Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Halliburton and Bechtel Are Nothing
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 295310" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>I figured about as much in regards to you being a liberal. Even if you were I'm cool with it. As to regulation, if you've read any of my past posts you will see I'm very anti-state, in some circles even anarchist which I'm sure spins some folks out of control. However I also have a realist POV and know there will be some aspect of gov't regulation no matter what but this is where I see regulation a bit different than yourself and maybe D if he doesn't mind me throwing him in here, gently of course.</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/happy2.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":happy2:" title="Happy2 :happy2:" data-shortname=":happy2:" /></p><p> </p><p>You guys see regulation as keeping the snakeoil salesman at bay but do we still from time to time have snake oil salesman? Yeah we do sadly I might add. When they do appear, the hue and cry is for more regulation and maybe for a time all seems well and then they rear up again. In some cases, there are those who claim the regs. were relaxed and thus they came back but if one does some honest research that is not always true. The point is, there are always snakeoil salesman. Why? Because snake oil salesman are dishonest to begin with and profit best in a protected market. They are able to do so because of several factors. One and this is something we see quite often, they prosper because they control the legislative process that sets the regulations via lobbyist and other manipulative means. </p><p> </p><p>I believe you once said something about working or doing something with a PAC which is a lobbying group and I'm not very high on that process but it is what it is IMO. Anyway, as they control the legislative process, they also in turn control the market access and by controlling market access (no free market in that case) they limit competition and they are more prone to take advantage and abuse the customer of their product or service. To make the point about lobbyist even further and how business abuses that process, Star Parker in a recent TownHall piece made the following point concerning the Bush years:</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2008/01/14/how_republicans_can_help_elect_a_democrat" target="_blank">http://www.townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2008/01/14/how_republicans_can_help_elect_a_democrat</a></p><p> </p><p>When you compare the growth of lobbyist and the growth of gov't and then consider the numbers of events like the Enron's, etc. that you point out and then go through the gov't records that few people do to being with, you will clearly see the connections. I use to have similar beliefs in many ways as folks like Brett, Big Arrow and to some extent a bit like yourself which falls in line with some of the things Newt Gingrich proposes as contary to myth Newt also believes in a regulated market but maybe not like you normally think. He believes in taking markets created by gov't like say social security or even healthcare, privatizing them through gov't contract and then passing legislation that by law all must take part in. In other words, he sets the monopoly for a private concern and then further pushes the monopoly by mandating with law that you must take part of face some form of sanction or penalty. For lack of better words, liberals if you will do the same thing it's just they create the monopoly, mandate the participation and then keep it all for gov't and then further the process by making it a jobs program and hiring people into gov't. Ever heard the old saying "gov't solves nothing!" They can't because the job cuts and layoff would kill the economy. You want to know why gov't is growing even under republicans? Sure they are greedy for power just like the democrats but they can't stop the train because the private job market isn't strong enough to maintain the low level of unemployment that we have. You might say even unemployment is a false created market.</p><p> </p><p>I know you believe the republicans are some aspect of free markets and the truth is they are far from it. All aspects of the economy from how much money is in it (Federal Reserve) how much are interest rates and what is the rate of inflation (Federal Reserve again) how much money stays out moving in the private sector (income taxation) and how far private wealth will build (income tax again) what a person's job is worth (minimum wage and other aspects of job regulation from OSHA to Labor Dept.) and then you have other economic policies that can effect everything from the price of oil to even the price of food as gov't doles out farm subsidies even for that. Even oil get fed. subsidies as this is a tax market for them in the way of fuel and oil excise taxes. Those markets get harmed and Uncle Sam feels it in the wallet! We don't have solar and wind cars because there is no means to drive an excise tax from it. They want a hydrogen economy because they can centralize and regulate the distribution and drive tax revenues from it to replace the ones they now get from oil. Why do you think we still don't have high mileage vehicles in the American market? Lightbulb going off yet anyone?</p><p> </p><p>So you see it's not about having or not having a free market, it's about who sits in the chair of power to regulate it all and to how far and who on the private side will benefit. Look atthe corp. money that use to go heavily to repubs. now going to democrats. You think that's because their anti-Iraq and anti-Patriot Act? They read tea leaves and they want in position to be able to control the process if the ball goes the other way!</p><p> </p><p>OK, in my utopian world that ain't gonna happen so don't freak out, there is no dept. of commerce, labor, OSHA, EPA, just pick one. All gone. Will it make things worse? My guess is yeah it will, maybe even much worse but then it will get better. Why? Because the monopoly standing that many large corporations have will fail because there is no law prohibiting the little guy from come up. Also the major national and international corp. use a central gov't as a cost effective tool to limit competition and with that gone they would now have to deal with 50 states or better yet, 1000's of local gov't and the cost to trump that market would be enormous. Would there be pockets of it? Sure. Would there be snakeoil salesman? Yeah but we have that now but the net effect would be that people instead of relying on gov't to watch out for them and still get taken would at the least start wiseing up themselves and less and less would get taken over time. Now for the snakeoil man to be legit, all he has to do is get a piece of paper saying US Gov't approved and we lemming fall in line and buy their stuff and never once question or ask to see proof the product works. In my world, people would have to say "Show Me" and most sankeoil men hate those words so much they would seem to be far removed. </p><p> </p><p>Also local business in most respects would return to locals trading with locals and when I know where you live and you know where I live, there seems a lot more civility in those cases. Outsiders or carpetbaggers as we in the south call em' tend to get run out of town on a rail if they come in with snakeoil. </p><p> </p><p>EZ, I think we both want the exact same thing but just see a different route on getting there. For the last 100 plus years the federal gov't has regulated more and more of our lives and what have we got for it? Our lives get worse and worse. We hear the cry that just a bit more gov't will fix the problem but down that road we go only a few years later to see the same results and the same cry of even more gov't. How far it too far? And to borrow a line from the democrats, "and the rich just get richer" in that system and now with gov't sudsidation, they are going global and exporting this crap called market domination! We're to stupid to realize we ain't winning nothing and that the debt having gone from $5 trillion to $9 plus trillion under Bush is a weight about the crush our own head and kill us if we don't wake up. All done via a gov't regulated economy and completely legal. I never said moral however.<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/happy2.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":happy2:" title="Happy2 :happy2:" data-shortname=":happy2:" /></p><p> </p><p>We will in all probabilty go down your regulatory road for the coming years as we have been conditioned for such. We are like Pavlov's dogs in that respect and they know it. But a new awaking at least among the youth who are a crossbreed of traditional liberal and conservative alike. They are starting to understand the relationship of big, overbearing and empirical gov't of both parties and want nothing of that from either one. They are forging alliances of small limited federal gov't that is non-interventionalist (not isolationist as there is a big difference) and is also not compulsary or in other words, it's voluntary and moving what was once at the federal level down to the state and local level where they can watch closer and react quicker to make changes when things begin to not work. Even with my avid anti-state beliefs, I could easily and happily live in that world as a local community should have the right to ban abortions or even guns from their mist without any federal say so whatsoever. Can we only survive to get there?</p><p> </p><p>That's where I'm at in all of this!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 295310, member: 2189"] I figured about as much in regards to you being a liberal. Even if you were I'm cool with it. As to regulation, if you've read any of my past posts you will see I'm very anti-state, in some circles even anarchist which I'm sure spins some folks out of control. However I also have a realist POV and know there will be some aspect of gov't regulation no matter what but this is where I see regulation a bit different than yourself and maybe D if he doesn't mind me throwing him in here, gently of course. :happy2: You guys see regulation as keeping the snakeoil salesman at bay but do we still from time to time have snake oil salesman? Yeah we do sadly I might add. When they do appear, the hue and cry is for more regulation and maybe for a time all seems well and then they rear up again. In some cases, there are those who claim the regs. were relaxed and thus they came back but if one does some honest research that is not always true. The point is, there are always snakeoil salesman. Why? Because snake oil salesman are dishonest to begin with and profit best in a protected market. They are able to do so because of several factors. One and this is something we see quite often, they prosper because they control the legislative process that sets the regulations via lobbyist and other manipulative means. I believe you once said something about working or doing something with a PAC which is a lobbying group and I'm not very high on that process but it is what it is IMO. Anyway, as they control the legislative process, they also in turn control the market access and by controlling market access (no free market in that case) they limit competition and they are more prone to take advantage and abuse the customer of their product or service. To make the point about lobbyist even further and how business abuses that process, Star Parker in a recent TownHall piece made the following point concerning the Bush years: [URL]http://www.townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2008/01/14/how_republicans_can_help_elect_a_democrat[/URL] When you compare the growth of lobbyist and the growth of gov't and then consider the numbers of events like the Enron's, etc. that you point out and then go through the gov't records that few people do to being with, you will clearly see the connections. I use to have similar beliefs in many ways as folks like Brett, Big Arrow and to some extent a bit like yourself which falls in line with some of the things Newt Gingrich proposes as contary to myth Newt also believes in a regulated market but maybe not like you normally think. He believes in taking markets created by gov't like say social security or even healthcare, privatizing them through gov't contract and then passing legislation that by law all must take part in. In other words, he sets the monopoly for a private concern and then further pushes the monopoly by mandating with law that you must take part of face some form of sanction or penalty. For lack of better words, liberals if you will do the same thing it's just they create the monopoly, mandate the participation and then keep it all for gov't and then further the process by making it a jobs program and hiring people into gov't. Ever heard the old saying "gov't solves nothing!" They can't because the job cuts and layoff would kill the economy. You want to know why gov't is growing even under republicans? Sure they are greedy for power just like the democrats but they can't stop the train because the private job market isn't strong enough to maintain the low level of unemployment that we have. You might say even unemployment is a false created market. I know you believe the republicans are some aspect of free markets and the truth is they are far from it. All aspects of the economy from how much money is in it (Federal Reserve) how much are interest rates and what is the rate of inflation (Federal Reserve again) how much money stays out moving in the private sector (income taxation) and how far private wealth will build (income tax again) what a person's job is worth (minimum wage and other aspects of job regulation from OSHA to Labor Dept.) and then you have other economic policies that can effect everything from the price of oil to even the price of food as gov't doles out farm subsidies even for that. Even oil get fed. subsidies as this is a tax market for them in the way of fuel and oil excise taxes. Those markets get harmed and Uncle Sam feels it in the wallet! We don't have solar and wind cars because there is no means to drive an excise tax from it. They want a hydrogen economy because they can centralize and regulate the distribution and drive tax revenues from it to replace the ones they now get from oil. Why do you think we still don't have high mileage vehicles in the American market? Lightbulb going off yet anyone? So you see it's not about having or not having a free market, it's about who sits in the chair of power to regulate it all and to how far and who on the private side will benefit. Look atthe corp. money that use to go heavily to repubs. now going to democrats. You think that's because their anti-Iraq and anti-Patriot Act? They read tea leaves and they want in position to be able to control the process if the ball goes the other way! OK, in my utopian world that ain't gonna happen so don't freak out, there is no dept. of commerce, labor, OSHA, EPA, just pick one. All gone. Will it make things worse? My guess is yeah it will, maybe even much worse but then it will get better. Why? Because the monopoly standing that many large corporations have will fail because there is no law prohibiting the little guy from come up. Also the major national and international corp. use a central gov't as a cost effective tool to limit competition and with that gone they would now have to deal with 50 states or better yet, 1000's of local gov't and the cost to trump that market would be enormous. Would there be pockets of it? Sure. Would there be snakeoil salesman? Yeah but we have that now but the net effect would be that people instead of relying on gov't to watch out for them and still get taken would at the least start wiseing up themselves and less and less would get taken over time. Now for the snakeoil man to be legit, all he has to do is get a piece of paper saying US Gov't approved and we lemming fall in line and buy their stuff and never once question or ask to see proof the product works. In my world, people would have to say "Show Me" and most sankeoil men hate those words so much they would seem to be far removed. Also local business in most respects would return to locals trading with locals and when I know where you live and you know where I live, there seems a lot more civility in those cases. Outsiders or carpetbaggers as we in the south call em' tend to get run out of town on a rail if they come in with snakeoil. EZ, I think we both want the exact same thing but just see a different route on getting there. For the last 100 plus years the federal gov't has regulated more and more of our lives and what have we got for it? Our lives get worse and worse. We hear the cry that just a bit more gov't will fix the problem but down that road we go only a few years later to see the same results and the same cry of even more gov't. How far it too far? And to borrow a line from the democrats, "and the rich just get richer" in that system and now with gov't sudsidation, they are going global and exporting this crap called market domination! We're to stupid to realize we ain't winning nothing and that the debt having gone from $5 trillion to $9 plus trillion under Bush is a weight about the crush our own head and kill us if we don't wake up. All done via a gov't regulated economy and completely legal. I never said moral however.:happy2: We will in all probabilty go down your regulatory road for the coming years as we have been conditioned for such. We are like Pavlov's dogs in that respect and they know it. But a new awaking at least among the youth who are a crossbreed of traditional liberal and conservative alike. They are starting to understand the relationship of big, overbearing and empirical gov't of both parties and want nothing of that from either one. They are forging alliances of small limited federal gov't that is non-interventionalist (not isolationist as there is a big difference) and is also not compulsary or in other words, it's voluntary and moving what was once at the federal level down to the state and local level where they can watch closer and react quicker to make changes when things begin to not work. Even with my avid anti-state beliefs, I could easily and happily live in that world as a local community should have the right to ban abortions or even guns from their mist without any federal say so whatsoever. Can we only survive to get there? That's where I'm at in all of this! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Halliburton and Bechtel Are Nothing
Top