Can Any Rightwinger Give Me A Solid Argument Why Private Industry Instead Of Government Should Run..

[Billy000]

Ok here is not what you aren't getting. Both private industry and government have scandalous problems. If the VA was privately funded, what is to stop those at the top exploiting their patients for profit? [You mean, other than the law?] What would stop them from denying expensive treatment for chronic illnesses for the sake of saving money? [You mean, other than the law?] Have you not heard of the word greed before? Evil breeds more in private industry than in government.

What is your basis for this? Greed is greed, it's found in government or private sector. Law breakers need to be punished, we need to vigorously enforce the laws against the graft and corruption you are claiming. But capitalism doesn't operate on greed. In fact, greed is the antithesis of capitalism. Now think about this... every capitalist has as their objective to capitalize on something and make a profit. If they are too greedy in the amount of profit they want to make, another capitalist will come along who is less greedy and put them out of business. So the capitalist walks a very tight line between being too greedy and making as much profit as possible.

The VA just needs reforms with the right people at its leadership.

After the failures of GM, should we let government take a who at running the company? No. Of course not.

When it comes to basic human services, they must be run by the government with the right people involved.

Well the government DOES run the VA, it's a government entity. So I'm not sure what you mean here. We're debating whether our health care system should be turned over to the government or remain in the hands of the private sector for the most part. We already have several government health care assets, the VA being one of those. We also have Medicaid and Medicare and all kinds of government run health clinics, hospitals, etc. Every state has at least one state hospital.

Government doesn't do anything more efficiently than private sector capitalists. Your hooting and hollering about the possibility someone might break the law and be corrupt is priceless... as if to honestly claim that you believe a government run system would have none of this. You have this naive trust in the government that is almost infantile.

Lol how does a less greedy person put a greedy person out of business? What the fuck? As long as a super greedy person has a profitable market, it doesn't make a piss difference how greedy they are. Here are some actual statistics for you: 1% of the top earners in this country own 40% of the nation's wealth. People continue to buy their products regardless. I suppose your point is that another business will come along and be more fair to these veterans. What sort of transition will happen? More than likely those veterans would be under some sort of contract. How much more fair is this new company? For how long would it remain fair? Wouldn't it be easier to just let a government agency with strict laws oversee it? Corporations just do whatever the fuck they want. A gov agency has a set of rules where no one is making gross profit. Sure that didn't stop the VA scandal, but at least there were still limitations on how these corrupt individuals operate. What needs to be done now about the VA is make reforms. Fire those involved in the scandal and make new LAWS that will protect veterans from further exploitation. It's that simple.

I don't understand your logic behind privatising the VA becaus it was run by government. Again your logic would apply to giving government a shot at running GM because private industry can't handle it. You see how that works? Like I said, just make reforms in the VA. Privatising it will inevitably lead to more corruption. Why wouldn't it?

You know what corrupts gov the most? Powerful lobbyists.

 

[dblack]

But no matter what you do, government is going to have that power, the universe where we don't have governments like that is far away from our own. The best we can do is make laws that it's illegal for government officials to use their positions to pick winners or losers, or give 'special favors' to. It's kind of something built-in to what politics and government is. Money, power, influence.

You seem to really want to disagree with me for some reason, but it's not clear why. Why in the world wouldn't we want to push for laws (or better yet, constitutional provisions) limiting the government's power to intervene in our economic decisions? Are you advocating for complacency?

I mean, look... I am all for a system where the guy with the most weed and coconuts gets to decide what we're all going to do. We can discuss all kinds of ideas for how we plan to run our new laissez faire society, or we can join the real world and understand that we actually live in a society where government has influence over our lives. Like it or not, we have to grow up and accept this, and deal with what we can do as a society to ensure peaceful cohabitation.

???

 

[The Rabbi]

Billy, you're the biggest moron on this board.
When private companies screw up, they go out of business. Unless they are heavily invested with unions, in which case the Obama Administration gives the company to the union and props it up with government cash.
But generally private business has no incentive to cheat because the penalties for doing so are enormous. The customers can fire them by going elsewhere.
Where are dissatisfied veterans going to go?
Government is not responsive because government has clients, business has customers.

Your ignorance astounds me. Businesses evade legal punishment for serious crimes all the fucking time with pathetic fines they pay instead. How? Money talks.

Oh and guess what assclown? Self regulation is a myth. Corporations screw over the public without it even realizing. Don't you think those long ingredients you are too stupid to pronounce in your processed foods have health consequences?

Seriously? That's your response?
smh.

Yeah as usual you have no argument. Why do you bother? You never win.

