What liberal and libertarians won&#39;t tell you

TeamWarfare VetTWL Contributor

2011-09-25 19:38

Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.

did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

Cocytus

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-25 20:09

Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

As I think even you can see sam, there's no invitation to anything in this world. You take what you want! If not, you suffer!

Cheers

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-25 20:35

Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

I support fascism!

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-25 23:40

Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

Is there a hidden implication to this statement?

What I am asking is this: do YOU rule out developing our own natural resources? I dont recall where you stand on this and would like to hear your POV.

Pending your reply, more questions to follow.

burn!

Actual Veterinarian

2011-09-25 23:46

It would be interesting to see two nations with a billion per duke it out.

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-25 23:47

Originally posted by: burn!
It would be interesting to see two nations with a billion per duke it out.

That would be a massive and pointless loss of life. Even more so than WW1 and 2.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

burn!

Actual Veterinarian

2011-09-25 23:49

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: burn!
It would be interesting to see two nations with a billion per duke it out.

That would be a massive and pointless loss of life. Even more so than WW1 and 2.

I don't think it would go that far.. potentially a skirmish at the disputed area though
Post edited by burn! at 9/25/2011 11:50:24 PM

=NCG=Leonidas

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 01:35

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: burn!
It would be interesting to see two nations with a billion per duke it out.

That would be a massive and pointless loss of life. Even more so than WW1 and 2.

Pointless? Are you smoking crack? The loss of a few billion people on the other side of the globe would be incredible for America (and Europe). Do you realise how many resources those billions consume? The only problem is keeping it contained. Hopefully India comes out on top (and Pakistan is turned to glass) in the process and China must completely rebuild their government.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

This message was brought to you by the Society for the Reinstitution of Natural Selection

Seek out a kingdom worthy of your soul

Mockery

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 02:49

Originally posted by: =NCG=Leonidas
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: burn!
It would be interesting to see two nations with a billion per duke it out.

That would be a massive and pointless loss of life. Even more so than WW1 and 2.

Pointless? Are you smoking crack? The loss of a few billion people on the other side of the globe would be incredible for America (and Europe). Do you realise how many resources those billions consume? The only problem is keeping it contained. Hopefully India comes out on top (and Pakistan is turned to glass) in the process and China must completely rebuild their government.

I'm clearly an asshole....but I'm with this.

My convoluted libertarian answer is to continue selling both countries weapons until they can figure out what to do on their own.

-2 billion people later.....there will be plenty more blue fin tuna for me eat next sushi night.

Cocytus

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 04:36

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

I support fascism!

I support not being told how to live my life by Indians, Chinese, Koreans....etc!

You on the other hand will be their bitch!

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 07:47

Originally posted by: =NCG=Leonidas
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: burn!
It would be interesting to see two nations with a billion per duke it out.

That would be a massive and pointless loss of life. Even more so than WW1 and 2.

Pointless? Are you smoking crack? The loss of a few billion people on the other side of the globe would be incredible for America (and Europe). Do you realise how many resources those billions consume? The only problem is keeping it contained. Hopefully India comes out on top (and Pakistan is turned to glass) in the process and China must completely rebuild their government.

I don't know. I guess I just value humanity more than I do cheap iPods and shit, especially the innocents, like the children.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 07:48

Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

I support fascism!

I support not being told how to live my life by Indians, Chinese, Koreans....etc!

You on the other hand will be their bitch!

Sure. You'd rather have your life controlled by Haliburton and GE.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 08:46

While I wait for sam to answer...

NBF: Why do businesses exist?

Is it to turn a profit?

If so, at what point do your morals and values come into conflict where you will quit the current small / medium business you work for in order to not have your life controlled by them?

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 09:05

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
While I wait for sam to answer...

NBF: Why do businesses exist?

Is it to turn a profit?

If so, at what point do your morals and values come into conflict where you will quit the current small / medium business you work for in order to not have your life controlled by them?

Businesses engaging in free and open trade is one thing. Government intervening in foreign affairs, overthrowing foreign nations, staging wars, engaging in sabotage or outright conquering foreign nations for the benefit of business is something else. That is the point I'm making.

