God Bless the Corporations

We are corrupt because we are greedy.

Thank you. Coming from a neo-con, that's a nice compliment.

In regard to the role Gov't would play in trade. Yeah I said that. It's not the only idea we have. And you don't have to put on the armcuff to go to our meetings.

See, here in the US, we have these entities called states, and they also impose taxes, and at the moment, they are pretty damn resonable. You think our books are balanced now?

Pure speculation. You're too scared to think coherently. It's just change buddy.

That's fear mongering.

Really? Give examples.

 

I'm gonna have to side with Pointbreak here.

Well, so is everyone else with power in the world.

States' rights is bullshit IMO. The whole idea was drawn up in a time when going from Massachusets to Georgia took months and no contact could be effectively maintained between federal and locan gov't. It was necessary back then. Now we have telephones, the Internet, etc., and the reason for the whole thing doesn't exist anymore.

If we stop importing other countries' goods, and impose high tarrifs on what we do import, it's only logical to think that they would do the same to us.

If we only buy what's made here, our buying options will be limited. Prices would soar because it costs a lot more to produce something paying a union worker $7.50/hr plus benefits than it does to produce something paying a Chinese worker half that without benefits. The quality would go down, and the price would increase.

The U.S. tried what you describe back in the early 1800s for a few years, but it failed miserably. And that was back then. Today we are much more reliant on foreign goods.

 

I don't understand this comment.

So you think America could wage a one sided trade war where everyone else welcomed our exports even as we shut theirs out? Sounds like you have given this a lot of thought.

I'm not, and it wasn't.

No, it is economic fact. How could we not increase prices and lower choice by banning goods produced by more efficient producers (which is the reason they were imported in the first place)? That would affect living standards. Productivity would fall because rather than doing what we are most efficient at, we would be stuck trying to do everything. Where productivity goes, so do wages. It's all basic economics.

You want to find out what happens when we close our markets to "protect jobs"? Do a search on Smoot-Hawley.

Or consider this - two of the places with the best record of economic success since WW2 are Singapore and Hong Kong - both of which import virtually everything and are surrounded by vastly larger, vastly poorer countries. If competition from low wage countries hurts rich countries, then HK and Singapore would have never got off the ground.

 

No, who would've thunk it!?!

So that excuses greed?

That was the situation, but that's not the reason. The poewer of the federal government was intentionally limited, and you know it.

What's that matter? You're operating from this extreme consumerism that plagues this age. Simplify and localize everything. It takes a lifestyle change to heal.

Oh no, not limited buying options! The horror. You're damn right it costs more. The heads of most Corp. in this country (excluding mom & pop's, I mean major corporations that produce high ticket items) make MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars PROFIT. And people in the towns they live in don't have enough food to eat. Why do you think American workers can't produce quality products? Esp. if being paid a living wage? BTW 7.50/hr is no living wage. Prices would increase? Oh no!?! Boo Hoo! I can't get that new Cadillac for 100K!?! I also smoke, gamble & do drugs. Yet, I also support taxing the hell outta those. Sacrifice for the greater good. Look into it. It will help us all evolve faster.

More details. I seriously doubt my plans were ever tried here.

 

Trade war? By being self suffiecient? Is everything war to you people?

I've noticed almost all of the truly sick capitalists are products of some defunct economist or another.

If you want to prove your point, why don't you just tell me. If I want to prove you wrong, I'll do the research, deal?

If you consider a military government, or police state and rampant child labor a success, you really need to take a long look in the mirror.

 

Bacchus, Libertarians for government regulated economies is like Jews for Jesus.

lol, no comment.

No, but I don't see why we should hold ourselves to a higher standard than anyone else. While I'm with you on the idea we need stricter gov't control over the greedy corporations, you're taking it a bit too far.

That's debatable, but let's leave it for another thread.

Well, I'd like to have choices when I go to the store. If we simplify and localize everything, a lot of competition will be destroyed and companies won't feel a need for innovation or progress. Without competition from the outside, the products we will be forced to buy won't be of good quality, and there won't be many choices. There has to be incentive for progress and profit in order for manufacturers and retailers to take risks and try out new ideas.

I hate to say it, but that's the same mentality Lenin had. On paper it works, but in real life nobody wants to "sacrifice for the greater good." Simply giving people what they need to get by on and expecting them to do a good job is exactly what the Soviets did, and the system just didn't work. There has to be the opportunity for advancement, for personal improvement, in order for people to work hard. Taking out the millions of $ in profit to be made is only going to hurt the quality of goods in the long run.

Napping in history class? (So was I, but not on this chapter ) Here's some food for thought:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/id/17606.htm

http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/education/history/2002/smoot_hawley.html

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Smoot-Hawley&btnG=Google+Search

 

"No, but I don't see why we should hold ourselves to a higher standard than anyone else."

Of course you don't, Max.

So if we have fewer products on the shelves, quality will go down? This makes no sense. Ask anyone over 40 - they'lll tell you that in the past, when the majority of products were made domestically, products were made to last for years. They were made well and made from high-quality materials - this is why your plastic Chinese-made radio dies after 5 years, but grandma still has one made in 1945 that is still working. Due to current consumerism, products are made to be replaced - often intentionally - this fuels further consumerism. While some products are certainly made well - expensive Japanese cars, as an example - many imports are absolutely garbage plastic crap.

Yes, prices will be higher if we ban sweatshop-made goods, or goods made by countries with no environmental regulation. But they SHOULD be higher. Human beings deserve a living wage. The environment needs protection. Prices should reflect something other than western greed. And if we - as the largest consumer nation on the planet - aren't going to set a higher standard - who will?

As it is, neither Max nor PB have anything to worry about. Politicians are soundly in the pocket of corporate america, so there is no way any humanitarian trade legislation has a chance in hell of passing anytime soon. And by the time these imbeciles evolve, it will be far too late to do anything to save the few remaining redwoods. So rest easy, boys - corporate greed is winning.

 

It's funny how I never said I supported sweatshop labor, or labor from countries that have no regard for the environment. This thread (at this point anyway) doesn't have anything to do with living wages or environmental standards, it has to do with total protectionism like Bacchus is suggesting and it's effects. If you want to start calling me (and PB) a blackhearted imperial fascist (which I'm not), do it on a different thread.


Actually, looking back I did post one sentence about Chinese workers in one of my old posts. Sorry.

And yes, quality will decrease if we remove all outside competition from the market. And the price will rise, not because of lack of sweatshop labor but because of lack of competition. Whether it's German cars, Japanese televisions, or Indian t-shirts, if we remove foreign competition and localize all industries, quality will go down and prices will go up. A clock made 50 years ago lasts because of the work ethic and the quality of the time period, not the location it was made at.

 

Stop being a drama queen. I suppose people who use the term "price wars" get lumped in their to? You honestly think countries can be economically isolated and still prosper? You know nothing about economics. Talk about corporate greed, could you imagine the corruption if citizens were priced forced to buy only american products? What about japan? They import a ton of food becasue they cannot grow any with the amount of people they have on such a small island, but they make up for it with their electronic exports.

You cant bitch at US companies for outsourcing, becasue companies outsource to us as well. Foreign car companies, electronics, manufacturing, all have plants in the US. We live in a global market, and a nation cannot produce everything, it is impossible. Granted, the US can do a lot of that on it's own, but prices would skyrocket on everything without foregin competition.

Sick capitalists? You are the one who is supposedly a libertarian, you clearly arent. You dont even know the right stances of political parties for christ's sake. I AM a libertarian, I support minimal government in both economics and personal liberties/freedoms. You have failed to say anything to refute pointbreak's remarks, only saying "Everything to you people is war! Sick capitalists". Either put up a half way decent arguement or bail out of the discussion.

 

...says the libertarian. There is nothing extreme about wanting the best products at the cheapest prices. And the lower the income, the more the person would be harmed by your efforts to limit choice and force people to buy more expensive products. Is buying a Volvo "extreme" consumerism? Is buying French cheese and Chilean wine "extreme" consumerism? What if I want to read the Economist instead of Newsweek - is that "extreme"?

So you're so worried about those people in the towns that can't affort to eat and you want to close the borders to cheaper food - but Boo hoo for them if they don't like it! Its funny you would mention that 100K Cadillac - because its not just luxury items that would be more expensive, it would be virtually every product.

Call it what you want. But every other nation is going to try to be self sufficient too, and we'll all lose. As an aside, self-sufficiency ("juche") is the official philosophy of North Korea. 50 years of it and they remain dependent on food aid from their worst enemies.

There is no child labour in either Singapore or Hong Kong, which only goes to prove my point even more - they prosper despite being in the middle of a region where human rights and environmental standars are far lower.

 

It makes perfect sense. You cannot improve quality and price by reducing selection and competition.

That's nice, but of course that's not what was being talked about. We're talking about protectionism against lower wage countries, which WOULD raise prices and which WOULD be, effectively, a regressive tax on lower income people. In fact we're also talking about protectionism against high wage countries too - which would still have the same effect.

And prices do not reflect western greed, they reflect inescapable realities like demand, supply, and productivity. If evil America disappeared tomorrow,wages in Africa would not increase, in fact they would almost certainly fall.

The road to disaster is paved with good intentions, and some of these good intentions involve imposing humanitarian and environmental standards on countries that don't want them.

 

Like I said, I don't agree with the entire philosophy, but it does come the closest to representing my most treasured political values (i.e. civil liberties, victimless crimes, etc...). But it really is beside the point what you or I should pidgeonhole me. Let's just say, I'm registered that way.

I do see why we should hold ourselves to a higher standard.

Speculation. I disagree. I think the human is a very innovative animal. It's almost what defines us as something other than chimps.

I'm not into socialism.

Thanks for the links. I'll get to 'em after my vacation.

 

Who's being dramatic?

Mine can. Apparently not yours though, so I can see why you feel that way. But hey, on a bright note, I will be in Prague in a couple weeks, I promise to tip well, OK? [/QUOTE]

Who said forced? Only more economically viable.

There is nothing about the J. culture, people, economy, environment, or government that makes that an acceptable comparison.

Yes we can. We should learn to "need" less. Good I hope prices on everything go up. You don't need 4 TV's and 3 cars and 3 stories and etc.....

Some sick people are capitalists.

Some capitalists are sick people.

Are all capitalists sick people?

Are all sick people capitalists?

It's a faulty argument, a logical fallacy. Here learn something useful. http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

 

I think there is.

Oh, I agree totally, we should definately pay more to low paid workers. It's CEO's and CFO, (who by the way, proportionately have steadily increased the disparity between themselves and their average employee) who need to sacrifice.

No, but if you insist of french cheese or chilean wine, you should expect to pay more for it. I was reffering to the mind set of American consumerism. You know 1/3 of the world's resources and 1/10 of the population? (Mind you, I don't really know the figures, but I am aware of the disparity).

You say prosper, I say profit. The diference is the who. As is, we, as US consumers, are paying for exec. salaries not production costs.

 

I'm not trying to be offensive Bacchus, so don't take this the wrong way, but it seems to me that you're knowledge on economics, social studies and recent history is somewhat lacking, and it's showing.

That would make you a liberal democrat, not a Libertarian.

Fine, moving on.

Humans are innovative animals, but only when there is personal gain to be had. The type of economy you describe sounds like isolationist socialism, where we make everything domestically, punish the ones with the money, the government tells people what they need, and luxury items are considered evil. That's socialism (and extreme socialism at that), read up on Lenin and communist ideaology, it's closer to your beliefs than you might think.

Socialism isn't bad, in fact I think the U.S. might do well to borrow a few socialist ideas from Canada and Europe. But, from what I can gather from this thread, you do sound like a socialist.

The entire reading might take a half hour, I think you're just refusing to read what might make you reconsider your ideas.

 

I'm very well read, I just don't hold your opinions. So you call me uneducated?

Name one democrat who would abolish the FCC, the IRS and the DEA.

Gain is not limited to monetary gain.

Why do you feel the need to paste a sticker on my forehead? Yes, SOME of my ideas are very Socialistic. Yes some of my ideas are Libertarian. Why do MY personal ideals matter? D you think I have a chance of election or something? I thought we were talking about Corp. greed and why it helps rich people....

Got a life. Maybe when I get back from vacation. A little demanding aren't you?

 

You are. "Is everything a war to you silly guys!!."

I have lived in the United States for over 10 years now, ass. And I am going to the University of VA in a matter of days. Oh, and if you go over there with that additutde, then it is no wonder why people around the world hate Americans, it's arrogant people like you. They don't need your tips, the Czech Republic and Poland are the 2 wealthiest nations in eastern europe.


You don't know anything about economics. So basically, you want the United States to just produce everything on their own, shut off trade with other nations? Foreign economies as well as the U.S.'s would plummet, but fortunently, not many people around the world share your sentiments, or we would be screwed. There is no way the United States economy could survive on it's own, cut off from the rest of the world. We have to import and export, that is how you make money, and improve the standards of living for people--especially in third world countries. Third world nations are dying to trade with nations like the United States to increase their standards of living and quality of life, but people like you would force people into the ground.

Everyone here has pretty much disproved you, especially pointbreak. If shut out competition for products and services, those things decrease in quality, and that indirectly FORCES people to have limited purchasing or selling options. It's not viable, it's moronic.

YES THERE IS! Nations like Japan, who import most of their products besides electronics, would collapse. Our nation would collpase in major industries if we are not allowed to buy/sell Japanese products, like you would want.

It's none of your business if I want 4 TV's or 3 Cars! If you don't want them, DONT BUY THEM. You are certainly not a libertarian, libertarians don't tell people what simple items they can/cannot buy, that's bullshit. If I can buy 20 cars, then I should be able to buy 20 cars if I choose to. If you told me to my face I could not have a 3 story house, or most people, they would probably, and rightly so, tell you to F- off.

 

Uneducated, no. You might hold a PHD in medicine for all I know, and you sound intelligent enough, but in matters being discusses IN THIS THREAD (economics, globalization, etc.) you appear a tad dull, no offense. If anything, Pointbreak has disproved most of what you put forth, but you still keep on going.

Fine, quick thinking on my part. I'm not trying to label anyone, you did that to yourself when you said you were a libertarian (which, as Jozac pointed out, you can't be).

Try explaining that to the average worker whom you're trying to help with your extreme protectionism. In the real world, for the average human, money is the goal of work. Try telling a factory or construction worker to do backbreaking labor for 8 hours a day only to be rewarded with a meal and a pat on the back when the day's over.

Threads stray off topic, this is no rare occurence. I'm not pasting a sticker on your forehead, you pasted one on your own by declaring yourself a libertarian. All I was doing was explaining why that sticker was wrong.

You've had enough time to make all these posts today.....

 

You list your location as Prague. Living in the past a little? I can tell.

I got no attitude. Shit, I'm embarrased to be from this country right now. I guarantee no one will complain about being tipped.

Current exchange rate from CNB:

1 USA dollar - 25.894

No.

Prove it.

Exactly.

Prove it.

Opinion. Bring some facts, stats, expert opinion. Something. Otherwise you're just a megaphone for the system.

Finally some proof. It's in CAPS it's MUST be TRUE!

Why do believe all this propaganda? Can you prove anything?

Ahhhh, now I see. You're just a selfish person, no wonder you moved over here, you should fit in nicely.

BTW, I never said anything about can't have anything, I said want & need. All I say is that you need to pay extra for extra luxuries.

 

Someone PROVED something? I'd like to see that.

That's your imposition of socialism on me, I don't believe in this scenarios you've invented. Your mythical "factory or construction worker" would be, under my plan, making more money and not paying 10-50 % of it to the federal gov. He would be free to purchase anything he wanted, provided he was willing to pay more for foreign products than for American made ones. He would not have to worry about his job moving to India or elsewhere if his company still expected to sell their products in America.

Besides the point... I'll read what you want me to read, when I damn well feel like it.

Again, pretty demanding AREN'T you?