So long as the power remains always with the people, the dog is kept under control. If the governed no longer rule the government then you have a problem, but not one that capitalism or communism can fix.
You need the state as the balance to corporate power, and need the people as balance to the state powers. Nature, Economics or God would be, I assume the balance on the people's power
Posted: 16 Dec 2009 22:10
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: So long as the power remains always with the people
Which is the point. The bigger government gets the less it has to listen to the people. You just don't want to put everything in life in the hands of the government, if we can handle it ourselves reasonably. If we have issues with healthcare shouldn't the public take up the fight instead of relying on politicians? The solutions they come up with take 5 billion pages so nobody can argue with them figuring who has time to read all that. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 16 Dec 2009 23:04
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
But Tim, what tools do the people have against corporations except the government.
I agree the force for change should come from the people (arguably it has as the people have elected congress and the president to make these decisions), but individuals are always weaker than conglomerations. So an individual has little power against a corporation or the state, but large groups of people have power against both. The problem is, that because we are in an employer based healthcare system individuals don't buy their insurance. There is no individual market force to create the change you are looking for.
If you want to have some kind of market you have to throw out the system we currently have in place and have everyone buy their insurance individually. This is a system that has never been tried, and unless you mandate a national wage increase for all people who will lose thier company sponsored benefits, you are going to be leaving a great deal of people high and dry.
It's not a question of what system is perfect, it's figureing out what system provides the best service for the most people at the lowest cost and transitioning to that.
Unfortunatly people get soo bogged down in ideology that it is hard to have a reasonable conversation.
I'm thinking about switching my party affiliation for the first time to the Whigs. They're back and they look like they've got some good ideas.
Posted: 17 Dec 2009 18:27
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: what tools do the people have against corporations except the government.
They can keep their money. Spend it on companies they trust.
If you put your trust in the government you are basically putting your trust in a bunch of shady politicians out to do anything to get power and re-elected the next time around. You don't want them controlling industry of any kind. That's why regulations have to be kept to a bare minimum. Regulations and laws shouldn't take up 5000 pages. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 17 Dec 2009 22:00
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
So, you trust the CEO of goldman sachs more than you trust your local elected representative.
In the end, The CEO of Goldman owe's you nothing, your local representative owes you for your vote.
It's pretty clear who an individual has more ability to influence, and thusly receive protection from.
The fact is, you may not even have direct business with Goldman Sachs, so you can't really pick up your dollars and go elsewhere, yet the actions (unregulated in your world) they take will certainly effect you.
That's the bottom line of it. There are companies who you don't deal with who can screw you over, and that's why you need the government to watch them. No one else has the power to do so, and without regulation they will make profit at the expense of everyone else....that's pretty much what we just went through.
Posted: 18 Dec 2009 20:27
Administrator Currently Offline
Posts: 4786
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote: So, you trust the CEO of goldman sachs more than you trust your local elected representative.
What's the chairman of goldman sachs got to do with me? If he sells something I don't want or does something I don't like I won't buy his products. __________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted: 18 Dec 2009 20:46
Registered User
Posts: 4725
Join Date: Aug 2007
Just for fun:
__________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles
And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted: 20 Dec 2009 04:25
Registered User Currently Offline
Posts: 391
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote: What's the chairman of goldman sachs got to do with me? If he sells something I don't want or does something I don't like I won't buy his products.
Tim, that's roughly akin to saying "I don't care if Dow Chemicals dumps wast up stream, I get my water down stream."
What goldmansachs does is going to effect you life (it probably already has), no one lives on an island anymore, nor has for about a hundred years or more.
You have little influence on goldman sachs, but their actions can have devistating effects on you.