To answer your question. This is my last week at my current employer. An employer who likes to pay a fair 40 hours worth of wages for 50+ hours worth of work. I am leaving for the competition, who sought me out, who are going to pay me 60% more for 40 hours worth of work.

Neither of them have controlled or will control my life, but, should someone choose to have their lives controlled by a business, then that is fine so long as it is their choice. Supporting a system where the biggest players with the biggest pocketbooks can buy the government so that costs can be socialized while profits are privatized (see our current foreign policy for reference) is something that I find foolish and self destructive. On top of that, not only does it screw the system's supporters (the interventionists like Cocytus) but it also screws the people who don't support it morally, but are forced to support it financially due to having the threat of force used against us if we don't pay our protection money or otherwise go along with the system.

Edit: quick answer to your question:

Business exist to turn profits.
Government exists to protect rights.
The fascist foreign-interventionist system in place and that is supported by Cocytus defrauds the American taxpayer or their wages/value of their savings and the American soldier/sailor/seaman/marine of his life/health for the unearned benefit of the companies that engage in buying off politicians who have the power to start said intervention.

Post edited by Nathan Bedford Forrest at 9/26/2011 9:10:07 AM

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 09:29

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Businesses engaging in free and open trade is one thing. Government intervening in foreign affairs, overthrowing foreign nations, staging wars, engaging in sabotage or outright conquering foreign nations for the benefit of business is something else. That is the point I'm making.

Mostly irrelevant to what was asked. Context here is important; save the rest for where that tangent is applicable - I did not ask you if businesses were in cahoots with gvt. I asked if business are open for profit through a market system.

The answer would be yes. Therefore, the rest of your post does not matter.

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
To answer your question. This is my last week at my current employer. An employer who likes to pay a fair 40 hours worth of wages for 50+ hours worth of work. I am leaving for the competition, who sought me out, who are going to pay me 60% more for 40 hours worth of work.

Neither of them have controlled or will control my life, but, should someone choose to have their lives controlled by a business, then that is fine so long as it is their choice. Supporting a system where the biggest players with the biggest pocketbooks can buy the government so that costs can be socialized while profits are privatized (see our current foreign policy for reference) is something that I find foolish and self destructive. On top of that, not only does it screw the system's supporters (the interventionists like Cocytus) but it also screws the people who don't support it morally, but are forced to support it financially due to having the threat of force used against us if we don't pay our protection money or otherwise go along with the system.

Edit: quick answer to your question:

Business exist to turn profits.
Government exists to protect rights.
The fascist foreign-interventionist system in place an that is supported by Cocytus defrauds the American taxpayer or their wages/value of their savings and the American soldier/sailor/seaman/marine of his life/health for the unearned benefit of the companies that engage in buying off politicians who have the power to start/intervene in said intervention.

Demonstrating the ability to switch jobs to one that is more lucrative and having the freedom to do so is none of my business. That's not what was asked.

The point of my question here is that I wanted you to understand that any company you work for will grow in size. Therefore, you are living a double standard on the one hand where you bad mouth a large business (or businesses) all the while working for any other company trying to increase it's growth. ALL businesses are concerned with their bottom line and one of the downsides to capitalism is the fact they do become engaged by gvt at all levels. Its a symbiotic relationship because businesses supply gvts with "revenue" [read: taxes] and businesses have to work within the parameters set by gvt. They want favorable conditions with which to operate to turn a profit, provide jobs, and pay their "bill" to the gvt. Notice I didnt say anything about foreign interventionism -thats another subject in itself. Whats being addressed here is your own words.

This is incredibly complex with no easy answer. Regardless, I find it rather naive to say business is bad but not the one I work for [regardless of which one it is].

So in the end, you cant have it both ways. I leave you to reconcile the inconsistency of your position.

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 09:51

Never once did I say that business is a bad thing. My complaint is with government corruption on behalf of business. You shouldn't have to kill/die/get maimed and you and I shouldn't have to be taxed, have our currency devalued or have our homes destroyed in retaliation so that GE can get access to some resources on our dime instead of buying them on the open market from the nation who possesses them.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 09:54

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Never once did I say that business is a bad thing. My complaint is with government corruption on behalf of business. You shouldn't have to kill/die/get maimed and you and I shouldn't have to be taxed, have our currency devalued or have our homes destroyed in retaliation so that GE can get access to some resources on our dime instead of buying them on the open market from the nation who possesses them.

