Govt is corrupt, so why do liberals want bigger govt !?!?

[AuSable River]

1) finland has a gdp per capita less than over 45 AMerican states !!!! --- so much for your scandanavian paradise.

1. Finland is usually not considered part of scandinavia
2. GDP/c is affected by billions of things other than the government, and when you consider the fact that they've been involved in drawn out wars with one of the strongest (militarily) superpowers on earth, it's amazing that it's as high as it is
3. If you look at countries generally accepted as part of scandinavia with relatively peaceful histories, like Norway, which has twice as much gdp/c as America
4. GDP/c is not a good indicator of how good a country is.

1) finland -- scandanavian or not --- is less wealthy per capita (PPP) than virtually every US state.

2) and the USA hasnt ????? ANd dude, finland fought a single low intensity campaign with the soviet union 70 years ago -- while most of the nations of europe and asia were utterly destroyed only to come back within less than a decade.

In sum, war is a lame excuse for finland being a joke -- and even more amusing is now your trying to rationalize and make excuses for finland's failure when in the original post I responded to -- you were citing finland as a standard of success ??!?!

3)funny you cite norway's gdp as indicative as a measure of its superiority over America --- yet inexplicably and paradoxically in the very next sentence you cite gdp as not an accurate measure of 'how good a country is' ??!!

moreover, norway ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT have a gdp per capita that is twice as high as the USA, despite the fact that Norway is the beneficiary of significant short term oil wealth.

4)also, GDP per capita, purchasing power parity is MOST CERTAINLY more accurate a measure of societal wealth any other.


you seem like your interested and you obviously take in interest in geopoltics, economics, et al ---- however, whoever has been teaching you is wrong.

try reading some conservative or libertarian stuff to balance the nonsense that youve been getting from your professors, pop culture, uncle, or newspaper.

I would recommend reading a book called "how capitalism saved AMerica" by dilorenzo

quick read concise.

note that I hardly agree with this anarchist -- however, he doesnt pollute the book with anarchist crap --- he saves that for other lectures and writings.

[Kingdoms of Cal]

An odd thing europe vs USA.

In europe the smallest form of government (none) is a leftwing thing. In the USA it's a right wing thing. Kinda odd.

Anarchy in Europe (and possibly other parts of the world is very lefty as it's about communes, etc), I suppose it is the difference between liberal (European) and libertarian(US), here's some news for some of you the pair meet at the opposite end of the spectrum. You can't put a cigarette paper between the two want when it comes to their view of what a government should do (not be there).

But then again most US types don't realise that the only functional anarchy was killed off by the right wing. The right is the enemy of anarchy, always has been always will be.

EDITED: Sorry my lysdexia strikes.

[AuSable River]

wrong --- corruption is more a function of opportunity.

For example, if a town puts all of its money in a bank and hires the town drunk to manage it without accountability--- then you will likely see your wealth diminish in short order.

IN contrast, if you decentralize power and leave it in the hands of those that earned it and those who will most benefit or suffer from its mismanagement -- then corruption is absolute.

Um, are you trying to convince me that power doesn't corrupt? Or are you saying wealth isn't power? I'm a bit confused.

military and political power is by any objective measure the most dangerous.

hence the need to decentralize, balance, limit, and make transparent this power within society.

In contrast, economic power acquired within a free, voluntary and competive free market ---other than military and political power-- is far less problematic or subject to corruption.

For example, a firm can achieve monopoly status within a single industry or series of industries. But without military or political power -- this gain is of little serious consequence.

indeed, in virtually every case that a monopoly has emerged (and then they only command from 50-90% of market share for a short period) the 'offending firm' was actually lowering prices and increasing quality -- hence thats how they gained monopoly status.

but for the sake of argument, if a firm did get too big for its britches and began to exploit the public -- then myriad responses would be possible

1) boycott

2) the firm would risk absolute loss of reputation that would destroy these CEOs forever in a free marketplace -- hence anytime they tried to get back into business, their competition would let everyone know how corrupt they were.

3) substitution goods and services exist for virtually all industries.

4) start up competition would immediately begin forming in earnest.

5) as a last resort, state government could immediately break up or outlaw the offending firm from doing business in the state.

In sum, a monopoly of armed force and/or political power is very difficult and bloody to remove -- in contrast a monopoly in every other industry is easily removed with far less societal complications. Hence, a government framework need only be formed to limit, decentralize, balance, and make transparent the elements of political and military power in society.

[Blakk Metal]

Are you honestly telling me that Dred Scott caused slavery. Oh and by the way the Supreme Court upheld the rights of THE STATES to own slaves in that decision.

what a state government is not a 'government' ??!!!

and the federal government re-affirming the right of a state government to retain its people as property is not an example of government supporting slavery ??!!

How about this one for you --- note that there were/are absolutely NO corporations or that corporate power is severely limited in these nations -- yet their people are enslaved, tortured and murdered by government by the tens of millions:

soviet union
communist china pre-1980
north korea
cuba
zimbabwe
cambodia (pol pot)


the list goes on and on.......

yet these liberals will bark incessantly that government is good and corporations are the source of evil in the world. Yet for every indiscretion that a corporation or private citizens has committed --- whether slavery, unprovoked war, genocide, et al -- government was the culprit and by far the worse offender in size and scope than any private entity whether corporation, firm, industry, or private citizen.

Strawman

what a state government is not a 'government' ??!!!

and the federal government re-affirming the right of a state government to retain its people as property is not an example of government supporting slavery ??!!

How about this one for you --- note that there were/are absolutely NO corporations or that corporate power is severely limited in these nations -- yet their people are enslaved, tortured and murdered by government by the tens of millions:

soviet union
communist china pre-1980
north korea
cuba
zimbabwe
cambodia (pol pot)


the list goes on and on.......

yet these liberals will bark incessantly that government is good and corporations are the source of evil in the world. Yet for every indiscretion that a corporation or private citizens has committed --- whether slavery, unprovoked war, genocide, et al -- government was the culprit and by far the worse offender in size and scope than any private entity whether corporation, firm, industry, or private citizen.

Ok you are quite confused. In a Socialist society, the government is the corporation. Slash all of the socialists off the list and you are down to.... African countries.

No, you are the one who is confused.

You do realize workers' states are one of the most corrupt states, right?

So-called workers' states didn't don't do much for workers, and in general workers were a tiny minority in their societies.

A proper non-imaginary workers' state exists only to suppresses counterrevolution anarchists and the reinstitution of reactionary social relations dissent. It's also constantly being eroded by workers' power from below the inefficiency of government.

Corrected.

[AuSable River]

An odd thing europe vs USA.

In europe the smallest form of government (none) is a leftwing thing. In the USA it's a right wing thing. Kinda odd.

Anarchy in Europe (and possibly other parts of the world is very lefty as it's about communes, etc), I suppose it is the difference between liberal (European) and libertarian(US), here's some news for some of you the pair meet at the opposite end of the spectrum. You can't put a cigarette paper between the two want when it comes to their view of what a government should do (not be there).

But then again most US types don't realise that the only functional anarchy was killed off by the right wing. The right is the enemy of anarchy, always has been always will be.

EDITED: Sorry my lysdexia strikes.

Interesting post, are you european ?

And indeed, both left and right anarchist are faith-based utopians who dont have a clue.

AMusingly, I have been banned by right anarchist websites for arguing that within an anarchist society (if one ever existed for more than a fortnight) that a territorial monopoly of armed force would emerge.

this is based on the specialization of labor, economies of scale, and collabration of defense industry firms to form a cartel to reduce the costs associated with armed competition.

Hence, anarchic society has no intentional mechanisms to prevent the centralization, balance, or limit military power -- moreover, within anarchic society, there is no transparency.

also, ancaps admit that monopolies are possible in any industry within ancap society --- and yet they have the ignorance to state that these are not coercive or that the free market can remove them through voluntary and peaceful exchange.

this nonsense is easily debunked by looking at the real world geopolitik which is really anarchic. Yet, every nation represents a territorial monopoly of armed force and every nation's military is unresponsive to free market pressures.

hence, anarchist society is utterly unable to prevent monopolies of armed force (proof -- look at the world today) and when these monopoly materialize the free market is powerless against them (proof -- look at the world today).

end of story

I could go into more detail regarding the preponderence of violence in anarchic society, but since we all pretty much agree that anarchism is a joke -- i will spare you.

sorry abuot your dylezia/

[Vrakon]

1. Finland is usually not considered part of scandinavia
2. GDP/c is affected by billions of things other than the government, and when you consider the fact that they've been involved in drawn out wars with one of the strongest (militarily) superpowers on earth, it's amazing that it's as high as it is
3. If you look at countries generally accepted as part of scandinavia with relatively peaceful histories, like Norway, which has twice as much gdp/c as America
4. GDP/c is not a good indicator of how good a country is.

1) finland -- scandanavian or not --- is less wealthy per capita (PPP) than virtually every US state.
Yes, and?
2) and the USA hasnt ????
Fighting a war comfortably on a different continent as a nuclear state =/= being at war with your next door neighbour, also finland was poor before they were left wing? ANd dude, finland fought a single low intensity campaign with the soviet union 70 years ago they were 12th in military casualties during wwii despite having a very small population, that's not low intensity -- while most of the nations of europe and asia were utterly destroyed only to come back within less than a decade.
In sum, war is a lame excuse for finland being a joke -- and even more amusing is now your trying to rationalize and make excuses for finland's failure when in the original post I responded to -- you were citing finland as a standard of success ??!?!

3)funny you cite norway's gdp as indicative as a measure of its superiority over America --- yet inexplicably and paradoxically in the very next sentence you cite gdp as not an accurate measure of 'how good a country is' ??!!
As the son of 2 philosophers, i cringe whenever someone uses paradoxically like that. I used both points to explain why it's stupid to say that America > Scandinavia because they have a greater gdp/c than finland
moreover, norway ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT have a gdp per capita that is twice as high as the USA, despite the fact that Norway is the beneficiary of significant short term oil wealth.
IMF, world bank and the cia factbook all disagree with you(citation
4)also, GDP per capita, purchasing power parity is MOST CERTAINLY more accurate a measure of societal wealth any other.
How about HDI?

you seem like your interested and you obviously take in interest in geopoltics, economics, et al ---- however, whoever has been teaching you is wrong.

try reading some conservative or libertarian stuff to balance the nonsense that youve been getting from your professors, pop culture, uncle, or newspaper.

I would recommend reading a book called "how capitalism saved AMerica" by dilorenzo

quick read concise.

note that I hardly agree with this anarchist -- however, he doesnt pollute the book with anarchist crap --- he saves that for other lectures and writings.

[AuSable River]

what a state government is not a 'government' ??!!!

and the federal government re-affirming the right of a state government to retain its people as property is not an example of government supporting slavery ??!!

How about this one for you --- note that there were/are absolutely NO corporations or that corporate power is severely limited in these nations -- yet their people are enslaved, tortured and murdered by government by the tens of millions:

soviet union
communist china pre-1980
north korea
cuba
zimbabwe
cambodia (pol pot)


the list goes on and on.......

yet these liberals will bark incessantly that government is good and corporations are the source of evil in the world. Yet for every indiscretion that a corporation or private citizens has committed --- whether slavery, unprovoked war, genocide, et al -- government was the culprit and by far the worse offender in size and scope than any private entity whether corporation, firm, industry, or private citizen.

Strawman

Ok you are quite confused. In a Socialist society, the government is the corporation. Slash all of the socialists off the list and you are down to.... African countries.

No, you are the one who is confused.

So-called workers' states didn't don't do much for workers, and in general workers were a tiny minority in their societies.

A proper non-imaginary workers' state exists only to suppresses counterrevolution anarchists and the reinstitution of reactionary social relations dissent. It's also constantly being eroded by workers' power from below the inefficiency of government.

Corrected.

I will debunk your nonsense in short order with the following question:

explain to me the mechanism of how a corporation gains power in a free society with government corruption and assistance?

[Blakk Metal]

Strawman

No, you are the one who is confused.

Corrected.

I will debunk your nonsense in short order with the following question:

explain to me the mechanism of how a corporation gains power in a free society with government corruption and assistance?

With lobbyists and campaign donations.

[Trotskylvania]

Strawman

No, you are the one who is confused.

Corrected.

I will debunk your nonsense in short order with the following question:

explain to me the mechanism of how a corporation gains power in a free society with government corruption and assistance?

By controlling scarce resources and having the money to hire armed men. Political and economic power aren't separate.

[North Franklin]

I just spent over an hour reading this entire thread. My summary:

AuSable: Corrupt Government
Liberal Zombie: No, because x y z
AuSable: Wrong
Liberal Zombie: Right, actually, because x y z
AuSable: No

[AuSable River]

1) finland -- scandanavian or not --- is less wealthy per capita (PPP) than virtually every US state.
Yes, and?
2) and the USA hasnt ????
Fighting a war comfortably on a different continent as a nuclear state =/= being at war with your next door neighbour, also finland was poor before they were left wing? ANd dude, finland fought a single low intensity campaign with the soviet union 70 years ago they were 12th in military casualties during wwii despite having a very small population, that's not low intensity -- while most of the nations of europe and asia were utterly destroyed only to come back within less than a decade.
In sum, war is a lame excuse for finland being a joke -- and even more amusing is now your trying to rationalize and make excuses for finland's failure when in the original post I responded to -- you were citing finland as a standard of success ??!?!

3)funny you cite norway's gdp as indicative as a measure of its superiority over America --- yet inexplicably and paradoxically in the very next sentence you cite gdp as not an accurate measure of 'how good a country is' ??!!
As the son of 2 philosophers, i cringe whenever someone uses paradoxically like that. I used both points to explain why it's stupid to say that America > Scandinavia because they have a greater gdp/c than finland
moreover, norway ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT have a gdp per capita that is twice as high as the USA, despite the fact that Norway is the beneficiary of significant short term oil wealth.
IMF, world bank and the cia factbook all disagree with you(citation
4)also, GDP per capita, purchasing power parity is MOST CERTAINLY more accurate a measure of societal wealth any other.
How about HDI?

you seem like your interested and you obviously take in interest in geopoltics, economics, et al ---- however, whoever has been teaching you is wrong.

try reading some conservative or libertarian stuff to balance the nonsense that youve been getting from your professors, pop culture, uncle, or newspaper.

I would recommend reading a book called "how capitalism saved AMerica" by dilorenzo

quick read concise.

note that I hardly agree with this anarchist -- however, he doesnt pollute the book with anarchist crap --- he saves that for other lectures and writings.

Your HDI index is seriously flawed because it cites life expectancy

how so?

the USA has a far lower life expectancy rating ---not because of lower standards of living --- it is the opposite.

Americans die far more frequently because of car accidents and ailments of affluence like heart disease and stroke than other Western nations.

Hence we have a lower life expectancy, and the index does not take into account cultural behaviors.

IN the absence of this factor --- AMericans are far more healthier and live longer than any other people's

AND......

regarding your lame argument that nominal GDP per capita is a more accurate assessment of standards of living, the following:

Comparisons of national wealth are also frequently made on the basis of nominal GDP, which does not reflect differences in the cost of living in different countries (See List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita). Using a PPP basis is arguably more useful when comparing generalized differences in living standards on the whole between nations because PPP takes into account the relative cost of living and the inflation rates of the countries, rather than using just exchange rates which may distort the real differences in income.

and good luck challenging this -- it came from the very source that your cited to support nominal gdp --- wiki.

enjoy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita

[AuSable River]

I just spent over an hour reading this entire thread. My summary:

AuSable: Corrupt Government
Liberal Zombie: No, because x y z
AuSable: Wrong
Liberal Zombie: Right, actually, because x y z
AuSable: No

The facts:

USA unfunded government debt = $60 trillion.

USA national deficit = $15 trillion

billions of dollars in lobbying in Washington and a government budget of over $2.5 trillion

The logic:

because they control vast sums of societal wealth in the form of tax and regulatory powers -- government is subject to corruption from special interests -- hence the incredible amount of money spent on lobbying politicians in Washington serves to divert societal wealth from productive, sustainable, and free private sector uses to inefficient, corrupt, and unsustainable politically connected uses in a quid pro quo scheme of preferential tax and regulatory favors for special interest votes and campaign contributions (bribes)

liberal response (or really non-response or denial ):

government is not corrupt, just corporations are corrupt or conservative government is corrupt.

My challenge to the indoctrinated:

How would corrupt interests in a free society gain power at the expense of societal health and well being in the absence of government as a criminal partner ??

Their response (note ad hominems, semantic diversions, and assorted nonsense are not valid):

I am still waiting...........

[Silent Majority]

How would corrupt interests in a free society gain power at the expense of societal health and well being in the absence of government as a criminal partner ??

Their response (note ad hominems, semantic diversions, and assorted nonsense are not valid):

I am still waiting...........

viewtopic.php?p=10393547#p10393547

[AuSable River]

I will debunk your nonsense in short order with the following question:

explain to me the mechanism of how a corporation gains power in a free society with government corruption and assistance?

By controlling scarce resources and having the money to hire armed men. Political and economic power aren't separate.

Explain how they can gain control of scarce resources in a free society ??

dude you just cant make this stuff up without explaining the mechanisms involved.

'(corporations) having the money to hire armed men --- trotsky

and are you kidding dude ??!!! Are you serious??!!

how is a corporation's 'armed men' going to compete against battleships, B-1 bombers, M-1 battle tanks, et al ?????

furthermore, government would still have a monopoly on political power in a free society as a last resort .

your dog aint barking dude, you have to do better than this simplistic nonsense.

[NMaa949]

It's called a Military INDUSTRIAL complex for a reason.

[Blakk Metal]

By controlling scarce resources and having the money to hire armed men. Political and economic power aren't separate.

Explain how they can gain control of scarce resources in a free society ??

By buying natural resources and monopolies.

[Trotskylvania]

Explain how they can gain control of scarce resources in a free society ??

dude you just cant make this stuff up without explaining the mechanisms involved.

Uh... by owning them. This isn't that hard to understand.

and are you kidding dude ??!!! Are you serious??!!

how is a corporation's 'armed men' going to compete against battleships, B-1 bombers, M-1 battle tanks, et al ?????

furthermore, government would still have a monopoly on political power in a free society as a last resort .

your dog aint barking dude, you have to do better than this simplistic nonsense.

You said a free society. As long as you have a state with an army, police and prisons, you don't have a free society. So, absent a state to regulate and control private capital, private capital simply becomes the state. And as long as the state exists, it will serve the interests of capital. That means restricted competition, and policies favorable to the interests of capital.

[AuSable River]

I will debunk your nonsense in short order with the following question:

explain to me the mechanism of how a corporation gains power in a free society with government corruption and assistance?

You want to hear the really funny (but sad and unfortunate ) thing about the nonsense from the Left.

It is that they always lament that a single corporation could take over a free society in the absence of government by:

By controlling scarce resources and having the money to hire armed men. Political and economic power aren't separate.-- trotsky

when in fact that is what corrupt and self-serving governments have DONE !!!!

the illogic is that these deluding leftists advocate creating the very thing they most fear to protect them from something that doesnt exist and couldnt exist in a free society!!!!

and you folks wonder why I use phrases like drone, brainwashed, deluded, illogical, et al ...

[Geilinor]

Your HDI index is seriously flawed because it cites life expectancy

how so?

the USA has a far lower life expectancy rating ---not because of lower standards of living --- it is the opposite.

Americans die far more frequently because of car accidents and ailments of affluence like heart disease and stroke than other Western nations.

Hence we have a lower life expectancy, and the index does not take into account cultural behaviors.

IN the absence of this factor --- AMericans are far more healthier and live longer than any other people's

AND......

regarding your lame argument that nominal GDP per capita is a more accurate assessment of standards of living, the following:

Comparisons of national wealth are also frequently made on the basis of nominal GDP, which does not reflect differences in the cost of living in different countries (See List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita). Using a PPP basis is arguably more useful when comparing generalized differences in living standards on the whole between nations because PPP takes into account the relative cost of living and the inflation rates of the countries, rather than using just exchange rates which may distort the real differences in income.

and good luck challenging this -- it came from the very source that your cited to support nominal gdp --- wiki.

enjoy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... per_capita

America has a lower life expectancy because of our obesity rate. Finland's GDP per capita might be slightly lower, but money does not buy happiness. Both countries are at a level of development that the GDP difference doesn't matter. People in European countries use cars less often and tend to eat healthier than in the United States. Believe it or not, that stuff is good for you. Walking to public transport(where possible), might make you look poorer, but it lowers the chance that a heart attack or a stroke will kill you. "Ailments of affluence"? "Cultural factors"? Denial.

[AuSable River]

It's called a Military INDUSTRIAL complex for a reason.

the military industrial complex is a government enterprises dude.

in a free society, government spending would be significantly reduced due to a balanced budget amendment, limits on govt spending as % of GDP, the elimination of the FED and fiat currency, a declaration of war required to send US forces into harms way in the absence of an immediate threat, supermajority to raise taxes to fund anything including military, et al

Indeed, a free society with limited govt. LIMITS the power of the military/industrial complex.

INdeed, transferring societal wealth from government uses to the free market and consumer uses minimizes this problem

try again. your dog aint barking

[Enadail]

Honestly... why has the pokemon discussion disappeared from this thread? It was the most productive part... at least there, you could argue your point and someone would listen.

Gen1 (the only real gen), I was a fan of bulbasaur.

[Silent Majority]

You want to hear the really funny (but sad and unfortunate ) thing about the nonsense from the Left.

It is that they always lament that a single corporation could take over a free society in the absence of government by:

By controlling scarce resources and having the money to hire armed men. Political and economic power aren't separate.-- trotsky

when in fact that is what corrupt and self-serving governments have DONE !!!!

the illogic is that these deluding leftists advocate creating the very thing they most fear to protect them from something that doesnt exist and couldnt exist in a free society!!!!

and you folks wonder why I use phrases like drone, brainwashed, deluded, illogical, et al ...

The difference being that we have a say in how the government is run, whereas with corporations unless you own part of all of said corporation you do not have a say.

[NMaa949]

Gen1 (the only real gen), I was a fan of bulbasaur.

I picked Bulbasaur too.

[NMaa949]

INdeed, transferring societal wealth from government uses to the free market and consumer uses minimizes this problem

try again. your dog aint barking

I have no desire to reduce defense spending, I think it oppresses you nicely.

[Enadail]

the military industrial complex is a government enterprises dude.

You mean where the government pays private industry to develop all its weapons and vehicles? And how its actually these businesses that control the government by being those few groups that can produce these supplies, thus making the government simply an employer/consumer of a private industry?

The government doesn't make most of its own stuff or magically get it... private industry does all that. Private industry determines what military the government has...


Also, I don't think you have ANY idea what a free market is. First, its non-existent and can't exist, as its a theory. its the perfect market that cannot exist, because it requires both the consumer and producer to have perfect knowledge of economic conditions. If any information is missing, it is no longer a free market. It also requires perfect entrance and exist from the said market, that there be no obstacles to joining a portion of a market or costs to leave beyond those incurred by the market.

In sum, a free market is impossible, and even attempting a free market in the real world, where emotion, information, and human faults come into play, only create a corrupt system.