Does Murtha get a payoff from his Arab buddies if the USA pulls out of Iraq?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And Dick Cheney had deals with Saddam Hussein.
Big fucking deal. I’m sorry that I have to be the one to tell you this HH, but politicians are corrupt. They are out for themselves, and you are a fool to think any other way.
I realize that they are out for themselves. That’s why our Constitution was designed to prevent these people from abusing their elective power. With the advent of a mixed economy though, the increased power of the federal government draws corrupt and evil people into government.
This is a big reason I favor a very small innocuous government. If our federal government was about as exciting as a post office in a small town in Iowa (for ex), the crooks couldn’t use it to abuse us.
And the heroes couldn’t use it to protect us.
Read “Jennifer Government”, it’s a book about capitalism taken to the level you like to blab about. Pick it up.
The fact is, if government was small, big business would simply “replace” it. And the crooks their are equally as bad, if not worse.
Capitalists don’t have police/military power to enforce their will. However, in a mixed economy, they can buy influence with a politician and gain power to abuse us.
The best way to prevent capitalists, or anyone, from corrupting a government is to make it simply outside the government’s province to interfere in the individual and economic life. Keep the government small: Military, judiciary, police. No other functions allowed, or we’re simply opening a Pandora’s Box (which we have already of course).
Someday, this system must collapse of its own weight, like the Ming Empire. The country will dissolve into ‘robber gangs’ and warlords. The currency will become worthless first, then rule by force will be initiated. Then comes the complete chaos. Not a bright future…
[/quote]HH,I had a friend that co-oped with one of the wealthiest business owners in southern ohio,owns a few fortune 500 co.s etc… My friend used to tell us how he would call the govnr. and put him on hold waiting for my friends boss to talk with him when he was ready.Who had the power ,I would say Big Bussiness.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
And Dick Cheney had deals with Saddam Hussein.
Big fucking deal. I’m sorry that I have to be the one to tell you this HH, but politicians are corrupt. They are out for themselves, and you are a fool to think any other way.
I realize that they are out for themselves. That’s why our Constitution was designed to prevent these people from abusing their elective power. With the advent of a mixed economy though, the increased power of the federal government draws corrupt and evil people into government.
This is a big reason I favor a very small innocuous government. If our federal government was about as exciting as a post office in a small town in Iowa (for ex), the crooks couldn’t use it to abuse us.
And the heroes couldn’t use it to protect us.
Read “Jennifer Government”, it’s a book about capitalism taken to the level you like to blab about. Pick it up.
The fact is, if government was small, big business would simply “replace” it. And the crooks their are equally as bad, if not worse.
[/quote]
that book rocks.
in other breaking news, some politician, somewhere, did something, roughly 3 decades ago, and we all need to give it serious thought. Right now.
In other breaking news, Ronald Reagan is a racist monster that supported the South African Apartheid government. He should be impeached posthumously!
Do I sound like a moron yet? I really hope so.
[quote]orion wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, if government was small, big business would simply “replace” it. And the crooks their are equally as bad, if not worse.
I agree. Although they already have, to an extent, because of how powerful they are.
Big Business is NOT powerful.
If they cannot get a government to force you to do something (only possible with a big government) they cannot do shit.
Government is gun-to-your-head powerful.
Big Business is serve-you-or-perish not powerful.
To utter again and again that them big companies are all evil and have way too much power does not makle it so.[/quote]
Well, I don’t know about Austria. But Big Business is very powerful in AMERICA. Both parties cater to big business. Big Business provides massive amounts of funding and financing. They don’t ‘run’ the government like some conspriacy theorists think, but they do have a tremendous influence in getting bills get passed.
Even moreso in the exact drafting of bills. Politicans pay great attention to the interests of big business, and it factors into many aspects of what they do. If you’d worked for a United States Senator like I have, you’d realize this.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
orion wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, if government was small, big business would simply “replace” it. And the crooks their are equally as bad, if not worse.
I agree. Although they already have, to an extent, because of how powerful they are.
Big Business is NOT powerful.
If they cannot get a government to force you to do something (only possible with a big government) they cannot do shit.
Government is gun-to-your-head powerful.
Big Business is serve-you-or-perish not powerful.
To utter again and again that them big companies are all evil and have way too much power does not makle it so.