No where was it implied that gvt doesnt have corruption. In fact, I went into detail as to how that actually happens.

What concerned me was how you can reconcile slamming a large successful business all the while working for one trying to grow itself.

At what point does it get so large where your morals force you to walk away as they grow and get involved with gvt?

Thats what you need to answer.

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 09:58

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Never once did I say that business is a bad thing. My complaint is with government corruption on behalf of business. You shouldn't have to kill/die/get maimed and you and I shouldn't have to be taxed, have our currency devalued or have our homes destroyed in retaliation so that GE can get access to some resources on our dime instead of buying them on the open market from the nation who possesses them.

No where was it implied that gvt doesnt have corruption. In fact, I went into detail as to how that actually happens.

What concerned me was how you can reconcile slamming a large successful business all the while working for one trying to grow itself.

At what point does it get so large where your morals force you to walk away as they grow and get involved with gvt?

Thats what you need to answer.

Size matters not.

It's all about actions. Specifically the illegal type. If I worked for a company that engaged in fraud, especially in collusion with government, then that threshold would be met. Until something of that nature takes place, I don't care how big the company is.

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 10:01

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Never once did I say that business is a bad thing. My complaint is with government corruption on behalf of business. You shouldn't have to kill/die/get maimed and you and I shouldn't have to be taxed, have our currency devalued or have our homes destroyed in retaliation so that GE can get access to some resources on our dime instead of buying them on the open market from the nation who possesses them.

No where was it implied that gvt doesnt have corruption. In fact, I went into detail as to how that actually happens.

What concerned me was how you can reconcile slamming a large successful business all the while working for one trying to grow itself.

At what point does it get so large where your morals force you to walk away as they grow and get involved with gvt?

Thats what you need to answer.

Size matters not.

It's all about actions. Specifically the illegal type. If I worked for a company that engaged in fraud, especially in collusion with government, then that threshold would be met. Until something of that nature takes place, I don't care how big the company is.

But you specifically mentioned Halliburton and GE on the last page.

Why are you amending your position now instead of stating it up front?

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 10:15

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Never once did I say that business is a bad thing. My complaint is with government corruption on behalf of business. You shouldn't have to kill/die/get maimed and you and I shouldn't have to be taxed, have our currency devalued or have our homes destroyed in retaliation so that GE can get access to some resources on our dime instead of buying them on the open market from the nation who possesses them.

No where was it implied that gvt doesnt have corruption. In fact, I went into detail as to how that actually happens.

What concerned me was how you can reconcile slamming a large successful business all the while working for one trying to grow itself.

At what point does it get so large where your morals force you to walk away as they grow and get involved with gvt?

Thats what you need to answer.

Size matters not.

It's all about actions. Specifically the illegal type. If I worked for a company that engaged in fraud, especially in collusion with government, then that threshold would be met. Until something of that nature takes place, I don't care how big the company is.

But you specifically mentioned Halliburton and GE on the last page.

Why are you amending your position now instead of stating it up front?

I mention them because it's no secret that they are both in bed with the government. Would you prefer that I mention a small company like Solyndra?

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

Mockery

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 20:21

Yeah...I'm lost.

Haliburton gets people pissed not because they are a successful business...but because they became privileged to no-bid contracts at the direct expense of the tax payer.

GE pisses people off because they are living off countless tax payer funded subsidies...ranging from defense contracts to Green Energy funding. All the while...they are outsourcing their labor and tax burden abroad, but absorbing billions in government money (ie. our money).

Solyndra pisses people off because it was entirely funded with tax payer money, through dubious green initiatives at the DOE, went bankrupt, and is now being sold off to other investors (while the tax payer footed all their bills and is left on the hook).

Common theme....keep the fucking government out of private business!!! It's simple.

Capitalism:
Profits are privatized....and incurred debt is privatized and both are the exclusive responsibility and belonging of the individual.

Socialism:
Profits are socialized...and incurred debt is socialized and both are the exclusive collective responsibility and belonging of the government.

Fascism:
Profits are privatized (and belong to the extreme few)....and the incurred debt is socialized and only the debt part becomes the exclusive responsibility of the collective via the funding of the government (who essentially takes and redistributes the collectives tax money).

