lack of regulation is about to unleash
    http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10122007/profile.html

    If thats not enough, the subprime disaster should be enough to realize regulations are needed and that the abscence of effective regulation leads to fraud and major problems.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #94  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    "By not limiting or a over controlled business model, you are offered the cheapest and best of products, services to chose from"
    Regulations ARE bad when they protect a small interest at the expense of everyone and the abscence of regulation is also bad. You need an effective democracy to make sure regulations benefit the people and not an industry.

    In the abscence of regulation, Oligopols arize in certain sectors. Their objective is not to offer the best product but to make the most profit, its doesnt matter if the product kills you or mangles the workers, if it poisons the water table or spews mercury in the air, if it defoliates the earth or strips oceans of all fish.

    Capitalism dumpts the hidden cost onto society and is not sustainable. Sure a product can cost 5$ and sell for 10$, but if it causes 100$ of medical problems because the production spews polution, you dont see the cost, its parasitic.
    Capitalism might work if people were telepathic and omniscient, so that you knew that 15,000 people each year die because of respiratory problems caused by the manufacturing of product X, but we're not omniscient, we see advertising of product X telling us how great it is and its price. THe more of the social, economic, environmental and medical cost the manufacturer can dump on scociety the more competitive he will be and with more ressources to advertize or cut cost its more likely that the crapiest soundrel will be the one you buy. Reality can not be observed with our 5 senses, there are aspect of reality that are beyond our eyesight or require processing/statistical analysis to be perceived, with Capitalism what you see glitters and almost everything thats hidden is crap and fraud.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #95  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    Cosmo; By not limiting or a over controlled business model, you are offered the cheapest and best of products, services to chose from.
    Tell that to the people who lost their life savings in Enron, or that are about to go bankrupt because there was no effective consumer protection with the sub prime mess. Lack of regulations lead to fraud and abuse, massive price gauging and economic catastrophe.

    Watch this episode to see the impending mess that lack of regulation is about to unleash
    http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10122007/profile.html

    If thats not enough, the subprime disaster should be enough to realize regulations are needed and that the abscence of effective regulation leads to fraud and major problems.
    Any public company is subject much to what brought Enron down. The corruption in that story came from misrepresentation of fact, which there charter with the New York Stock Exchange, requirements demanded by their board of directors and stock holder demands from each company head. As these facts were being revealed the values of there product (energy options) and by way off stock (equity) trading, the product and stocks progressively became less valuable, to the point of having what most stocks have, 1 cent per share. (On any share of Stock, you will find that par value stated, despite having paid up to 700.00 for that one share/Google highest market value.

    The Federal Government regulates most finance in the US, through the Federal Reserve and housing through Fanny May and Freddy Mac. Interest rates at 1.5% for years and Homes loans at sub-prime 1% over Fed Rates (adjustable arms, only) for that period, along with the over enthusiastic public for making a quick dollar resulted in the current problem. Market forces would cure not only the Housing/Financing issue but the lowering value of the US$ overseas and the presumed negative GDP coming. I might add, those market forces are being pressured by current government actions (those bail-outs, Stimulus package) as well as just who is going to be the next president and/or Bush 2003 tax reductions.

    Estimates for the total dollars lost in the Tech Bubble Burst 2000, range well up in the Trillions, yes with a T. These things happen...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #96  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Ice; 6000 people die in the US every day, more than 2 million in a year.
    Most die from some reason and respiratory is a leading cause, after Heart problems or cancer. Think its a whole lot more than 15k... year.

    Auto accidents take out over 40k per year, not much less in the 30's when 35k died over a year, even with a third the people available to kill. Would you advocate doing away with transportation? If yes, before that industry thrived (1920's r so), horse drawn everything roamed city streets causing all kinds of health problems. From kids playing in there mess, to street cleaners giving new meaning to Coal Miners Lung Disease. Think man, you live in a society, where a person smoking a block away from another person is regularly sued...

    What your really trying to do, is dump Global Warming as a man made cause, on industry. Its that industry which has given you everything from truly clean water to fresh air while flying to destinations 13k miles away.
    Nothing on todays market is less clean, less efficient, more environmentally friendly and yet less costly (adjusted for inflation) than last year, 20 years ago or 50 years ago.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #97  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    The forces of the market didnt reduce Acid Rain, Industries didnt invest in cleaner technology to save minnows in lakes or for the fuzzy good feeling of doing whats right, Legislation like the Clean Air Act forced them to.

    Also, people dying in car accidents is one thing, and death traps like the Pinto is something else. In the case of the Pinto, Ford calculated that settling with the inheritors of their clients that burned alive in their car was better for the bottom line than fixing the napalm mobile. So for a period of time, Ford not only was selling a hazardous product, but more importantly the costumers, including some that have burned to death, did not know about this information that Ford had.

    And thats the point, you dont know which product gets a competitive advantage by using slave labor, exploiting children, plundering a region, poluting water, poisioning the customer, etc. And the manufactrer will usually conceal his douche-baggery by every means. And a lot of these hidden situations have a cost for society, the most scoundrel of corporations dump the hidden cost of doing business on society.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  99. #98  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Ice

    Well said. I agree with you.

    Jackson

    It was the government that forced the auto industry to install all the safety features we have in todays autos.
    Also, the cleaner exhausts were government mandated.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  100. #99  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Actually, safety belts, air bags and many safety components were available on many vehicles, prior to government mandates. As for fuel efficiency, VW was getting 30-40 miles per gallon well back and the technology existed for 'catalytic converters' existed. All those mandates came from, then current knowledge. Refining fuels however, has been the biggest gain in reducing harmful auto emissions.

    Aside from the extra deaths (small cars) the additional cost for every item and being told what I can or can't do in my auto or truck, I have not voiced opposition.

    Ice; Again, people die. Any given day, we hear of some item being involved in some particular number of deaths. Lately even when no deaths are involved were told, you could die and mention some product.
    Companies that manufacture a product, do so with intent to sell that product. I find it hard to believe they intentionally sell any product that will directly cause a death. Mis use of any product, on the other hand can cause sickness to death. If you eat to many cotton balls, your going to die, but most people never eat one, for an extreme example. Blaming industry for peoples neglectful uses of products, has never made sense to me and is used by our legal system to enhance (in most cases) some attorneys wallet...

    As for exploitation of a people, you will have to give me an example. Wal-Mart, has hired about 100k Chinese at the going rates in China, but serves several hundred millions there now with a cost efficient means to acquire products IN CHINA, as well as shipping many of those products to American markets or others around the world. If thats exploitation, I don't see a problem. If child labor bothers you, I worked at 9yo, setting bowling pins, for about 30 cents an hour, though from a middle class family and was grateful for the opportunity. Maybe a whole lot more, would give our young folks an idea how hard working for something could be and not so quick to take from others, what they would then understand.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  101. #100  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    jackson, your answers are so surprising to me, Im curious to know if you have lived and worked outside the US? Or if you have visited a 3rd world country(and talked to the people living there)?

    Hazardous Products: Strawman: I'm not refering to the hazards of drinking gasoline from the pump at the station, or wraping the powerbar cable areound your neck and jumping through the office window, I'm talking about normal or expected use of products.

    Child Labor: Strawman: Not refering to part time job or summer jobs, I'm talking about children not going to school but working 10 hour days, 6 days a week, all year round, year after year.

    I no longer think that Richard Martin, 'Ask a Republican' is a satirical act, I now realize that people would actually vote for a politician like than.

    The war is good, the mercenary business is energized, the prostetics industry is booming, and if we run out of poor people to send over there we'll just make high-school more expensive.
    Yep, I can see people voting for that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •