https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL-y...eature=g-all-u
Why anybody would vote for Romney or Obama over Ron Paul is beyond me.
Printable View
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL-y...eature=g-all-u
Why anybody would vote for Romney or Obama over Ron Paul is beyond me.
I'd like to think it's because their beliefs better coincide with Romney or Obama. That they're educated voters, voting for the candidate that best represents them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tir_na_nOg
Unfortunately, it's really because the general voting populous are apathetic, bumper-sticker voters.
Because money controls politics. It's really easy. It won't get fixed until all of you decide to burn the whole fucking system down and rebuild it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tir_na_nOg
Or citizens could instead commit themselves to vote for 3rd party candidates exclusively - as most of the people running as 3rd party are idealogues who are not in it for the money or power ... since if they were, they'd be in one of the two major parties (which in my opinion are essentially identical clones when it comes to virtually all major [i.e., money-related] issues)Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmacky
But of course it will always be drummed into people's heads that they're "throwing away their vote" if they dare to prefer someone outside the system's anointed candidates.
I view US-style "democracy" as essentially a farce. People only think they are voting for their own choice of candidate, but in reality they're basically being given a choice between two people who have already been pre-approved (if not hand-picked) by the ruling establishment.
It is a farce. Even if you got a significant number of people voting for "fringe" candidates, their support would still get washed out by the great unwashed. The mere notion that a 15-45 second commercial spot can sway votes is proof of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by zot
^^^ For the people who lack the intellect to figure things out for themselves, Here's a simple rule they can follow: ALWAYS VOTE OUT THE INCUMBENT. That would go a long way to get rid of corruption, as it's the career politicians who are the worst.
A good example is Chris Dodd, who spent a lifetime in government taking bribes from the MPAA, and as a reward for such good service doing their bidding, they made him CEO, complete with a 7-figure salary. (We're supposed to completely forget the countless times that he swore he would never, ever work lobbying the government after leaving office) And this is the rule, not the exception. The people running the MPAA and RIAA, past and present, have previously worked in the government. (At least Dodd was honest enough to openly threaten recently that the politicians he personally bribes who are not following orders risk losing their bribe money.)
--- And vice-versa. So many of their lawyers and enforcers shift over to the FBI and "Justice" departments. It used to be called a "revolving door" -- but now there's hardly any door left anymore -- it's just one big smoke-filled room.
So am I winning you over, burn it all down right?Quote:
Originally Posted by zot
^^^ No need to win me over. I'd like to see the federal government completely disbanded -- all of it, including the military -- and let the state/local governments run their own affairs.
It might seem crazy to a lot of people conditioned to think that way, but that's how the United States actually started out, and largely remained for a long time. It's only been since 1933 that the federal government -and taxation- has grown like a cancer. As well as the lobbies and corporations that get rich milking it. And it's only been since 1940 that this country has had a permanent standing army and military-industrial complex.
If a giant comet or asteroid were to come down directly on Washington DC, all I know is I'd have a great deal more money in my pocket and a lot more personal freedom. And I'm sure a renewed faith in God.
So basically, you'd rather have 50 smaller countries than your US of A?Quote:
Originally Posted by zot
Just to be clear here: If Washington was wiped out, you'd regard that as a good thing? Or would the strike have to be a tad more surgical?Quote:
If a giant comet or asteroid were to come down directly on Washington DC, all I know is I'd have a great deal more money in my pocket and a lot more personal freedom. And I'm sure a renewed faith in God.
I'm not sure if anyone of national significance lives in Washington.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snee
You wouldn't have ANY money in your pocket (US currency being a Federal thing, ya know) and how exactly did the Federal government impinge upon your "freedom" today?Quote:
Originally Posted by zot
I can't speak for zot, but it would be chaos, and I would feast upon the flesh of the children of people who deny me their possessions!Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
OK, but serious now. I hate this society and wouldn't mind seeing it suffer to rebuild something devoid of commercial/financial influence, since it'd be like, a noble cause. I'm not personally as upset with the government as I am over the manipulation and control over the government by groups with plenty a dollar to spend. I only last year was able to get affordable health coverage (< $200/mo.) that didn't put a lifetime indemnity rider on anything that has to do with my heart or cardiovascular system (if they didn't outright reject me).
I am now getting notices about letting my cat roam around outside in our condo, the first time in 6 years, because we pissed off someone who knows members of the board by no longer being friendly with him. Since pets outdoors, not on leashes, is a violation of the rules, they can assess fines; if those go unpaid, they can lead to a legal eviction and forced foreclosure on the unit (by way of lien). This is something that really irks me, if I were tone down my reserved opinion. In reality, these board members have a different modus operandi, they have lawyer friends eager to secure their own payout. I've got about a half dozen other stories but will stop there. I have made several plans in the past to murder two of the board members, but have postponed entertaining the thought any further until I've secured my plans to leave the country.
I think I'm getting at a point here, it's shit like this that makes this country fucked.
So, the Federal gubmint is sending you notices about your cat?
If you're going to bitch about Federal intrusion, do you still get to complain about State or local interference?
I was pretty certain I got to a point about lobbying and this style of governing giving license to fuck a fool or twenty at the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
P.S. I'm not the state > federal guy
I'm the fuck the capitalist government guy.
Why isn't Ron Paul doing better?
Because the media has, so far, intentionally ignored him. I'm not a fan of the Republicans but so far Ron Paul is the only sane American politician out there. It's actually kinda scary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LosHooligun
I agree with you!
Wallah.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
Another way of forcing this issue is through the use of term limits.Quote:
Originally Posted by zot
There should be term limits for the Senate and the House.
And you think Cuba or North Korea would be better than the United States?Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmackyI was pretty certain I got to a point about lobbying and this style of governing giving license to fuck a fool or twenty at the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
P.S. I'm not the state > federal guy
I'm the fuck the capitalist government guy.
I'm sure they have room for one more person like you.
So the only non-capitalist countries are Cuba and N. Korea? And viewpoints contrary to capitalism aren't allowed in your version of America? :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999And you think Cuba or North Korea would be better than the United States?Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmacky
I'm sure they have room for one more person like you.
School doesn't seem to be rubbing off on you, 9's...
Come on! Comrade Macky is so obviously a commie. He may deny it, but in the immortal words of Chip Kelly: "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a god damned duck!"Quote:
Originally Posted by megabytemeSo the only non-capitalist countries are Cuba and N. Korea? And viewpoints contrary to capitalism aren't allowed in your version of America? :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
School doesn't seem to be rubbing off on you, 9's...
I'm merely saying he might feel more comfortable surrounded by his own kind in some place like Cuba or North Korea, since their system of government is so much better than ours, in his mind anyways.
The U.S. government is subject to measures by corporate interests in where policy making is aimed at capitalist priorities. The Chinese government is currently operating in similar fashion, and they're supposedly a communist state. I am not against a capitalist economy, just against their involvement in government. I also think communism can work for some nations, depending on their population and situation with natural resources, primary production, and labor markets. I don't think communism would work in the U.S. However, I do feel that since government is in essence a socialist enterprise, there's plenty of room for socialist policy in every nation, and the U.S. could use a little more of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999And you think Cuba or North Korea would be better than the United States?Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmacky
I'm sure they have room for one more person like you.
I feel so many more systems of governance are better than the that of the U.S., but when have I ever listed oppression as anything other than a major con? It seems to fit your current motif over mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
So, you don't oppose capitalism, but the government's role in it, right?
I can agree with that.
Capitalism didn't fail us. We failed it.
We let the government get in its way.
We should have never done any bail outs of anyone-- Wall Street, GM, etc.
We should have let them all file bankruptcy.
And we shouldn't have required banks to lend to people who obviously couldn't afford to pay back their mortgages. We should let the banks decide who they will or will not loan money to based on credit worthiness and their ability to repay the loans, and then when the banks make a risky decision and it blows up in their face, they have to eat it instead of coming to us (the taxpayers) and expecting to be bailed out. They would be much more careful about who they loaned money to, and this huge real estate bubble would never have even happened.
Other way around, capitalism interfered with government, even though it already benefits from it, it decided to take more, slowly eating away the barrier that keeps it from consuming itself. I wouldn't have minded if all the banks and major businesses crashed and sucked down the entire U.S. economy with it, it's the kind of catalyst we'd need to build up something smarter. However, it was the smarter move of government and business alike to bail them out, in both of their interests of self-preservation.