Just so we are all on the same page....this is what the libertarians are bitching about....or is at the very least what I am bitching about.

TeamWarfare VetTWL Contributor

2011-09-26 20:47

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

Is there a hidden implication to this statement?

What I am asking is this: do YOU rule out developing our own natural resources? I dont recall where you stand on this and would like to hear your POV.

Pending your reply, more questions to follow.

its complicated but if i can actually get it across, you might understand where i am coming from.

besides the above conflict if it should happen.

lets take the recent green loan to said company. never once will i ever agree with my tax dollars going to invest into something that is only going to pad the board members and a select few ivy league CEO's just so "we" get on the map in said technology.

this is why i have never been "for" the govt sponsoring fetus tissue to help advance medical research and, quite possibly all of our lives.

i think it should all be funded by private investors or, venture capitalist.

why should my money go to what is nothing more than Odious Debt, just so some well connected people can make billions while raping me and the rest of the tax paying public?

fuck them.

if some nation finds what they believe is an oil field, then they have the right to contact any company they want to come and get but leave my tax dollars out of it, my military out of it and my life out of it.

i mean, if they really want that bad, why cant they hire Xe and leave us tax payers out?

the thing is, oil is a commodity. whether its an american company or not means nothing to use at the pumps because its globally priced.

so, why should i, as a tax payer, go into more Odious Debt to take care of the oil oligarchy?

Cocytus

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 20:59

Originally posted by: Coba|t
JUST the carrier.

No aircraft on it either.

Just drilling equipment.

Only if we can put a Mission Accomplished sign up.

Deal?

FSB

The RApture found meTeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 21:20

Originally posted by: Mockery

Capitalism:
Profits are privatized....and incurred debt is privatized and both are the exclusive responsibility and belonging of the individual.

Funny...during all the bailouts under Bush, I would point to the "integrated economy".

Capitalist profits, socialized loss.

I think our economy fits the last category:

Fascism:
Profits are privatized (and belong to the extreme few) top 1%....and the incurred debt is socialized Bailouts and only the debt part becomes the exclusive responsibility of the collective via the funding of the government (who essentially takes and redistributes the collectives tax money).
Post edited by FSB at 9/26/2011 9:21:49 PM

______________________________________________________________________
"Oh, dark grin, he can't help, when he's happy looks insane, oh yeah"

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 21:24

Originally posted by: FSB

Fascism:
Profits are privatized (and belong to the extreme few) top 1%....and the incurred debt is socialized Bailouts and only the debt part becomes the exclusive responsibility of the collective via the funding of the government (who essentially takes and redistributes the collectives tax money).

ding ding ding

_________________
"I supported President Lincoln. I believed his war policy would be the only way to save the country, but I see my mistake. I visited Washington a few weeks ago, and I saw the corruption of the present administration - and so long as Abraham Lincoln and his Cabinet are in power, so long will war continue. And for what? For the preservation of the Constitution and the Union? No, but for the sake of politicians and government contractors." J.P. Morgan, American financier and banker, 1864

TeamWarfare VetTWL Contributor

2011-09-26 22:07

Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: FSB

Fascism:
Profits are privatized (and belong to the extreme few) top 1%....and the incurred debt is socialized Bailouts and only the debt part becomes the exclusive responsibility of the collective via the funding of the government (who essentially takes and redistributes the collectives tax money).
ding ding ding

welcome to corporatism. please enjoy your stay and if you spill your coffee, your neighbor will be forced, at gun point, to pick up the tab.

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 22:34

Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: Cocytus

I can't wait to hear how we can do it alone here at home being non-interventionists.
did a country invite us into this or are you planning on doing it to help the oil companies CEO's and board members?

Is there a hidden implication to this statement?

What I am asking is this: do YOU rule out developing our own natural resources? I dont recall where you stand on this and would like to hear your POV.

