Question on Political Stances of Those here

Earthmother

Oh I see it’s completely clear to you, because you (unlike some other people) completely understand it all, and surprise, surprise it says just what you want it to say. Who’d have guessed.

And not a hint of any egotism.

(I’m being sarcastic, but…I mean come on it was just calling out for it)

 

Shadow

OK are you going to address my criticisms or ignore them because they’re inconvenient?

 

ok sorry i missed ur post im not ignoring you.

ok well ur talking now about ideology versus actuality. yes there are problems with free market economy nobody can deny that. however what ur saying is an ideal as well. u seem to think that a government run economy is the correct system. one rather huge problem with that is the inefficiency of government. it is naturally inefficient whether it be communist or domocratic or a republic or any other kind of government. once u start getting government involved in businesses it makes economy inefficient. u begin wasting peoples money more and more and taxes must go higher and higher to counter all the waste that occurs. in a free market economy inefficient businesses die. they get a better higher quality product to the people for a cheaper price because of competition. now u might ask what happens with an economy if a monopoly occurs. answer it doesnt really matter. maybe a monopoly turns bad and starts charging outrageous prices. ok little businesses will pop up everywhere in an effort to make cheaper prices. this forces the big businesses to keep their costs down so they dont lose customers to the smaller businesses. the power to make sombody wealthy really is in the hands of the people. government doesnt need to be involved at all.

 

shadow

Well your reply seems to clearly show you didn’t read it

That’s the problem, those problems you mention that can’t be denied and I’m highlighting the problems, have you any answers to the problems or are you just ignoring the problems?

No I’m not, can you please read the posts.

All human system are inefficient even private ones they make mistakes often costly ones, and it can bring down a company, And governments can make mistakes and governments have fallen because of them.

But it comes back to the problem I highlighted that you’re not addressing - all governments are going to get involved in the economy the only way to stop them would be to get rid of them and let wealth be in control, but even that doesn’t work because you’d only end up with government just a plutocratic oligarchic government, working for the interests of a few.

*

And unpopular democratic governments get elected out of power.

But it is reality against fantasy – long before your ideological ‘free market’ was in place it would have been corrupted to serve the interests of wealth.

Free market = plutocratic tyranny.
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/s...?t=353336&f=36

*

Or they take control and form cables to fix prices and keep out competition. That is why there are laws and regulations to stop such things. Laws and regulation brought in and policed by government

*

Again reality against fantasy – long before your ideological ‘free market’ was in place it would have been corrupted to serve the interests of wealth

Free market = plutocratic tyranny.
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/s...?t=353336&f=36

And I’m sure that the monopoly which has the power will not use that power to block out any competition. I’m sure that they would look sympathetically at any competition squeezing their profits, even when there is nothing stopping them from using even naked force to shut them down?

*

As I’ve said to me it is about balance, but that you’d have no balance you’d hand over virtually all power to wealth.

 

What you just described is Balance! Which is generally the only real way to have a thing work. Artificial manipulation of this system by the government only leads to more trouble than if it were allowed to simply keep working naturally. Goods/services for money/other goods/other services without a lot of government interference would for the most part keep everything honest and aboveboard. It would be much easier to find better quality in goods and food for example. The more regulation, the less choice. The more regulation, the more difficult it all becomes. Now, of course, SOME regulations are a given. After all, we would not want to be eating lettuce that arrived in a garbage truck would we? (this actually happens even WITH regulations...) No, I think eventually the population who does the actual consuming would ultimately be the regulation. Government has involved itself so heavily in every aspect of existence that it's hard for people to even imagine how a thing could actually work really well by itself. Unfortunate.

 

:beatdeadhorse5:Jeezus, Blab, yer losin' it, ain't?.

I say what I mean and mean what I say. Always, and without exception. Even when I'm angry. There are no hidden meanings here. If you are trying to read anything else into what I am saying, you are wrong.
:beatdeadhorse5:

 

exactly. im 100% with u on this post. i like the post u have after this one too. it really describes where this thread is going. beating a dead horse.

 

Maybe Balbus should do his job and lock a rambling, off-topic thread.





Or Aris?



C'mon... I thought we had moderators for a reason!

 

dont fool urself

 

I wasn't, that was a joke.



Expectations are premeditated resentments.

 

i expect pretty little from people. i think thats y im a generally very relaxed person. they call that a type B personality right?

 

I guess thats what they might consider a Type-B personality.


Theres many more types of personalities than two!

"Expectations are premeditated resentments" is one of my favorite sayings.

So much so that it is tattooed on my foot.

It helps me by allowing me to be conscious in the way I attach to people/things. (most of the time)

It allows me to be much more detached, and less reactive and emotionally invested.

It teaches that when you have an expectation, you have created an attachment to something, and its fulfillment or lack thereof further affects you, because you get all wound up in your head, that you lose sight of the immediate Truth. With the loss of that Truth, you are left to stew and fester in your own emotions, effectively a slave to your mind.

Its a very feminine teaching...


I'm looking for a more masculine one to go on my other foot.

 

That's great! I like that one. I'm also a pretty non attached person, altho I DO like playing with psychology at times I see this all the time, some folks just sit and stew for hours when they could just go out and go for a walk or water the garden and not be so miserable.... And believe it, no matter how mad I might seem, I'm always typing with a smile on my face and a chuckle...

 

Even whilst addressing Balbus?...

 

Hell yea!!!!!

 

i have a garden and it is very relaxing... i also work on a farm however. the farm is not relaxing. funny how the same type of thing can be so very different. i dont really do many things because they relax me though. im just naturally a very relaxed person.

 

Earth

This seems to be another example of your right wing viewpoint.

I mean your statement could have come from any number of right leaning political groups.

Free market principles

Although I see you seem unable to addressing the criticism levelled at it.

Deregulation

Taking away the protections the community has against the interests of wealth. Oh and it worked so well before the present economic crisis.

Small Government

An ideological fixation with having a weak government (a weak democratic element in society) without caring if it a good or bad government just as long as it’s a weak one.

Tax cuts

Add to this your already expressed view of basically having massive tax cuts and you end up with the wet dream of a large section of established wealth.

*

And that’s fine, you have a right wing stance, but why do you claim you’re not right wing?

And why are you so unwilling to discuss you’re right wing views openly?

 

As I said much earlier in this thread – it can sometimes be difficult to take people at their word when it comes to a political stance. It is much better to examine what they say and make up your mind even if there is a contradiction between the two.

And I think this thread has thrown up some perfect examples of this, but it seems to have run its course, so if no one objects I’ll close it tomorrow.

 

balbus, you do realize that small government is not really a right wing ideal. they claim that it is but its clearly not. their words do not match their actions. for example George Bush who was a republican and therefore claims small government goes and passes such things as the Patriot Act and No Child Left Behind Act. these are not acts of small government but of large government. the right wing does not support small government. they only claim to. that is why it is a libertarian viewpoint. you however confuse libertarian with republican however they are very different. here is another difference. in general, the right wing tends to oppose abortion. a true libertarian would be pro choice because it gives more freedom to the people. if u did about 3 minutes of research on the libertarian party u would find they are not similar to the right wing as u have claimed in the past

 

Balbus, fuck off and close the thread already. But make sure to get in the last word.