At 1/1/13 05:28 PM, Warforger wrote:
What does cutting wages do? Also if the product seems the same or is not very different, how will consumers know that it was made with cheaper material?
Cutting wages saves them money. Using cheaper ingredients...people know the difference. You can't tell the difference between sugar and aspertame?
I worked for a multi-national food corporation for years. I see the cost cutting measures in quality of products, and employee/labor. They absorb the cost because they own almost everything that's probably in your pantry and bathroom.
This type of corporatism is only possible, when the government creates legistlation that benefits industry over consumers.
Monopolies exist without the government. Let's see, John D. Rockefeller got a monopoly in oil in the North east without any help from the government. In fact the government was responsible for breaking it up. If anything the opposite is true because it was the government who broke up monopolies and not consumers.
Rockefeller actually obtained and created his monopoly through buying government seats and lobbying legislation in his favor.
And the government did not breakup monopolies. They are still rampant today.
Nope because all that money comes in the form of loans, meaning they have to pay it back, and those loans are only made with strings attached, meaning say they have to get a new CEO. If anything the government forces them to correct their act where otherwise they would've just fallen and taken the economy with them.
Um, except it doesn't get paid back. Not to mention it creates a mindset of "we can fuck people over, and we'll always get money anyway!"
Except in a Libertarian system he just has to make sure his private militia is happy as was the case in the time Libertarian economics ruled.
Um, no that isn't libertarianism at all. Libertarianism, has NEVER been practiced in the nation, except maybe for a very brief period during the nations inception and even that's debatable.
As I said, in a libertarian system, it would be paramount for a CEO to jump through hoops to make sure his employees and customers were as happy as possible.
This concept of "private militias"...that's more inline with democrats and republicans than Libertarians...in fact the very concepts run totally counter one another.
That doesn't make any sense, the regulation is there to prevent mismanagement, if it wasn't there there would still be mismanagement.
And regulation makes it worse. Case in point, the current economic crisis.
Do you seriously think every new regulation is written by private companies?
Yes. They are called lobbyists. I'm sure you're aware that former CEO's of corporations sit as head of "regulatory" agencies, right? Like the head of the FDA used to be the CEO of Tyson Chicken?
Al-Qaeda, since you know they bombed the World Trade Centers.
The Army protects me from Al-Quida. Bailouts do not.
You do realize it's alot more complex than that? The guy I was talking about for example got his basement flooded when he was working for his company, he took time off to go clean it up on his own and he got hospitalized after that. While he was hospitalized his company went bankrupt and he lost all his savings. On top of this medical care is expensive, as in too expensive to save up for.
I agree. Wouldn't it be nice if we didn't have robber baron insurance companies jacking up prices with impunity?
Um no it's still solvent because they had raised payments in anticipation. Currently it's going to go bankrupt in about 2050 if I recall. Medicare there's a big scare that it's going to happen 2016 but that's only one or two funds that won't be able to keep pace, if they say 2016 it's probably a fear monger date as it'll probably be later than that.
So, explain again why I am not allowed to have freedom to decide whether or not to participate.
You think the government is bad? The private sector is even worse.
Hmm.. Private sector has given me hospitals, computers, phones, fuel, food, airplanes (I'm a pilot), cars and entertainment, not to mention numerous paychecks. The government has given me war, murder and can arrest me without trial.
You do realize Harvard and Yale are some of the top universities in the world right?
You're barely mentally fit to type on a keyboard much less be a point of authority on the presidency. You do realize though that for one you would hate him no matter what he did and think he's an idiot for not subscribing to your idealist views and two he didn't invade any country.
I'm smart enough to realize killing people will not make them like you :)
BTW, Obama has invaded Libya, Yemen, Pakistan (when he murdered Bin Laden), and Somalia.
A society where everyone is equal is Socialism.
Show me a socialist society in history where that is true...30's germany? Greece? Denmark? 30's Italy? Where?
No it doesn't.
Ever heard of Guantanimo Bay?
As for assassinations, even the HUFFINGTON POST knows it's true
Oh and here's a quote from Obama's head of DNI
"Being a US citizen will not spare an American from getting assassinated by military or intelligence operatives overseas if the individual is working with terrorists and planning to attack fellow Americans."
Far from it. Hyperinflation is a rare occurrence that only happens when you do something incredibly stupid, for example in Zimbabwe they confiscated all the property of the whites and handed it to the blacks, since the whites were a big part of the econ no one wanted to trade in Zimbabwean dollars so the currency underwent hyperinflation. Belgium by comparison has had many periods where they had no government and their currency was fine so if we were to go off the fiscal cliff the dollar won't do much.
Maybe not hyperinflation...but inflation at an alarming rate non the less. Brought a loaf of bread lately?
Businesses expanded too much and ended up with too much excess stock. They had over expanded on their own with no government intervention. The whole thing was the failure of the free market to regulate itself.
No, they expanded too much because they lobbied government to write laws in their favor, and look the other way (See JP Morgan, Rockefeller, et al)
They did do it and they succeeded (it was meant only for a few labs to share data easily). They handed it over to private corporations so they could develop it for civilian use.
No they didn't. You need to check your history. Companies like IBM were developing the technology WAY before the federal govt.
No you said the government doesn't innovate, I proved you wrong.
That's why they're in space right now I presume?
I was listing these people who "didn't earn or deserve it" which were veterans, seniors, kids in public schools etc. then you went off about how the government didn't give them enough money thereby contradicting everything you said before.
No, the veterans DO earn it (risking their lives and all). Children DO deserve it (general welfare). The government steals from them to benefit their campaign contributors.
Greed is already an excess, it's too much want to the point of doing immoral acts to get it. So there's no such thing as being "overly greedy".
And that's where consumers and employees come into the equation. However, when you take power from them to keep it in check, or having the government supporting it, you have a problem. Look around you.
That if insurance companies wanted everyone to be insured that they would've done it without any regulation.
Right. Regulation that takes away your right to choose what you purchase. Of course a company isn't going to force you to buy their shit. They can't...that's why some people are uninsured.
Question: How could they insure everyone if there was no regulation forcing people to buy?