The Dangers of the 'Collective'

[ScienceRocks]

"Conservatism....recognizes the supremacy of the individual."

Is that 'conservatism' as in 'the collected group of humans calling themselves conservatives'?

They do? Since when?

There’s scant evidence of that.

Sure they do, as long as you're not asking for "the supremacy of the individual" in your affairs of love, sex or marriage.

I don't give a shit about what people do in their rooms. At least not until the state is forcing something down the churches throat. They should have the choice.

 

[editec]

One more example of the effect of leaving market decisions to government?
Railroad transportation: as demand for railroads stagnated over the 20th century, and aviation and trucking took over, Congress responded to special interests and sought to 'save' railroads; Amtrak was formed to subsidize railroads. Railroads are now the most subsidized form of transportation, even though it costs taxpayers over $100 per 1000 miles traveled by train compared to $10 for the same distance per airplane, and $4 for buses. Federal Subsidies to Passenger Transportation | Bureau of Transportation Statistics

Only in the 20th century? How do you think the Transcontinental Railroad got built? Do you think that Dagny Taggart's grandfather "built that"?

And your knowledge of America's founders is nil. (See signature)

and so do you.
It was built by those that wished to support, through the purchase of bonds and the gift of the land.

Close but no cigar

If you want to understand the FINANCING of the transcontinental railroads, rather than continue to believe the fairy tale you currently believe, you need to read this

AN ACT to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri river to the Pacific ocean, and to secure to the government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes.

Pacific Railroad Act - Transcontiental Railroad and Land Grants

A kind of AMERICAN STYLE FASCISM built the transcontinental.

Corporations and the GOVERNMENT financed it and then the corporations continued to OWN it.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The total fear mongering bs the RW will resort to to avoid spending some money on education...

I want to fund education...My problem is that I believe that the problem is the anti-education mindset within this generation is the problem.

 

[Agit8r]

Only in the 20th century? How do you think the Transcontinental Railroad got built? Do you think that Dagny Taggart's grandfather "built that"?

And your knowledge of America's founders is nil. (See signature)

and so do you.
It was built by those that wished to support, through the purchase of bonds and the gift of the land.

Close but no cigar

If you want to understand the FINANCING of the transcontinental railroads, rather than continue to believe the fairy tale you currently believe, you need to read this

AN ACT to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri river to the Pacific ocean, and to secure to the government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes.

Pacific Railroad Act - Transcontiental Railroad and Land Grants

A kind of AMERICAN STYLE FASCISM built the transcontinental.

Corporations and the GOVERNMENT financed it and then the corporations continued to OWN it.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it fascist. It was mercantilist. We had a mercantilist economy from the Washington Administration until 1947 GATT.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We're not going back to 1791. Sorry.

We need to fund our educational system, police, fire, roads, bridges and military(standing military). This is just a fact of life.

If we have to rewrite parts of the constitution to do it...Well, we may have to do just that!

 

[eots]

1. Conservatism, known earlier as classical liberalism, in simplest terms, recognizes the supremacy of the individual. The perspective acknowledges the need to protect individual liberties and freedoms from the threat of an excessively powerful government of an oppressive collective.

a. The impetus for this philosophy was based on the tyranny of absolute monarchy. In the same way, a tyranny of the majority could threaten the natural and God given rights of the individual.

2. The Founders saw that federal separation of powers was the best way to limit the coercive powers of government. Taxation can be such a coercive power, and can be used in opposition to the concept of economic reward being directly related to the economic output at the individual level, e.g., 'you didn't build that!'






3. Taxation represents an essential difference between Liberals and conservatives, the former seeing coercive taxation as a method for equalizing material wealth, while conservatives see taxes as support for those enumerated powers granted the federal government in the Constitution...and any excess to be returned via tax cuts.

a. The use of tax revenues should be to fund those initiatives that contribute to the protection of Americans' rights, and that the free market cannot produce on its own.

b. The windbag...er, President, often attempted to instill class warfare through the use of the phrase "fair share," as in 'the rich must pay their fair share.' Well....we finally know what that fair share is! "(Reuters) - President Barack Obama paid an effective federal tax rate of 18.4 percent in 2012..." Obama's income fell in election year, paid 18.4 percent tax rate | Reuters

c. It is of more than passing interest that the same is consistent with the Biblical requirement, in difficult times:
Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%).
Kudos to Obama!






4. Would you like to see an example of what Democrat leaders believe tax money should fund?
Money for a mob museum!

"LAS VEGAS — After taking a hail of bipartisan bullets in recent days over the suggestion that a federal stimulus package should help pay for a proposed $50 million museum here on the history of organized crime, the project’s godfathers are returning fire, complaining that Washington pols are scapegoating the museum and the city.... Senator Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican and the minority leader, attacked the museum this week as a kind of localized earmark project that does not belong in legislationn..." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/10/us/10mob.html






5. The very nature of the country explains why the collectivist approach is flawed. The nation has grown to such an extent that Congress is unable to respond to individual preferences of the electorate. And, the knowledge and ability of the Congress has been far outstripped by technology. Without the experience and knowledge that are found in niche areas of the various industries, politicians determine expenditures in both inefficient, and corrupt matter. Imagine the result if decisions about science and technology were made by one versed in community organizing?

a. " But…government in education? Healthcare? Automobile production? And dubious and absurd programs designed to bring about “equality”? Shouldn’t these decisions be left to the individual, or to the free market, in which forces compete to serve the individual, who will be the arbiter of their success?

But what about the abuses of the free market? It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.

b. In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!"
David Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter ten.





6. One more example of the effect of leaving market decisions to government?
Railroad transportation: as demand for railroads stagnated over the 20th century, and aviation and trucking took over, Congress responded to special interests and sought to 'save' railroads; Amtrak was formed to subsidize railroads. Railroads are now the most subsidized form of transportation, even though it costs taxpayers over $100 per 1000 miles traveled by train compared to $10 for the same distance per airplane, and $4 for buses. Federal Subsidies to Passenger Transportation | Bureau of Transportation Statistics


Keeping the electorate ignorant is the explanation for the elections such as the recent one. Imagine if the 'low information voter' was aware of the costs to the economy of of boondoggles such as Amtrak, or ObamaCare....or subsidizing 'green energy'....

"President Obama's reelection is likely to ensure efforts to privatize Amtrak service and cut transportation funding will be unsuccessful."
Obama victory likely to preserve highway, Amtrak funding - The Hill's Transportation Report
Above based on Patrick Wetherille, "Reinventing the Right."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZEJ4OJTgg8]We are The Borg - YouTube[/ame]

 

[editec]

and so do you.
It was built by those that wished to support, through the purchase of bonds and the gift of the land.

Close but no cigar

If you want to understand the FINANCING of the transcontinental railroads, rather than continue to believe the fairy tale you currently believe, you need to read this

AN ACT to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri river to the Pacific ocean, and to secure to the government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes.

Pacific Railroad Act - Transcontiental Railroad and Land Grants

A kind of AMERICAN STYLE FASCISM built the transcontinental.

Corporations and the GOVERNMENT financed it and then the corporations continued to OWN it.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it fascist. It was mercantilist. We had a mercantilist economy from the Washington Administration until 1947 GATT.

Not mercantilism, amigo

Mercantilism is the economic doctrine that government control of foreign trade is of paramount importance for ensuring the military security of the country.

Why do I call it a kind of fascism?

Because it is the alliance of government and private capital coming together to undertake a project where ultimately the corporation RETAINS ownership of the final result.


Note that this KIND of fascism is relatively benign?

Note that it has nothing to do with racism, jackboots or any of the other crap that most people think of when the word FASCISM is uttered?

 

[Agit8r]

Close but no cigar

If you want to understand the FINANCING of the transcontinental railroads, rather than continue to believe the fairy tale you currently believe, you need to read this

AN ACT to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri river to the Pacific ocean, and to secure to the government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes.

Pacific Railroad Act - Transcontiental Railroad and Land Grants

A kind of AMERICAN STYLE FASCISM built the transcontinental.

Corporations and the GOVERNMENT financed it and then the corporations continued to OWN it.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it fascist. It was mercantilist. We had a mercantilist economy from the Washington Administration until 1947 GATT.

Not mercantilism, amigo

Mercantilism is the economic doctrine that government control of foreign trade is of paramount importance for ensuring the military security of the country.

Why do I call it a kind of fascism?

Because it is the alliance of government and private capital coming together to undertake a project where ultimately the corporation RETAINS ownership of the final result.


Note that this KIND of fascism is relatively benign?

Note that it has nothing to do with racism, jackboots or any of the other crap that most people think of when the word FASCISM is uttered?

Internal protectionism is part of mercantilism too. The British did it before us. And yes, fascist governments have tended to use internal protectionism, particularly "tax remissions." But what makes them most unique economically is that they "denationalized" public entities, or what is today called "privatization"

http://www.ub.edu/graap/bel_Italy_fascist.pdf

http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

 

[editec]

Internal protectionism is part of mercantilism too.

Okay, I do NOT want to get into a semantics debate because THAT really is not the issue, is it?

If you want to call the alliance between govcernment and SOME industries "INTERNAL MERCHANTILISM" fine by me.

Just so long as we are on the same page about what was done, it truly does not matter what we call it.

The British did it before us.

What we are describing here EVERY GOVERNMENT since the dawn of civilization has done. They marshalled the wealth and labor of the society to create some new form of wealth. In this case they marshalled public wealth with private wealth to create a transportation system..one that ultimately was OWNED, not by the public, but by a privately owned corporation.

Now to me, the term fascism better describes that event, but as long as we agree what the event was, what we call it is not really all that important.

And yes, fascist governments have tended to use internal protectionism, particularly "tax remissions." But what makes them most unique economically is that they "denationalized" public entities, or what is today called "privatization"

As it regards the transcontinental rail system, there was nothing to privatize EXCEPT the land upon which it was built.

And no that was NOT something unique in American history. The canal system was ALSo built, often on PUBLIC lands that then become owned by private industries.



http://www.ub.edu/graap/bel_Italy_fascist.pdf

http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf

 

[auditor0007]

"Conservatism....recognizes the supremacy of the individual."

Is that 'conservatism' as in 'the collected group of humans calling themselves conservatives'?

Collective Individualism.

And here I thought this thread was going to be about the Borg.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They do? Since when?

There’s scant evidence of that.

Sure they do, as long as you're not asking for "the supremacy of the individual" in your affairs of love, sex or marriage.

I don't give a shit about what people do in their rooms. At least not until the state is forcing something down the churches throat. They should have the choice.

This is what I'm talking about. The conservative version of individual's rights is about preserving the individual's right to discriminate against others.

 

[Antares]

Your attempt to equate Classical Liberalism with what passes for Liberalism today shows a real lack of understanding.

"Conservatism, known earlier as classical Liberalism"...

The sidekick of the whole "Hitler was a Liberal" revisionism song and dance as they try to turn political definitions inside out in some kind of Bizarrro World comic book. Denial is a deep river.
Interesting how they hate Liberalism so much they're now trying to claim "hey, we thought of it first".

Ignorance is Strength.