There's no winning against someone with such poor skills and knowledge base. You generalize based on nothing but your own opinion and then move the goalposts when proven wrong.
Companies go out of business all the time due to mistakes, lawsuits and the like.
When was the last time a corrupt government agency went out of business? Typically they get more money.

I can't believe you cons are so naive. Corporations actively try to deceive consumers for the sake of profit. Why are you so convinced these "job creators" aren't corrupt? Cigarettes kill countless millions every year from their products. They actively fight to limit the health warning regulations on their products. Where's your outrage there?

See, this is what I'm talking about. Lots of allegations, little substance.
What deception has Apple engaged in? What has Sprint lied about that anywhere comes close to "If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan"? THere arent any.
And if corporations dont create jobs, just who do you think does?
How effective have health warnings been on cigarettes? Anyone who doesnt know cigarettes are harmful, and hasnt for the last 50 years, is a dolt. No wonder they fight it.

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't understand your logic behind privatising the VA becaus it was run by government. Again your logic would apply to giving government a shot at running GM because private industry can't handle it. You see how that works? Like I said, just make reforms in the VA. Privatising it will inevitably lead to more corruption. Why wouldn't it?

.

How is that remotely logical??
btw, why is it greed to want to keep more of the money you made, but its not greed to demand someone else's money in taxation?

 

[Billy000]

Your ignorance astounds me. Businesses evade legal punishment for serious crimes all the fucking time with pathetic fines they pay instead. How? Money talks.

Oh and guess what assclown? Self regulation is a myth. Corporations screw over the public without it even realizing. Don't you think those long ingredients you are too stupid to pronounce in your processed foods have health consequences?

Seriously? That's your response?
smh.

Yeah as usual you have no argument. Why do you bother? You never win.

There's no winning against someone with such poor skills and knowledge base. You generalize based on nothing but your own opinion and then move the goalposts when proven wrong.
Companies go out of business all the time due to mistakes, lawsuits and the like.
When was the last time a corrupt government agency went out of business? Typically they get more money.

I can't believe you cons are so naive. Corporations actively try to deceive consumers for the sake of profit. Why are you so convinced these "job creators" aren't corrupt? Cigarettes kill countless millions every year from their products. They actively fight to limit the health warning regulations on their products. Where's your outrage there?

See, this is what I'm talking about. Lots of allegations, little substance.
What deception has Apple engaged in? What has Sprint lied about that anywhere comes close to "If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan"? THere arent any.
And if corporations dont create jobs, just who do you think does?
How effective have health warnings been on cigarettes? Anyone who doesnt know cigarettes are harmful, and hasnt for the last 50 years, is a dolt. No wonder they fight it.

How can you be this dumb? I didn't say they didn't create jobs. I am implying they are bad at doing it especially given their ridiculous profit.

Apple profits off of poor work conditions in China. You think they're so great than go work there.

 

[The Rabbi]

Seriously? That's your response?
smh.

Yeah as usual you have no argument. Why do you bother? You never win.

There's no winning against someone with such poor skills and knowledge base. You generalize based on nothing but your own opinion and then move the goalposts when proven wrong.
Companies go out of business all the time due to mistakes, lawsuits and the like.
When was the last time a corrupt government agency went out of business? Typically they get more money.

I can't believe you cons are so naive. Corporations actively try to deceive consumers for the sake of profit. Why are you so convinced these "job creators" aren't corrupt? Cigarettes kill countless millions every year from their products. They actively fight to limit the health warning regulations on their products. Where's your outrage there?

See, this is what I'm talking about. Lots of allegations, little substance.
What deception has Apple engaged in? What has Sprint lied about that anywhere comes close to "If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan"? THere arent any.
And if corporations dont create jobs, just who do you think does?
How effective have health warnings been on cigarettes? Anyone who doesnt know cigarettes are harmful, and hasnt for the last 50 years, is a dolt. No wonder they fight it.

How can you be this dumb? I didn't say they didn't create jobs. I am implying they are bad at doing it especially given their ridiculous profit.

Apple profits off of poor work conditions in China. You think they're so great than go work there.

Move the goalposts, deflect.
THis is why you are chief apeshit of this board.
Tell me what lie any corporation has told that comes remotely close to "If you like your private health insruance, you can keep it, period."

 

[georgephillip]

Some societies drown female infants.
The biggest burden facing the US and Greece, for example, is the greed of their richest citizens:
"Life in Greece has been turned on its head since the debt crisis took hold. But in few areas has the change been more striking than in health care.

"Until recently, Greece had a typical European health system, with employers and individuals contributing to a fund that with government assistance financed universal care.

"People who lost their jobs still received unlimited benefits.

"That changed in July 2011, when Greece signed a loan agreement with international lenders to ward off financial collapse.

"Now, as stipulated in the deal, Greeks who lose their jobs receive benefits for a maximum of a year. After that, if they are unable to foot the bill, they are on their own, paying all costs out of pocket."

While the rich get richer.

Health care insurance lessons from Greece - PNHP s Official Blog

Yeah dude. That's what I've been talking about. Socialism works until you run out of other people's money to spend. Greece setup their own disasters.

Now, I get it... you leftists never want to accept that your system fails, and instead you need to find someone to blame. So of course, it's not the fact socialism fails that caused this.... no it's "poor get poorer and rich get richer", it's the typical universal class warfare argument from the left.

If you really believe that the problem wasn't the system, but rather this loan deal, then why not just refuse to accept the loans??

"Because their would be fiscal crash and the economy would be ruined, and Greece would have collasped!"

Right, but how did they get into that position?

Because they engaged in socialism, and ran out of other people's money to spend.

Your system doesn't work. Greece is proof.

Greece proves Wall Street turns everything it touches into shit. It's a textbook case for how bankers, bondholders, speculators, and politicians can offload the cost of bad assets onto the shoulders of the non-rich, crushing their medical system and their society for the benefit of a few rich parasites.

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Wall Street had everything to do with the previous Greek government's secret debts and the 2008 global debt crisis. Despite the fact that thirty years of neoliberalism resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, bankers and their useful idiots continue to push austerity and privatization as solutions to a problem they created and continue to profit from.

What solution do you propose for the problem of being too far in debt other than spending less?

End the Long War in the Middle East and begin the Conflict on Carbon at home by taxing the rich into extinction.

 

[georgephillip]

Greece proves Wall Street turns everything it touches into shit. It's a textbook case for how bankers, bondholders, speculators, and politicians can offload the cost of bad assets onto the shoulders of the non-rich, crushing their medical system and their society for the benefit of a few rich parasites.

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Greece's citizens looking to and allowing their government to supply and take care of more of their needs, over the individual taking on that responsibility themselves, is why that nation's economy is in such bad shape.

How is an individual citizen any freer when she turns to a private corporation for her needs instead of government?

A little more than a century ago, when Americans began leaving the farms to work in cities they were told they were sacrificing their independence by working for wages instead of growing and harvesting their own food.

Maybe we're at a similar point today regarding wages and entitlements?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wrong. CU v. FEC didn't level any playing field, you are parroting Limbaugh or other talking heads and thus expose your ignorance.

See:

Political action committee - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I'm not parroting anyone. What does a wiki link to PACs have to do with Citizen's United? [READ THE LINK, or Remain Ignorant!] I never said Citizen's leveled any playing field, the field was already leveled by the 1st Amendment, the SCOTUS simply reaffirmed that it would remain level. Freedom of political speech is an inalienable right endowed to the people and can't be stripped away because they belong to a group, which is what a corporation represents.

Corporations are not people, notwithstanding Mr. Romney's belief. Corporations are amoral, though some act with a moral certitude, others seek to profit and have business models which take into consideration the risks, and then decide some harm is better for the bottom line.

Neither is the AFL/CIO, yet I'm sure you see nothing wrong with them throwing billions into the ring of politics. You want to eliminate corporations from having a say, that won't happen without the likewise removal of unions from the political arena.

The key thing is to revoke government's power to grant special favors to any of these groups. The reason they spend so much money to influence politics is because they get something for their money. If they didn't, they wouldn't.

There are a lot of special interests trying to influence Washington, that IS the problem. You have oil companies as well as "green" projects like solar. As well as government bureaucrats in DC manipulating regulations in order to try and bankrupt fossil fuel energy producers to appease environmentalist special interests. If we eliminate all these special interest's financial influences in election campaigns, as well as keeping lobbyists out of Congress, we would all be better off as a nation. This is why we need to limit government power to those granted to them under our Constitution.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'm not parroting anyone. What does a wiki link to PACs have to do with Citizen's United? [READ THE LINK, or Remain Ignorant!] I never said Citizen's leveled any playing field, the field was already leveled by the 1st Amendment, the SCOTUS simply reaffirmed that it would remain level. Freedom of political speech is an inalienable right endowed to the people and can't be stripped away because they belong to a group, which is what a corporation represents.

Corporations are not people, notwithstanding Mr. Romney's belief. Corporations are amoral, though some act with a moral certitude, others seek to profit and have business models which take into consideration the risks, and then decide some harm is better for the bottom line.

Neither is the AFL/CIO, yet I'm sure you see nothing wrong with them throwing billions into the ring of politics. You want to eliminate corporations from having a say, that won't happen without the likewise removal of unions from the political arena.

The key thing is to revoke government's power to grant special favors to any of these groups. The reason they spend so much money to influence politics is because they get something for their money. If they didn't, they wouldn't.

There are a lot of special interests trying to influence Washington, that IS the problem. You have oil companies as well as "green" projects like solar. As well as government bureaucrats in DC manipulating regulations in order to try and bankrupt fossil fuel energy producers to appease environmentalist special interests. If we eliminate all these special interest's financial influences in election campaigns, as well as keeping lobbyists out of Congress, we would all be better off as a nation. This is why we need to limit government power to those granted to them under our Constitution.

There are many 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officals for their own financial betterment; as well as 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officials for the greater good to the greatest number of our citizens.

It doesn't take a genius to understand which is self serving and which is not. Sadly, five members of the Supreme Court are of the opinion that corporations have the same rights and needs as human beings, an absurd conclusion which anyone thinking, unbiased and rational person understands.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Corporations are not people, notwithstanding Mr. Romney's belief. Corporations are amoral, though some act with a moral certitude, others seek to profit and have business models which take into consideration the risks, and then decide some harm is better for the bottom line.

Neither is the AFL/CIO, yet I'm sure you see nothing wrong with them throwing billions into the ring of politics. You want to eliminate corporations from having a say, that won't happen without the likewise removal of unions from the political arena.

The key thing is to revoke government's power to grant special favors to any of these groups. The reason they spend so much money to influence politics is because they get something for their money. If they didn't, they wouldn't.

There are a lot of special interests trying to influence Washington, that IS the problem. You have oil companies as well as "green" projects like solar. As well as government bureaucrats in DC manipulating regulations in order to try and bankrupt fossil fuel energy producers to appease environmentalist special interests. If we eliminate all these special interest's financial influences in election campaigns, as well as keeping lobbyists out of Congress, we would all be better off as a nation. This is why we need to limit government power to those granted to them under our Constitution.

There are many 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officals for their own financial betterment; as well as 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officials for the greater good to the greatest number of our citizens.

It doesn't take a genius to understand which is self serving and which is not. Sadly, five members of the Supreme Court are of the opinion that corporations have the same rights and needs as human beings, an absurd conclusion which any thinking, unbiased and rational person understands.

 

[The Rabbi]

Corporations are not people, notwithstanding Mr. Romney's belief. Corporations are amoral, though some act with a moral certitude, others seek to profit and have business models which take into consideration the risks, and then decide some harm is better for the bottom line.

Neither is the AFL/CIO, yet I'm sure you see nothing wrong with them throwing billions into the ring of politics. You want to eliminate corporations from having a say, that won't happen without the likewise removal of unions from the political arena.

The key thing is to revoke government's power to grant special favors to any of these groups. The reason they spend so much money to influence politics is because they get something for their money. If they didn't, they wouldn't.

There are a lot of special interests trying to influence Washington, that IS the problem. You have oil companies as well as "green" projects like solar. As well as government bureaucrats in DC manipulating regulations in order to try and bankrupt fossil fuel energy producers to appease environmentalist special interests. If we eliminate all these special interest's financial influences in election campaigns, as well as keeping lobbyists out of Congress, we would all be better off as a nation. This is why we need to limit government power to those granted to them under our Constitution.

There are many 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officals for their own financial betterment; as well as 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officials for the greater good to the greatest number of our citizens.

It doesn't take a genius to understand which is self serving and which is not. Sadly, five members of the Supreme Court are of the opinion that corporations have the same rights and needs as human beings, an absurd conclusion which anyone thinking, unbiased and rational person understands.

That you actually believe this is disturbing.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Corporations are not people, notwithstanding Mr. Romney's belief. Corporations are amoral, though some act with a moral certitude, others seek to profit and have business models which take into consideration the risks, and then decide some harm is better for the bottom line.

Neither is the AFL/CIO, yet I'm sure you see nothing wrong with them throwing billions into the ring of politics. You want to eliminate corporations from having a say, that won't happen without the likewise removal of unions from the political arena.

The key thing is to revoke government's power to grant special favors to any of these groups. The reason they spend so much money to influence politics is because they get something for their money. If they didn't, they wouldn't.

There are a lot of special interests trying to influence Washington, that IS the problem. You have oil companies as well as "green" projects like solar. As well as government bureaucrats in DC manipulating regulations in order to try and bankrupt fossil fuel energy producers to appease environmentalist special interests. If we eliminate all these special interest's financial influences in election campaigns, as well as keeping lobbyists out of Congress, we would all be better off as a nation. This is why we need to limit government power to those granted to them under our Constitution.

There are many 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officals for their own financial betterment; as well as 'special interests' who lobby and bribe public officials for the greater good to the greatest number of our citizens.

It doesn't take a genius to understand which is self serving and which is not. Sadly, five members of the Supreme Court are of the opinion that corporations have the same rights and needs as human beings, an absurd conclusion which anyone thinking, unbiased and rational person understands.

Again, the rights of owners associated with corporations are the same as those of AFL/CIO unions throwing billions of dollars to influence politicians and election results. If one side has a voice then so does the other, it's not too hard to see that reasoning behind that decision. If you want to eliminate corporations from having a voice, then unions likewise must be forbidden from contributing to elections as well - the same sword cuts both ways.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Some societies drown female infants.
The biggest burden facing the US and Greece, for example, is the greed of their richest citizens:
"Life in Greece has been turned on its head since the debt crisis took hold. But in few areas has the change been more striking than in health care.

"Until recently, Greece had a typical European health system, with employers and individuals contributing to a fund that with government assistance financed universal care.

"People who lost their jobs still received unlimited benefits.

"That changed in July 2011, when Greece signed a loan agreement with international lenders to ward off financial collapse.

"Now, as stipulated in the deal, Greeks who lose their jobs receive benefits for a maximum of a year. After that, if they are unable to foot the bill, they are on their own, paying all costs out of pocket."

While the rich get richer.

Health care insurance lessons from Greece - PNHP s Official Blog

Yeah dude. That's what I've been talking about. Socialism works until you run out of other people's money to spend. Greece setup their own disasters.

Now, I get it... you leftists never want to accept that your system fails, and instead you need to find someone to blame. So of course, it's not the fact socialism fails that caused this.... no it's "poor get poorer and rich get richer", it's the typical universal class warfare argument from the left.

If you really believe that the problem wasn't the system, but rather this loan deal, then why not just refuse to accept the loans??

"Because their would be fiscal crash and the economy would be ruined, and Greece would have collasped!"

Right, but how did they get into that position?

Because they engaged in socialism, and ran out of other people's money to spend.

Your system doesn't work. Greece is proof.

Greece proves Wall Street turns everything it touches into shit. It's a textbook case for how bankers, bondholders, speculators, and politicians can offload the cost of bad assets onto the shoulders of the non-rich, crushing their medical system and their society for the benefit of a few rich parasites.

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Wall Street had everything to do with the previous Greek government's secret debts and the 2008 global debt crisis. Despite the fact that thirty years of neoliberalism resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, bankers and their useful idiots continue to push austerity and privatization as solutions to a problem they created and continue to profit from.

What solution do you propose for the problem of being too far in debt other than spending less?

Taxes, not cutting essential services which you would want.

But, let's do cut the fat. First, the salary and benefits of members of Congress who work less hard than every fast food/minimum wage earner (how many hours per day does your member of the H. of Rep. spend raising campaign donations? If you don't know, look it up). How many days did your member of Congress actually work? It seem Boehner has the House not in session more than in session.

Next, let's look at corporate welfare. Is it a myth, or is it real? If Corporations are people too, why don't they pay the same rate on their profits as do people? And why is it that members of Boards of Directors don't go to prison? When the corporation is found criminally guilty of a crime (if you or I poured oil into a storm drain, wouldn't we serve some time?) it seems if the Corporation is people too, people ought to go to jail/prison and pay restitution - not the stock holders (you do understand "duty" do you not?).

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Yeah dude. That's what I've been talking about. Socialism works until you run out of other people's money to spend. Greece setup their own disasters.

Now, I get it... you leftists never want to accept that your system fails, and instead you need to find someone to blame. So of course, it's not the fact socialism fails that caused this.... no it's "poor get poorer and rich get richer", it's the typical universal class warfare argument from the left.

If you really believe that the problem wasn't the system, but rather this loan deal, then why not just refuse to accept the loans??

"Because their would be fiscal crash and the economy would be ruined, and Greece would have collasped!"

Right, but how did they get into that position?

Because they engaged in socialism, and ran out of other people's money to spend.

Your system doesn't work. Greece is proof.

Greece proves Wall Street turns everything it touches into shit. It's a textbook case for how bankers, bondholders, speculators, and politicians can offload the cost of bad assets onto the shoulders of the non-rich, crushing their medical system and their society for the benefit of a few rich parasites.

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Wall Street had everything to do with the previous Greek government's secret debts and the 2008 global debt crisis. Despite the fact that thirty years of neoliberalism resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, bankers and their useful idiots continue to push austerity and privatization as solutions to a problem they created and continue to profit from.

What solution do you propose for the problem of being too far in debt other than spending less?

Taxes, not cutting essential services which you would want.

But, let's do cut the fat. First, the salary and benefits of members of Congress who work less hard than every fast food/minimum wage earner (how many hours per day does your member of the H. of Rep. spend raising campaign donations? If you don't know, look it up). How many days did your member of Congress actually work? It seem Boehner has the House not in session more than in session.

Next, let's look at corporate welfare. Is it a myth, or is it real? If Corporations are people too, why don't they pay the same rate on their profits as do people? And why is it that members of Boards of Directors don't go to prison? When the corporation is found criminally guilty of a crime (if you or I poured oil into a storm drain, wouldn't we serve some time?) it seems if the Corporation is people too, people ought to go to jail/prison and pay restitution - not the stock holders (you do understand "duty" do you not?).

So in short, it's wrong that green corporations and groups (like solyndra, Nevada Geothermal, and First Solar) are allowed to flood campaign contributions to try and influence elections for a government "payback" from their preferred political party. Right? All those millions of government incentives going for a Chevy Volt, it's shameful.

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah dude. That's what I've been talking about. Socialism works until you run out of other people's money to spend. Greece setup their own disasters.

Now, I get it... you leftists never want to accept that your system fails, and instead you need to find someone to blame. So of course, it's not the fact socialism fails that caused this.... no it's "poor get poorer and rich get richer", it's the typical universal class warfare argument from the left.

If you really believe that the problem wasn't the system, but rather this loan deal, then why not just refuse to accept the loans??

"Because their would be fiscal crash and the economy would be ruined, and Greece would have collasped!"

Right, but how did they get into that position?

Because they engaged in socialism, and ran out of other people's money to spend.

Your system doesn't work. Greece is proof.

Greece proves Wall Street turns everything it touches into shit. It's a textbook case for how bankers, bondholders, speculators, and politicians can offload the cost of bad assets onto the shoulders of the non-rich, crushing their medical system and their society for the benefit of a few rich parasites.

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Wall Street had everything to do with the previous Greek government's secret debts and the 2008 global debt crisis. Despite the fact that thirty years of neoliberalism resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, bankers and their useful idiots continue to push austerity and privatization as solutions to a problem they created and continue to profit from.

What solution do you propose for the problem of being too far in debt other than spending less?

Taxes, not cutting essential services which you would want.

There's nothing essential about any of the services government provides. Government already takes too big of a chunk out of the hides of taxpayers. No one who isn't getting a check from the government believes he isn't paying enough taxes. What the people who are getting a check from the government believe doesn't count. They're parasites.

But, let's do cut the fat. First, the salary and benefits of members of Congress who work less hard than every fast food/minimum wage earner (how many hours per day does your member of the H. of Rep. spend raising campaign donations? If you don't know, look it up). How many days did your member of Congress actually work? It seem Boehner has the House not in session more than in session.

Next, let's look at corporate welfare. Is it a myth, or is it real? If Corporations are people too, why don't they pay the same rate on their profits as do people? And why is it that members of Boards of Directors don't go to prison? When the corporation is found criminally guilty of a crime (if you or I poured oil into a storm drain, wouldn't we serve some time?) it seems if the Corporation is people too, people ought to go to jail/prison and pay restitution - not the stock holders (you do understand "duty" do you not?).

It's all fat.

The cuts you listed amount to trying to empty a swimming pool using a tea cup. Real corporate welfare is defended by most libs. Take farm subsidies, for example. Dims vote for them in large numbers. Then there's the Ethanol mandate, subsidies for renewable energy, vouchers to the elderly for energy, yada, yada, yada. These are all examples of corporate welfare, but Dims voted for all of them.

When the officers of a corporation commit a crime, they are charged and go to jail, so I'm not clear exactly what you "crimes" you are referring to. I suspect its stuff that no one would consider to be a crime, like producing a superior product that everyone wants to buy.

 

[Boss]

Ok here is not what you aren't getting. Both private industry and government have scandalous problems. If the VA was privately funded, what is to stop those at the top exploiting their patients for profit? [You mean, other than the law?] What would stop them from denying expensive treatment for chronic illnesses for the sake of saving money? [You mean, other than the law?] Have you not heard of the word greed before? Evil breeds more in private industry than in government.

What is your basis for this? Greed is greed, it's found in government or private sector. Law breakers need to be punished, we need to vigorously enforce the laws against the graft and corruption you are claiming. But capitalism doesn't operate on greed. In fact, greed is the antithesis of capitalism. Now think about this... every capitalist has as their objective to capitalize on something and make a profit. If they are too greedy in the amount of profit they want to make, another capitalist will come along who is less greedy and put them out of business. So the capitalist walks a very tight line between being too greedy and making as much profit as possible.

The VA just needs reforms with the right people at its leadership.

After the failures of GM, should we let government take a who at running the company? No. Of course not.

When it comes to basic human services, they must be run by the government with the right people involved.

Well the government DOES run the VA, it's a government entity. So I'm not sure what you mean here. We're debating whether our health care system should be turned over to the government or remain in the hands of the private sector for the most part. We already have several government health care assets, the VA being one of those. We also have Medicaid and Medicare and all kinds of government run health clinics, hospitals, etc. Every state has at least one state hospital.

Government doesn't do anything more efficiently than private sector capitalists. Your hooting and hollering about the possibility someone might break the law and be corrupt is priceless... as if to honestly claim that you believe a government run system would have none of this. You have this naive trust in the government that is almost infantile.

Lol how does a less greedy person put a greedy person out of business? What the fuck? As long as a super greedy person has a profitable market, it doesn't make a piss difference how greedy they are. Here are some actual statistics for you: 1% of the top earners in this country own 40% of the nation's wealth. People continue to buy their products regardless. I suppose your point is that another business will come along and be more fair to these veterans. What sort of transition will happen? More than likely those veterans would be under some sort of contract. How much more fair is this new company? For how long would it remain fair? Wouldn't it be easier to just let a government agency with strict laws oversee it? Corporations just do whatever the fuck they want. A gov agency has a set of rules where no one is making gross profit. Sure that didn't stop the VA scandal, but at least there were still limitations on how these corrupt individuals operate. What needs to be done now about the VA is make reforms. Fire those involved in the scandal and make new LAWS that will protect veterans from further exploitation. It's that simple.

I don't understand your logic behind privatising the VA becaus it was run by government. Again your logic would apply to giving government a shot at running GM because private industry can't handle it. You see how that works? Like I said, just make reforms in the VA. Privatising it will inevitably lead to more corruption. Why wouldn't it?

You know what corrupts gov the most? Powerful lobbyists.

How does a less greedy person put a greedy person out of business?

Because the greedy person is trying to make more profit than they deserve and the less greedy person is not. The consumer sees the greedy person's price as excessive and the less greedy person's price as fair.

I have not advocated privatizing the VA, nor would I support such a thing. I have no idea where you came up with that. I simply presented the VA as an example of how inefficiently government runs health care.

1% of the top earners in this country own 40% of the nation's wealth.

So what? Does it mean more wealth can't be created?

Corporations just do whatever the fuck they want.

Well, no... actually, they don't.

A gov agency has a set of rules where no one is making gross profit. Sure that didn't stop the VA scandal, but at least there were still limitations on how these corrupt individuals operate.

Are you even listening to yourself? Limitations on how corrupt individuals operate? Tell me about how those work? Kind of like a law against criminals who break the law?

You're right, the government agency doesn't involve making profit, and that is the problem. If there is no profit, there can be no loss. So tell me.... would you spend more from your checking account knowing you had a certain amount per week or month going in, as opposed to having an unlimited amount that was always there? In which way would you be more likely to be careful with your spending?

Government agencies are not free market capitalists, they aren't competing with each other for profit. They hold the monopoly in most cases, and the price is whatever the government says the price will be. It is actually government who does what the fuck it wants.

 

[Boss]

But no matter what you do, government is going to have that power, the universe where we don't have governments like that is far away from our own. The best we can do is make laws that it's illegal for government officials to use their positions to pick winners or losers, or give 'special favors' to. It's kind of something built-in to what politics and government is. Money, power, influence.

You seem to really want to disagree with me for some reason, but it's not clear why. Why in the world wouldn't we want to push for laws (or better yet, constitutional provisions) limiting the government's power to intervene in our economic decisions? Are you advocating for complacency?

I mean, look... I am all for a system where the guy with the most weed and coconuts gets to decide what we're all going to do. We can discuss all kinds of ideas for how we plan to run our new laissez faire society, or we can join the real world and understand that we actually live in a society where government has influence over our lives. Like it or not, we have to grow up and accept this, and deal with what we can do as a society to ensure peaceful cohabitation.

???

Why in the world wouldn't we want to push for laws (or better yet, constitutional provisions) limiting the government's power to intervene in our economic decisions? Are you advocating for complacency?

Why not just disband government and go with the weed and coconut guy? Seems just as realistic to me. You haven't explained how you're going to prevent government from doing what government does. Look, take out your wallet and pull out what you think is money, and look to see if you can find anywhere that it says it's money? It is a promissory note from the Federal Reserve. As long as government controls our currency, they can intervene in our economic decisions and affairs.

I am advocating for realism.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Greece proves Wall Street turns everything it touches into shit. It's a textbook case for how bankers, bondholders, speculators, and politicians can offload the cost of bad assets onto the shoulders of the non-rich, crushing their medical system and their society for the benefit of a few rich parasites.

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Wall Street had everything to do with the previous Greek government's secret debts and the 2008 global debt crisis. Despite the fact that thirty years of neoliberalism resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, bankers and their useful idiots continue to push austerity and privatization as solutions to a problem they created and continue to profit from.

What solution do you propose for the problem of being too far in debt other than spending less?

Taxes, not cutting essential services which you would want.

There's nothing essential about any of the services government provides. Government already takes too big of a chunk out of the hides of taxpayers. No one who isn't getting a check from the government believes he isn't paying enough taxes. What the people who are getting a check from the government believe doesn't count. They're parasites.

But, let's do cut the fat. First, the salary and benefits of members of Congress who work less hard than every fast food/minimum wage earner (how many hours per day does your member of the H. of Rep. spend raising campaign donations? If you don't know, look it up). How many days did your member of Congress actually work? It seem Boehner has the House not in session more than in session.

Next, let's look at corporate welfare. Is it a myth, or is it real? If Corporations are people too, why don't they pay the same rate on their profits as do people? And why is it that members of Boards of Directors don't go to prison? When the corporation is found criminally guilty of a crime (if you or I poured oil into a storm drain, wouldn't we serve some time?) it seems if the Corporation is people too, people ought to go to jail/prison and pay restitution - not the stock holders (you do understand "duty" do you not?).

It's all fat.

The cuts you listed amount to trying to empty a swimming pool using a tea cup. Real corporate welfare is defended by most libs. Take farm subsidies, for example. Dims vote for them in large numbers. Then there's the Ethanol mandate, subsidies for renewable energy, vouchers to the elderly for energy, yada, yada, yada. These are all examples of corporate welfare, but Dims voted for all of them.

When the officers of a corporation commit a crime, they are charged and go to jail, so I'm not clear exactly what you "crimes" you are referring to. I suspect its stuff that no one would consider to be a crime, like producing a superior product that everyone wants to buy.

The fact that you're a hopeless partisan and dumb as a box of rocks makes any debate with you, rabbi(t), Stepanie, CrusaderFrank and the rest of the echo chamber jerks impossible. That finger in your avatar, is it a sign of your IQ or the age you act?

 

[The Rabbi]

Wall street didn't have a thing to do with Greece's current predicament. Public Sector unions and outrageous benefits are the reason Greece can't pay its bills. The government made promises it couldn't possibly keep and now the bill has come due. In typical fashion the appologists for socialism are all looking for a scapegoat they can blame when the blame belongs with them.

Wall Street had everything to do with the previous Greek government's secret debts and the 2008 global debt crisis. Despite the fact that thirty years of neoliberalism resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, bankers and their useful idiots continue to push austerity and privatization as solutions to a problem they created and continue to profit from.

What solution do you propose for the problem of being too far in debt other than spending less?

Taxes, not cutting essential services which you would want.

There's nothing essential about any of the services government provides. Government already takes too big of a chunk out of the hides of taxpayers. No one who isn't getting a check from the government believes he isn't paying enough taxes. What the people who are getting a check from the government believe doesn't count. They're parasites.

But, let's do cut the fat. First, the salary and benefits of members of Congress who work less hard than every fast food/minimum wage earner (how many hours per day does your member of the H. of Rep. spend raising campaign donations? If you don't know, look it up). How many days did your member of Congress actually work? It seem Boehner has the House not in session more than in session.

Next, let's look at corporate welfare. Is it a myth, or is it real? If Corporations are people too, why don't they pay the same rate on their profits as do people? And why is it that members of Boards of Directors don't go to prison? When the corporation is found criminally guilty of a crime (if you or I poured oil into a storm drain, wouldn't we serve some time?) it seems if the Corporation is people too, people ought to go to jail/prison and pay restitution - not the stock holders (you do understand "duty" do you not?).

It's all fat.

The cuts you listed amount to trying to empty a swimming pool using a tea cup. Real corporate welfare is defended by most libs. Take farm subsidies, for example. Dims vote for them in large numbers. Then there's the Ethanol mandate, subsidies for renewable energy, vouchers to the elderly for energy, yada, yada, yada. These are all examples of corporate welfare, but Dims voted for all of them.

When the officers of a corporation commit a crime, they are charged and go to jail, so I'm not clear exactly what you "crimes" you are referring to. I suspect its stuff that no one would consider to be a crime, like producing a superior product that everyone wants to buy.

The fact that you're a hopeless partisan and dumb as a box of rocks makes any debate with you, rabbi(t), Stepanie, CrusaderFrank and the rest of the echo chamber jerks impossible. That finger in your avatar, is it a sign of your IQ or the age you act?

It's a sign of his respect for you.
No wonder. You are the most worthless poster on here. You can't debate the rest of us because you are ill informed and lack knowledge of much beyond gay prison sex.