Capitalism STRONGLY favors (to the point of sheer disgusting disproportion) those who inherit wealth.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
I can't say I feel sorry for "failing" capitalism. Capitalism fails the masses- who work endlessly for very little, on a daily basis.
What happens when the banks go down? Does this mean that all their investors/gamblers lose all their money too? Sound like a Democratic/Socialist view of things. Nice to see that 'paid for' education is getting through to you 69.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
Hey! You're back!Quote:
Originally Posted by bigboabWhat happens when the banks go down? Does this mean that all their investors/gamblers lose all their money too? Sound like a Democratic/Socialist view of things. Nice to see that 'paid for' education is getting through to you 69.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
If that is their view of it, then it that one particular instance, I agree with them.
In pure capitalism, with no help and no hindrance from the government, yes, when the banks fail due to giving loans to people who can't afford to pay them back, then the investors/gamblers would all lose their money.
I'll bet the investors would make sure that the banks stopped giving risky loans to people who obviously could not afford to pay them back, and they would want realistic appraisals of the homes and land upon which the loans were made.
I would not have any rules, regulations, or laws for the banks-- let them do whatever they want to do, and take on as much risk as they feel they can handle, but when it blows up in the faces from unwise investments and schemes, they would know that no one is going to bail them out. They would just have to file bankruptcy. Just like everybody else.
And yes, when I graduate from college, I will not have any student loans to pay back, because my tuition and college expenses are being paid in full right now. That is the way to live your life-- don't go into debt. Pay as you go. This is something the United States needs to learn. Stop spending more money than you take in.
Hmmm... I wonder if that is why I like capitalism so much? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by megabytemeCapitalism STRONGLY favors (to the point of sheer disgusting disproportion) those who inherit wealth.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
I can't say I feel sorry for "failing" capitalism. Capitalism fails the masses- who work endlessly for very little, on a daily basis.
Capitalism worked very well for most of this country's existence, and is only having trouble now because it has become entangled in the web of the federal and state governments.
It's time for some pruning, and I think the sleeping giant is waking up and is going to break free from all of this. The scales are falling off of peoples' eyes now.
Why am I not surprised that you seem to be saying that you think the bailout was right?Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmacky
Because I'm not saying it was "right", and comprehension isn't your strong suit. Since your livelihood doesn't rely on your education, I'm not surprised by this.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999Why am I not surprised that you seem to be saying that you think the bailout was right?Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmacky
Says the boy who doesn't earn his dollar.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
Capitalism is in essence psychopathic and only worked to our advantage when tightly held in check.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
You like greed, not capitalism.Quote:
Originally Posted by 9....
I went with pseudo-witty the first time around, but I meant to amend it so this time I'll address the elephant in the room. Your system would prevent 98 % of businesses from starting. I'm just guestimating there, you can argue as to whether it's probably 97 or 99 %.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
It's closer to 30%. There are a lot more tiny business start-ups than ones where the purchase of expensive fixed assets is necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmackyI went with pseudo-witty the first time around, but I meant to amend it so this time I'll address the elephant in the room. Your system would prevent 98 % of businesses from starting. I'm just guestimating there, you can argue as to whether it's probably 97 or 99 %.Quote:
Originally Posted by 999969999
I'm guessing at the percentage, too, but my guess is going to be much better. It's expansion where businesses often get into debt.
I did lol slightly when I read your post in a 'did he really write that' kinda way.
I'm talking about the 999 guy. How is the housing market going to work if no one can get into debt?
Oh, wait, I know. Communism!
I'm generalizing here in the theme he presented, i.e. using other people's money (which he has already abused). Basically, I was including investment. I was still being pseudo-witty :(Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
You're making me wish I'd read this thread so I could tell what the fuck you're talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmackyI'm generalizing here in the theme he presented, i.e. using other people's money (which he has already abused). Basically, I was including investment. I was still being pseudo-witty :(Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
Spoiler: Shownot really.
It wasn't a spoiler, I already knew when you started out with "You're making me wish".Quote:
Originally Posted by mankerYou're making me wish I'd read this thread so I could tell what the fuck you're talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmacky
Spoiler: Shownot really.
Is that my contradictory spoiler tell :dabs:
When I'm the subject of the secondary pronoun, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker