Page 2 of 2 [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

vibratetogether
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: WA, USA

13 Apr 2009, 3:36 pm

First off, let's not be naive and take the position that the income tax we pay goes to social services, infrastructure or anything of the sort. When you send off that check tomorrow, understand fully that this money will merely go to pay off the debt incurred through horribly short-sighted economic policies.

The public services hinted at in the "social contract" are paid for through legal, constitutional taxes such as gas taxes, sin taxes, sales tax, property tax, license fees, etc. The unconstitutional income tax is a legalized form of extortion, that doesn't even come from our government, but from the world of international bankers (no, I am not a NWO conspiracy guy, but there is a kernel of truth to their position).



JoJerome
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 261
Location: Lake Powell/Page AZ

13 Apr 2009, 4:59 pm

First of all, where is this Social Contract? Is it available as a Word Document?

Next, if history has shown us nothing it has shown us that private corporations will, given the chance, screw their customers into the ground just as badly as so many complain the government does. Government regulation is a form of checks and balances. See; "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair.

If recent events have shown us nothing it's that private corporations can and do run themselves belly up. Once the CEO has his millions, who cares if the company survives? See Bernie Madoff.

One could say it's aliens or god or the moon is made of green cheese, but all the hard evidence to our current economic crisis points to deregulation of the banks. Again, not that government regulation is perfect by any means, but some law and order is better than none at all.

Sorry, I take that back. Somalia effectively has no government and I'm sure we can all agree that it's a utopia that is a business model for the rest of the world.

As for social services in general, no they aren't perfectly run or organized. That does not mean imho that they should be done away with altogether. When I hit ruveyn's age I expect my social security checks will not be adequate to live on. But I won't be ripping them up and sending them back to Washington (via Fed-Ex, not the government run Postal Service) as I'm sure ruveyn does being so against government services and handouts.



vibratetogether
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: WA, USA

13 Apr 2009, 5:13 pm

JoJerome wrote:
First of all, where is this Social Contract? Is it available as a Word Document?

Next, if history has shown us nothing it has shown us that private corporations will, given the chance, screw their customers into the ground just as badly as so many complain the government does. Government regulation is a form of checks and balances. See; "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair.

If recent events have shown us nothing it's that private corporations can and do run themselves belly up. Once the CEO has his millions, who cares if the company survives? See Bernie Madoff.

One could say it's aliens or god or the moon is made of green cheese, but all the hard evidence to our current economic crisis points to deregulation of the banks. Again, not that government regulation is perfect by any means, but some law and order is better than none at all.

Sorry, I take that back. Somalia effectively has no government and I'm sure we can all agree that it's a utopia that is a business model for the rest of the world.

As for social services in general, no they aren't perfectly run or organized. That does not mean imho that they should be done away with altogether. When I hit ruveyn's age I expect my social security checks will not be adequate to live on. But I won't be ripping them up and sending them back to Washington (via Fed-Ex, not the government run Postal Service) as I'm sure ruveyn does being so against government services and handouts.


This post shows a general misunderstanding of the legal entity known as the "corporation".

CEOs are legally bound to do whatever it takes to turn a profit. They are legally beholden to their shareholders.

The issue does not lie with whether or not to regulate, the issue lies with the legal construct itself. There should be no such thing as a "corporation", because the legal construct basically facilitates corrupt business practices. It almost makes it mandatory.

I highly suggest watching a documentary called "The Corporation". IMDB

When you have this sort of legal entity, you cannot have a free market.

In such an environment, when combined with lobbyists and corrupt politicians, often regulation enforces monopoly, as opposed to promoting healthy free trade.

So, while it may be true that we should regulate corporations, it is much more true that we should abolish the legal entity in the first place.



Henriksson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,534
Location: Sweden

13 Apr 2009, 5:15 pm

*sneaky subscription post*


_________________
"Purity is for drinking water, not people" - Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Apr 2009, 5:49 pm

JoJerome wrote:
I'm sure ruveyn does being so against government services and handouts.


That last thing I want is a private army. The one thing government ought to run is the military. Why? Because the military is to protect all of us, not just the one's who can afford to buy ships, tanks and planes.

ruveyn



vibratetogether
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: WA, USA

13 Apr 2009, 5:55 pm

ruveyn wrote:
JoJerome wrote:
I'm sure ruveyn does being so against government services and handouts.


That last thing I want is a private army. The one thing government ought to run is the military. Why? Because the military is to protect all of us, not just the one's who can afford to buy ships, tanks and planes.

ruveyn


In fairness, looking at the military-industrial complex, our military has a lot of private enterprise elements to it.



JoJerome
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 261
Location: Lake Powell/Page AZ

13 Apr 2009, 6:27 pm

vibratetogether wrote:
CEOs are legally bound to do whatever it takes to turn a profit. They are legally beholden to their shareholders.


"Legally." As in "government regulated or at least enforced by such legal entities as courts and police."

But ok, let's do away with corporations and make everything a privately owned business. In my experience privately owned businesses will also, given the chance, bilk people out of their money. Not all, but a fair share. Again, if "The Jungle" doesn't illustrate this, I'm not sure what will.

I will check out that documentary however. :)



vibratetogether
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: WA, USA

13 Apr 2009, 6:39 pm

JoJerome wrote:
vibratetogether wrote:
CEOs are legally bound to do whatever it takes to turn a profit. They are legally beholden to their shareholders.


"Legally." As in "government regulated or at least enforced by such legal entities as courts and police."

But ok, let's do away with corporations and make everything a privately owned business. In my experience privately owned businesses will also, given the chance, bilk people out of their money. Not all, but a fair share. Again, if "The Jungle" doesn't illustrate this, I'm not sure what will.

I will check out that documentary however. :)


You'll like the doc, guarantee.

Libertarian argument : In a truly free market, corrupt businesses will be put out of business by other non-corrupt businesses. Instead of government regulation, we need to look to private consumer advocacy groups like Consumer Reports so that we can self-regulate industry.



NobelCynic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 600
Location: New Jersey, U.S.A.

13 Apr 2009, 7:33 pm

Sand wrote:
I rather agree to the idea that everybody is responsible for paying taxes and those who would refuse to contribute to the general public good should be forced to contribute whether they like it or not.

What strikes me as really odd, is the notion of compelling a person to perform an action that is in his own best interests to perform. Of course Sand might justify this by the general stupidity of mankind (which he seems to exclude himself from,) and he may be right; but if he is, do we deserve goverment?

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
I didn't claim voluntary taxes to be a fantastically good thing.

Pity you didn't; I would have agreed with that.

The main argument against voluntary taxaction is the general opinion that the prevailing attitude would be "let somebody else do it." The problem with our system of compulsory taxaction is that is still the prevailing attitude only it is more plausible if you have a government that can make somebody else do it. If taxes were voluntary, the people who paid taxes would be those with the greater sense of civic duty; as it stands now, the people who pay taxes are those who aren't smart enough to get out of it.


_________________
NobelCynic (on WP)
My given name is Kenneth


NobelCynic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2006
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 600
Location: New Jersey, U.S.A.

15 Apr 2009, 7:38 pm

Unlike some, I love killing threads. I like to be the one who posted something so wise and so profound that there is nothing else to say on the topic; however, I don't think that my last post in this topic really qualifies.

The best business one could be in would be government; for then he could decide what his "customers" should pay for his service and what they have a right to expect in return for it; and if the customer doesn't agree, then there is obviously something wrong with his thinking which needs to be fixed.

Isn't there anyone who wants to say that this is not how it should be?


_________________
NobelCynic (on WP)
My given name is Kenneth


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

15 Apr 2009, 8:17 pm

NobelCynic wrote:
Unlike some, I love killing threads. I like to be the one who posted something so wise and so profound that there is nothing else to say on the topic; however, I don't think that my last post in this topic really qualifies.

The best business one could be in would be government; for then he could decide what his "customers" should pay for his service and what they have a right to expect in return for it; and if the customer doesn't agree, then there is obviously something wrong with his thinking which needs to be fixed.

Isn't there anyone who wants to say that this is not how it should be?

Why? If we kill that business, how will I enter? It sounds like a sweet deal if I get into the government end of it. :twisted: