Screw 'em if they hate us
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Tuesday, July 1, 2008 09:13
VIEWED: 19860
PAGE 23 of 30
Rue: If you ain't even gonna pretend to tell the truth, just keep your mouth shut, right-O.
I know damn well that corporate power springs in part from being able to "buy off" the gov - and that the Sherman, and later Clayton, anti-trust acts and trust busting were intended to prevent that particular problem from coming about in the first place, so once again you flat refuse to acknowledge what I just said and then shovel a load of shit on top of it.
Part of the reason such trust-busting failed was that in practice it became a tool for established corps with the financial and political influence to remain unmolested while having potential up and coming competitors destroyed, one nasty side effect of this has been the decline of effective competition and any real motive to keep prices low or innovate.
Which then leads to...
The consolidation and monopolisation also mentioned, as the path of maximum profit, least accountability - something that is a damned frequent bitch of mine and thus I can't possibly see how your insulting and ficticious statement could even possibly apply unless once again you've categorised folk and responded by category instead of addressing folk as individuals.
Believe me, I ain't the only one pissed off, ask ANY hard core videogamer how they feel about Electronic Arts using the America Online model of buying, then more or less devouring smaller, more innovative (and arguably better) game companies resulting in a lack of quality games that is probably going to cause a repeat of the original video game market crash, and will almost certainly cause the implosion of the Xbox360 platform due to lack of decent content.
I am well aware of the dangers of such corporatism and have addressed it at length and repeatedly here, on so many occasions that your statement is at best woefully ignorant and at worst maliciously false.
Did I not just expend considerable effort pointing out that the primary and most effective check and balance AGAINST this problem was more or less strangled in it's crib by the combined forces of both Gov and Corps ?
Look at it from an ecological model - releasing a prolific species into the wild while killing off all it's natural predators is the same kind of disaster, yes ?
The simplest corrective action would be to somehow prevent Gov from interfering on the Corp side, and remove the legislative straightjacket from the Unions.
As eviscerated and crippled as they currently are, that wouldn't have a very immediate impact but over time it WOULD add at least to the level of difficulty by requiring a Corp to at least in part answer to the folk they are employing instead of making employment almost a condition of de-facto servitude.
More wasted words, no doubt, but there you have it.
Siggy: Not my point at all, actually - I was pointing out that in times when the people HAVE engaged at the ballot box, quite successfully, those in power simply refused to accept the result.... which brings up the question of what do you DO then ?
I think that is a very valid question, myself.
As for the small percentage, I am well aware of the problem of the smaller your core group, the more radical they must be - one need look no further than the right to effective self defense and how we're only hanging onto that by our fingernails *because* of the downright rabidity of the few defending it, something I would very much like to change, but I am going for a wider horizon here.
Rather than a teensy tiny ultra radical collective, our method is to get to our younger generations and give them information and resources other than Gov-Corp propaganda - something that has strangely become easier every year, for a multitude of reasons, one of which seems that the more divergent the message from the obvious realities around them, the harder it's becoming for this social order to force kids to swallow it, this being IMHO one of the reasons for the ever increasing flood of chemical intervention to smooth this bumpy ride out....
Remember how lo
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
That wasn't what I was questioning at all. The system is what the system is and anyone and everyone should use it to their advantage (within reason). I was just wondering what you were getting at by suggesting I should leave the country rather than try to change things.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rockqu
Like I said somewhere above I didn't know where you were coming from and what was motivating you. As far as calling you a person who would abandon his country, I wouldn't do that and I don't think choosing to move to another country for political reasons a bad thing because of my father. If my dad didn't leave Hungary I wouldn't be me or here.
http://swyzzlestyx.com/index.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I was under the impression that the anti-trust acts simply had to do with preventing monopolistic (anti-competitive behavior) with no reflection on the government at all.
I know damn well that corporate power springs in part from being able to "buy off" the gov - and that the Sherman, and later Clayton, anti-trust acts and trust busting were intended to prevent that particular problem from coming about in the first place
Quote:If you meant to say the law is a tool for destroying small businesses or propping up big ones, that is not the case. Using Microsoft as an example, most of what MS did was clearly illegal even under our relatively weak laws. But the laws' biggest flaw is simply that it wasn't enforced. (Kollar-Kotelly)
Part of the reason such trust-busting failed was that in practice it became a tool for established corps with the financial and political influence to remain unmolested while having potential up and coming competitors destroyed
Quote:I'm not sure that would prevent monopolism. What I think would happen is that the corporation side would get more and more concentrated, and the union side would do likewise, until only two world-straddling giants would remain. There is NO getting around the fact that monopolies are more efficient due to economies of scale.
Did I not just expend considerable effort pointing out that the primary and most effective check and balance AGAINST this problem was more or less strangled in it's crib by the combined forces of both Gov and Corps?... The simplest corrective action would be to somehow prevent Gov from interfering on the Corp side, and remove the legislative straightjacket from the Unions.
Quote:Well, it depends. The civil rights marches were pretty successful.
Not my point at all, actually - I was pointing out that in times when the people HAVE engaged at the ballot box, quite successfully, those in power simply refused to accept the result.... which brings up the question of what do you DO then ? I think that is a very valid question, myself.
Quote:Except that I would point to the many successful movements of the past 40 years which were generated (apparently) by nothing more than discomfort.
Uncomfortable.. not so much, Hamlet and the Founding Fathers agree, folk will generally take shit until it becomes flat out impossible to do anything BUT react violently, and that kind of thing can go in a lot of directions, few of em good.
Quote:Well, any successful movement requires radicals. But the biggest problem is the frigging media. THOUSANDS of people have been tear-gassed, clubbed, and arrested over nothing. But since the media refused to air the tape, their story never got out. You have to BRING YOUR OWN CAMERA and POST IT ON THE INTERNET.
We're lookin for pissed off, or perhaps more appropriately, outraged - and in a slow burn and controlled fashion that allows a sustained push like a changing tide or a tree root under a sidewalk - you'll note that the beach and sidewalk always lose that one in the end, right ? Not sure if that's quite as clear as I'd like it to be, but hopefully the gist of it gets across.
---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
But your talking about a system of government, not an economic system.
Communism requires that the economy is directed by the government, so you can't really have one without the other.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Khyron - why is it when you post you try to shut down other opinions ?
See the pot. See the pot call the kettle black. Call the kettle black, pot. Call the kettle black.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer
When have I ever told someone not to post ? Please ... go find it.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frem
"I know damn well that corporate power springs in part from being able to "buy off" the gov ..."
Yes, PART of corporate power springs from that. And the rest ? From the power of life and death - literally. Who gets to work, how much they earn, whether or not it affords them water, food, clothing and shelter. If that isn't direct power over you and me I don't know what is. And, BTW, it has NOTHING to do with the government.
"I am well aware of the dangers of such corporatism and have addressed it at length and repeatedly here ..."
Please show me where, b/c your biggest solution seems to be - well, gee, if everybody had a gun ... and we just somehow became more local ... No kidding, that's what comes across. Somehow the nature of capitalism, to expand and agglomerate and eventually control, will just ... go away.
IF pushed you MAY say that sure government might have some possible usefulness here or there - but nowhere have I seen you actually propose a solution that I remember. And certainly none that involves the cooperative power of society to deal with things too big for individuals.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Geezer
When have I ever told someone not to post ? Please ... go find it.
Never said you did. You just insult, demean, obfuscate, lie, redefine words and concepts to fit your agenda, and - when all else fails - bullshit.
BTW, how's that research on Sweden as a Socialist country coming?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How's that research coming along to find just ONE good thing to say about the ol' US of A ?
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
From the power of life and death - literally. Who gets to work, how much they earn, whether or not it affords them water, food, clothing and shelter. If that isn't direct power over you and me I don't know what is. And, BTW, it has NOTHING to do with the government.
Ask the folks who lived under Communist rule in Russia and Eastern Europe about the government having the economic power of life and death. Hell, folk in Zimbabwe are starving to death right now because they didn't support Mugabe and the ZANU-PF. The generals in Burma are using economic pressure to shut down dissent. China is forcing over a million people to move so they can build the Three Gorges Dam project, to support their economic plans.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME