What are your political views?

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah, I know, government has magical investigative powers. God forbid if a private organization ever wanted to research something.

Honestly, of course there are reports of this. I would be very surprised if there weren't reports about this all the time actually, in most industries. Now, we can say that maybe Toyota had a high point. We might say it had a low point as well. I don't really know, but frankly, it isn't as if there aren't a lot of claims of wrongdoing.

Yeah, proper government is necessary because management ignores workers and so government has to prevent this by finding out after the problem occurs. Got it.

Yes, because WE'RE GOING TO ABOLISH THIS SOMEHOW!! ! Oh yeah, I mean, human corruption? Thing of the past now that we have 20 regulators for every person actually doing work. Sand, quit being ridiculous. There are costs, and there are benefits, and the issue is that perfection doesn't exist, so we have to pick a level of benefits that outweigh the costs. In most cases, this means that some poor f**k will get screwed over. Is this "the will of God"? No, this is just a recognition that we live in a world with rational restraints. Magical utopias don't exist, Sand. If you want your unicorn, you're going to have to glue it on the old fashioned way. As it stands though, there will always be principle-agent problems, monitoring costs that are too high to deal with, perverse incentives that pop up, etc, and there are also always people too clever for either their good or the good of others, but what are we to do? Kill the clever ones?

There you go chasing toy balloons filled with your hot air and pretending the faces you have scribbled on them is me. Where did you get the idea I was pursuing utopia or assuming that having government will cure all corruption? Corruption exists, will probably always exist and cannot be permitted to exist without some counterforce. That's what good government should and must be about. You are advocating no government so that the inherent social malignancies shall prosper unopposed. That's plain nuts and I wonder why someone like you who seems to have the capacity to think thinks otherwise.

i am blind politically and i do not have a political guide dog.
so i have no political view

And it is also a fact that there were folks who bought food locally and made it from scratch and they did not get sick. It comes down to this: careful shopping. Let the buyer beware.

ruveyn

I voted very liberal but some of my views are not...like gun control and the death penalty...I say shoot em and fry em...jk

anyway as far as the arguement of coruption in government. Momma always said....."you cant legislate morality"
meaning no matter what regulations you put up the someone will just find a way around them...but without some regulations there will be a free-for all.

Rules are like locks...only keep a honest person honest.

however on the food thing...without regulation how would you know that the saminellia (sp) came from peter pan...it could have come from the bread or the jelly...or the spoon left on the counter that you used when it was laying out already. Without someone to investigate and punish the offenders and warn the public...how would you know? Yes there could be a private sector that investigates and informs the public...but that private sector has no authority to restrict an offending producer's ability to produce. Ya there is public knowlege...but there are always idiots, nieve children, and the religious nuts who dont believe in the media.

as far as
High heels.....they are supposed to make your butt look rounder by positioning of the leg musles...but were origionally worn by men in the renicsance (sp)....I would like to see that trend come back

motercycles...I have a baby picture of me in the saddle bag of a motorcycle as my dad was a biker till his brother got killed poping a wheelie through a red light only to meet a semi truck...ohhhch

baked beans...great with barbeque sauce

tuba....never played one and never liked the sound and It looks like blowing on a giant snail

the marshmallow thing...well asuming that it got past the earth's orbit...it would be a radioactive mashmallow collecting debris at an alarming rate...thus creating its own mass and gravity collecting even more debris until it is the size of the moon...slaming into the earth's surface and wiping out life as we know it...better watch out for those radioactive marshmallows

Failing to explain yourself clearly due to your desire for pompous rhetoric is hardly my fault. If you need a communication class, please get the help you need.

Where did I get this idea? You lampooned a rational recognition that corruption will always exist comparing it to the "will of God", either you need reading classes, or writing classes, and I do not care which one.

Sand, consumers oppose the purchasing of bad products, and they use fancy tools such as magazine, online reviews, and news stories to get this kind of information *all* the time. The fact that you can't get it into your head that society already has some counter-measures is not my fault, nor is it my fault that you can't recognize that these counter-measures could likely be further strengthened if they became more socially necessary. Your failing is pretty simple; it is boiling down the issue too quickly into overly simplistic positions.

Careful shopping is also easier today given that in order to find a review for a product, all one has to do is look online. Additionally, if careful shopping ends up making a huge difference at little financial cost, then a number of people will do it, and those who don't will likely still benefit from the good work of the careful shoppers.

I must admire the neat way you distort what I say to inflate your nonsense.
My statement:"This is why proper government is necessary. At present it doesn't fund the Food and Drug administration sufficiently to provide proper inspection. Your blanket acceptance of people dying for corrupt practices smells a bit too much like the fatal acceptance of religious organizations that this is "the will of God". I'm afraid the "will of corruption" doesn't carry that kind of emotional weight" What kind of lampooning is that when I merely pointed out that corruption is unacceptable and must be confronted with government regulation and not accepted as the will of God?.
Your silly offering of an astute public researching magazine reviews to decide what brand of hamburger to buy indicates you have no concept of how the media is controlled and what kind of research people do when buying daily comestibles-, aside from the obvious fact that much of the food is consumed in fast food outlets and who the hell knows what they put in their stuff? The average shopper just shops and reads the flyers shoved in their mailboxes about daily sales. If people don't really pay attention to their political choices, the chance they will analyze their meats and vegetables has very little possibility if any. You live in some fantasy of the USA.