Well, I don’t know about Austria. But Big Business is very powerful in AMERICA. Both parties cater to big business. Big Business provides massive amounts of funding and financing. They don’t ‘run’ the government like some conspriacy theorists think, but they do have a tremendous influence in getting bills get passed.
Even moreso in the exact drafting of bills. Politicans pay great attention to the interests of big business, and it factors into many aspects of what they do. If you’d worked for a United States Senator like I have, you’d realize this.[/quote]
So they influence politicians, because those politicians ARE powerful because of Big Government.
Why would Big Business bother to buy politicians if they could do it on their own?
[quote]orion wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
orion wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, if government was small, big business would simply “replace” it. And the crooks their are equally as bad, if not worse.
I agree. Although they already have, to an extent, because of how powerful they are.
Big Business is NOT powerful.
If they cannot get a government to force you to do something (only possible with a big government) they cannot do shit.
Government is gun-to-your-head powerful.
Big Business is serve-you-or-perish not powerful.
To utter again and again that them big companies are all evil and have way too much power does not makle it so.
Well, I don’t know about Austria. But Big Business is very powerful in AMERICA. Both parties cater to big business. Big Business provides massive amounts of funding and financing. They don’t ‘run’ the government like some conspriacy theorists think, but they do have a tremendous influence in getting bills get passed.
Even moreso in the exact drafting of bills. Politicans pay great attention to the interests of big business, and it factors into many aspects of what they do. If you’d worked for a United States Senator like I have, you’d realize this.
So they influence politicians, because those politicians ARE powerful because of Big Government.
Why would Big Business bother to buy politicians if they could do it on their own?
[/quote]
So what? Whether they can do it on their own is irrelevant. The point is because they have great influence [money and power] they are very accomplished at getting laws passed that serve their interest. And politicians do [not always but often] subordinate the interests and well-being of other segments of society because of the disporporionate influence Big Business wields. Corporations are not lawmakers, but because of their power to have the government cater to them, as a practical matter, they’re often able to act as such. If we had a WEAKER government and less regulation, Big Business would be able to act more directly. As it is, they still do a pretty good job of getting their agenda through.
[quote]Ren wrote:
in other breaking news, some politician, somewhere, did something, roughly 3 decades ago, and we all need to give it serious thought. Right now.
In other breaking news, Ronald Reagan is a racist monster that supported the South African Apartheid government. He should be impeached posthumously!
Do I sound like a moron yet? I really hope so.[/quote]
Um…if he was willing to take a payoff years ago, might he be getting one to get us out of Iraq, and perhaps out of the Middle East? From his Arab buddies?
Let’s make an analogy, since you’ve made a good effort at being ‘slow’: would you hire a child molester for a day care center, if he was almost arrested/indicted (whatever) 20 or 30 years ago? No? Why not? Track record play any role here???
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
orion wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
orion wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
The fact is, if government was small, big business would simply “replace” it. And the crooks their are equally as bad, if not worse.
I agree. Although they already have, to an extent, because of how powerful they are.
Big Business is NOT powerful.
If they cannot get a government to force you to do something (only possible with a big government) they cannot do shit.
Government is gun-to-your-head powerful.
Big Business is serve-you-or-perish not powerful.
To utter again and again that them big companies are all evil and have way too much power does not makle it so.
Well, I don’t know about Austria. But Big Business is very powerful in AMERICA. Both parties cater to big business. Big Business provides massive amounts of funding and financing. They don’t ‘run’ the government like some conspriacy theorists think, but they do have a tremendous influence in getting bills get passed.
Even moreso in the exact drafting of bills. Politicans pay great attention to the interests of big business, and it factors into many aspects of what they do. If you’d worked for a United States Senator like I have, you’d realize this.
So they influence politicians, because those politicians ARE powerful because of Big Government.
Why would Big Business bother to buy politicians if they could do it on their own?
So what? Whether they can do it on their own is irrelevant. The point is because they have great influence [money and power] they are very accomplished at getting laws passed that serve their interest. And politicians do [not always but often] subordinate the interests and well-being of other segments of society because of the disporporionate influence Big Business wields. Corporations are not lawmakers, but because of their power to have the government cater to them, as a practical matter, they’re often able to act as such. If we had a WEAKER government and less regulation, Big Business would be able to act more directly. As it is, they still do a pretty good job of getting their agenda through.[/quote]
If Big Business is evil by nature, why do you propose to give them a big government (with military/police/courts) with which to enforce their will?
Wouldn’t it maybe be just a smidgen better to keep them (or anyone) from having such power?
A mixed economy is simply potting soil for Fascism. Since we have a mixed economy, we are doomed. Let’s hope after the collapse that humanity gets its ‘Third Chance’. The Founding Fathers tried giving us a second chance, but left the door open for letting government become part of the economy. Whoops, bad move boys!!
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
…
Let’s make an analogy, since you’ve made a good effort at being ‘slow’: would you hire a child molester for a day care center, if he was almost arrested/indicted (whatever) 20 or 30 years ago? No? Why not? Track record play any role here???
[/quote]
Only if he were an unindicted coconspirator.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
This is a big reason I favor a very small innocuous government.
[/quote]
Then why do you support President Bush?
Dustin
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
So what? Whether they can do it on their own is irrelevant. The point is because they have great influence [money and power] they are very accomplished at getting laws passed that serve their interest. And politicians do [not always but often] subordinate the interests and well-being of other segments of society because of the disporporionate influence Big Business wields. Corporations are not lawmakers, but because of their power to have the government cater to them, as a practical matter, they’re often able to act as such. If we had a WEAKER government and less regulation, Big Business would be able to act more directly. As it is, they still do a pretty good job of getting their agenda through.[/quote]
Well then explain to me what Big Business could possibly do to me without the aid of the government.
The point is, they have no legal way to force me to do anything.
What is Wal-Mart going to do?
Not sell me shitty sweaters?
You are right that in a mixed economy it allmost makes no difference, which is why people cry capitalism! when they mean government interference in favor of big companies which is neither capitalism, free trade or classic liberalism.
[quote]Dustin wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
This is a big reason I favor a very small innocuous government.
Then why do you support President Bush?
Dustin
[/quote]
Dustin,
You have to realize that it was always the dream of Republicans to have a Republican Congress with a Republican President. We could then pass the Contract With America, get term limits put in, a balanced budget amendment passed, and so on. Unfortunately, the Republicans and esp GWB decided that the best way to keep power was to act like…Democrats! Spend like crazy, never veto anything, get cozy with scumbuckets, and simply ignore WHY WE ELECTED THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!
I think that this last was the end for this country. We are so deeply in debt that the currency MUST become worthless eventually. When federal revenues won’t even pay the interest on the national debt (has it hit there yet?), that’ll mark the end. Collapse, military takeover, then further breakdown into warring regions with warlords. (Laugh if you will but its happened in China several times.)
Bush, the Republicans, the Democrats, will all simply be flushed down the sewer of history. What a waste of a great country…
[quote]Dustin wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
This is a big reason I favor a very small innocuous government.
Then why do you support President Bush?
Dustin
[/quote]
I’m considered to be quite a conservative Republican and my opinion is that GW is NO true conservative. He may be more conservative than any Dem running for office but Bush in not conservative.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Dustin wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
This is a big reason I favor a very small innocuous government.
Then why do you support President Bush?
Dustin
Dustin,
You have to realize that it was always the dream of Republicans to have a Republican Congress with a Republican President. We could then pass the Contract With America, get term limits put in, a balanced budget amendment passed, and so on. Unfortunately, the Republicans and esp GWB decided that the best way to keep power was to act like…Democrats! Spend like crazy, never veto anything, get cozy with scumbuckets, and simply ignore WHY WE ELECTED THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!
I think that this last was the end for this country. We are so deeply in debt that the currency MUST become worthless eventually. When federal revenues won’t even pay the interest on the national debt (has it hit there yet?), that’ll mark the end. Collapse, military takeover, then further breakdown into warring regions with warlords. (Laugh if you will but its happened in China several times.)
Bush, the Republicans, the Democrats, will all simply be flushed down the sewer of history. What a waste of a great country…
[/quote]
I disagree with the warlords bit.
The US military as a social institution is popular and strong enough to hold the country together.
Looks more like a temporary military coup to me, like Pinochet`s.
Here’s my point:
HH, if the government is tiny, whats to stop the capitalists from creating their own private [secret] armies? You say they have no power, but in a world where their is no government, they would simply replace it. Their wouldn’t be a government to take advantage of, they’d simply do bad shit directly.
I happen to support big biz. I don’t think corporations are evil ect…
But still, absolute power corrupts absolutely. In ALL cases. There are those in biz who are just as evil as those in government. Remember Enron? If Halliburton didn’t have Cheney pushing their will, they’d just do it directly.
[quote]derek wrote:
I’m considered to be quite a conservative Republican and my opinion is that GW is NO true conservative. He may be more conservative than any Dem running for office but Bush in not conservative.
[/quote]
I agree in that Bush is no conservative and probably never was to begin with.
I’m not sure that any true conservatives exist in politics today. There are few exceptions I suppose, but they are usually ignored, by and large. Pat Buchanan is on that comes to mind.
Dustin
[quote]Dustin wrote:
derek wrote:
I’m considered to be quite a conservative Republican and my opinion is that GW is NO true conservative. He may be more conservative than any Dem running for office but Bush in not conservative.
I agree in that Bush is no conservative and probably never was to begin with.
I’m not sure that any true conservatives exist in politics today. There are few exceptions I suppose, but they are usually ignored, by and large. Pat Buchanan is on that comes to mind.
Dustin[/quote]
Agreed.
It seems to me that the minute someone in these forums or anywhere else for that matter realizes I’m a conservative Republican, they automatically consider me a Bush “bootlicker” (actually been called that here!).
True conservatism has been gone a long time now. Whenever a hint of it sneaks out, good stuff happens.
The problem in America is that domestically and abroad, people link Bush with true conservatism and that just isn’t the case.
Bush does a very poor job representing the conservative nature of this country. It’s just that he’s doing a much better job than Kerry would have (or Gore, or Hillary or any Democrat since I don’t know who.)
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Here’s my point:
HH, if the government is tiny, whats to stop the capitalists from creating their own private [secret] armies? You say they have no power, but in a world where their is no government, they would simply replace it. Their wouldn’t be a government to take advantage of, they’d simply do bad shit directly.
I happen to support big biz. I don’t think corporations are evil ect…
But still, absolute power corrupts absolutely. In ALL cases. There are those in biz who are just as evil as those in government. Remember Enron? If Halliburton didn’t have Cheney pushing their will, they’d just do it directly.[/quote]
The ideal system would be one where NO ONE has the power to dominate others (except see below). A clearly mandated government that has the 3 functions named above would prevent any of what you point out.
I’m not advocating anarchy, btw. I like a government that has a monopoly on the use of force, but only against those who initiate its use. A private army would simply be illegal.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Here’s my point:
HH, if the government is tiny, whats to stop the capitalists from creating their own private [secret] armies? You say they have no power, but in a world where their is no government, they would simply replace it. Their wouldn’t be a government to take advantage of, they’d simply do bad shit directly.
I happen to support big biz. I don’t think corporations are evil ect…
But still, absolute power corrupts absolutely. In ALL cases. There are those in biz who are just as evil as those in government. Remember Enron? If Halliburton didn’t have Cheney pushing their will, they’d just do it directly.
The ideal system would be one where NO ONE has the power to dominate others (except see below). A clearly mandated government that has the 3 functions named above would prevent any of what you point out.
I’m not advocating anarchy, btw. I like a government that has a monopoly on the use of force, but only against those who initiate its use. A private army would simply be illegal.
[/quote]
Your speaking like an idealist.
I, personally, believe the ideal system would be a small, but very powerful government, with absolutely no corruption. Possible? Nope.
Realistically, a strong but limited government is needed to help those who do not have the means to help themselves. It’s nice to think that things like affirmative action and social security aren’t necessary, but the truth is they damn well are! They may not be very good systems, but the ideas they uphold are damn necessary.
I am not a libertarian, but I DO understand where the libertarians are coming from. I like a lot of it. I believe in social liberalism, freedom of speech, and choice.
I also believe in capitalism. I love capitalism. I think communism is ultimately doomed to failure. But I think capitalism needs a socialist splash every once and awhile to keep the social Darwinism at bay.
Without a powerful enough government, whats to stop the old trusts from being recreated? In this day and age, it is unlikely, but possible. Microsoft is dominant not because it has influence in the government, but because the government just sits on its ass and twiddles its thumbs.
What’s to stop business owners from using very unscrupulous practices to eliminate competition? What’s to stop business owners from heavily influencing voting through threats in the workplace?