Pending your reply, more questions to follow.
its complicated but if i can actually get it across, you might understand where i am coming from.

besides the above conflict if it should happen.

lets take the recent green loan to said company. never once will i ever agree with my tax dollars going to invest into something that is only going to pad the board members and a select few ivy league CEO's just so "we" get on the map in said technology.

this is why i have never been "for" the govt sponsoring fetus tissue to help advance medical research and, quite possibly all of our lives.

i think it should all be funded by private investors or, venture capitalist.

why should my money go to what is nothing more than Odious Debt, just so some well connected people can make billions while raping me and the rest of the tax paying public?

fuck them.

if some nation finds what they believe is an oil field, then they have the right to contact any company they want to come and get but leave my tax dollars out of it, my military out of it and my life out of it.

i mean, if they really want that bad, why cant they hire Xe and leave us tax payers out?

the thing is, oil is a commodity. whether its an american company or not means nothing to use at the pumps because its globally priced.

so, why should i, as a tax payer, go into more Odious Debt to take care of the oil oligarchy?

I wasnt advocating any taxpayer funding, so lets make sure that is very clear. In fact, it was clearly stated in another thread the gvt shouldnt be in the venture capital business since ROI is non-existent and the CBA is skewed toward the politically connected. Nor am I advocating military interventionism either. No. Fucking. Way.

What I am advocating is utilizing our own natural resources (that was argued recently resulting in a disagreement between Stryk and I) and that requires some form cooperation between gvt and private enterprise since you are in fact allocating National resources that will end providing a great many things that keeps our economy "lubricated", so to speak. We will reap the rewards from it, but so will those corporations who have the capital assets to exploit that resource.

What I am asking you to consider is that someone, somewhere is going to make money. Its how business works -you should know that based upon your own business operations. So we need to decide if that money will stay here or go overseas. Our choices are as limited as the rest of the worlds' based upon proven oil reserves. We simply do not have alot of options and we need to maximize our efforts that serve us best.

agree or disagree?

Mockery

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 23:09

Originally posted by: FSB
Originally posted by: Mockery

Capitalism:
Profits are privatized....and incurred debt is privatized and both are the exclusive responsibility and belonging of the individual.

Funny...during all the bailouts under Bush, I would point to the "integrated economy".

Capitalist profits, socialized loss.

I think our economy fits the last category:

Fascism:
Profits are privatized (and belong to the extreme few) top 1%....and the incurred debt is socialized Bailouts and only the debt part becomes the exclusive responsibility of the collective via the funding of the government (who essentially takes and redistributes the collectives tax money).

Total agreement....

That's why the term gets used so much around here.

It was and is total fucking fascism.

Just not social fascism with little mustaches...but smiley face, corporate collusion, fuck the tax payer fascism.

Stryk

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 23:16

Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: FSB
Originally posted by: Mockery

Capitalism:
Profits are privatized....and incurred debt is privatized and both are the exclusive responsibility and belonging of the individual.

Funny...during all the bailouts under Bush, I would point to the "integrated economy".

Capitalist profits, socialized loss.

I think our economy fits the last category:

Fascism:
Profits are privatized (and belong to the extreme few) top 1%....and the incurred debt is socialized Bailouts and only the debt part becomes the exclusive responsibility of the collective via the funding of the government (who essentially takes and redistributes the collectives tax money).

Total agreement....

That's why the term gets used so much around here.

It was and is total fucking fascism.

Just not social fascism with little mustaches...but smiley face, corporate collusion, fuck the tax payer fascism.

You didn't read that closely.

TeamWarfare VetTWL Contributor

2011-09-26 23:25

Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
agree or disagree?

it would be lovely if we could always keep everything American and that, i would agree with.

the issue becomes when our govt becomes involved in making sure that the board members and CEO's are the only ones reaping the benefits on our dime, on our debt.

its not my debt.

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-09-26 23:36

Originally posted by: samUwell
Originally posted by: [-NM-] -SS-
agree or disagree?
it would be lovely if we could always keep everything American and that, i would agree with.

the issue becomes when our govt becomes involved in making sure that the board members and CEO's are the only ones reaping the benefits on our dime, on our debt.

its not my debt.

No one advocated that it was sam. It was delineated that the gvt shouldn't be in the venture capitalist arena with taxpayer monies and incurring loss on any "investment".

What I did say is that we have choices and I want to know where you stand on utilizing our national resources or not. If you support exploiting our natural resources, then *who* will make the money? Bear in mind it will require a company with capital assets to undertake an endeavor of this magnitude.

I cant make it more clear than that.