Right.....


Corruption is acceptable, in that we all must recognize that corruption will exist and that we accept it. I mean, we can always pour more resources into stopping corruption, but at some point this is a waste. So, your statement "corruption is unacceptable" must be accepted as wrong simply because you do not wish to pour infinite resources to continually attempt to reduce corruption.


Ok, but who is controlling the media? I mean, if I am one restaurant, then I want the other guys to be discredited. The news station though generally can't discredit itself too much. Even further, if one media source hops on a story about rats in restaurants and I ignore the matter, then that other media source gets more attention. Is this to say that the system is perfect? No, but frankly, there isn't a monolithic media anyway. Magazine, TV, Internet sources, etc, all are valid.

As for fast food places, um.... fast food places have food that tastes good and is fast and cheap, who really cares whether it is made with beef or rat-meat so long as one doesn't get sick or die?

Finally, Sand, here's the problem with your model:
1) People don't make rational choices.
2) Therefore they don't make rational food choices (from 1)
3) Therefore they don't make rational political choices (from 1)
4) Therefore we trust people to make rational political choices (from ????)

I mean, you kind of have to accept rational political choices, as if you *don't* then what makes you so sure that a governmental regulator will actually regulate things? I mean, the only check is "rational political choices" and you generally deny rational choices, so, why couldn't the government regulator be corrupt? There is nothing checking them, corruption would make their job easier, so... it seems to me that by your own logic, you've basically denied that political or market means should work.

However, I'd argue that people make rational food choices and irrational political choices. People don't have the time or energy to study economics, political science, law, or all of the other subjects much and so they don't, but rather often pick political actors more on identity, charisma, their feelings at the moment and other non-rational factors while failing to keep up with their choices. However, with food choices, they base their decision on their personal experiences, and the personal experiences that they hear other people as having, and given that personal experience is one of the most important metrics for food choice, this makes their food purchasing decisions relatively more rational.

This kind of model of irrational politics, but rational consumption habits isn't really strange seeming to me, and is upheld by other thinkers such as Bryan Caplan. And, it also makes sense if we regard the market system as evolutionary. If some behaviors are very good, or very bad, then actors have an incentive to change them because they have the ability to assess the goodness or badness with relative ease and the incentive to do so. With politics, assessment of quality, and incentives are both very weak, as we do not suffer much for irrational political choices and even professionals have difficulty in the assessment of the quality of political actions.

Your simple trust in the power of commerce to regulate itself is totally naive. Businesses are there to make money and they'll do it any way they can. The bigger they get the more fiddling they do with their products.
You are perfectly right about government being difficult to control but it's the only tool we've got and that it's not used properly does not mean that it must be tossed away because nothing at all in control is infinitely worse. Because GWB was monstrously bad government proves something about GWB, not government.

Corrected this part.


Well, that and our purchasing decisions. I think the purchasing decisions are more relevant. Additionally, I don't think you've justified the infinity. Nor do I think the problem is just GWB either, but rather politicians across a few decades.

I mean, let's even look at it another way: if people are apathetic in voting and politics, and businesses aren't, then who will have control? Businesses! So, why should we give them this tool to screw us even more?

Your shoving your words in my mouth is not clever, it is unethical and requires an apology. If you want to modify my quote it must be clearly indicated what you are doing. Calling it a correction is insufficient. This calls for an official complaint.

I am not apologizing and that's that.

Conservatism
UK Unionism
Euroscepticism
Mild libertarianism
Classical liberalism

Socialist and heavily leaning on anarchist. I believe the economy should be pretty much dictated (mild hyperbole), and any other matter should be left to individual contract, enforced by the court, and punished by prison time or a fee. The consequences should of course be mentioned in the contract, as individual contract should overrule the court. All laws should be in the form of rights, and inability to preserve another's rights is punishable by law. Also, any individual who can pay taxes and does pay taxes is given all of these rights. For anyone who is considered poor, taxes is a mere penny. Anyone who profoundly rich, it is ten percent. All other incomes are arbitrary. If anything doesn't work it can be modified by a vote proposed to the people.

These are my political beliefs. Yes, I am crazy.

Very liberal, very libertarian on social issues and on economic issues. I believe the government should provide for its people, make sure everyone pays their fair share on taxes and so on. Which means a adequate social safety net, consumer protection, government funding for science and research, infrastructure and so on. I also believe people have the right to bear arms and guns should only be regulated in Public Places or people with criminal records. I also believe in a strong Single-Payer health system and so on. In today's world I would be considered at the left-wing fridges of the U.S Democratic Party but back before 1980 I would be a Mainstream Democrat. Without the government the people would be screwed big time.

Politicians with similar political views. Dwight Eisenhower, Truman, FDR as well as most New Dealers, Abraham Lincoin as well as Thomas Jefferson.

One of my favorite senators right now is Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. A Independent/ Democratic-Socialist who caucuses with the Democrats.