Great find 2 1/2 hours late.

I've seen quacks like him all the time, eloquently explaining the problems. But when it comes to solutions, it's the same old big government shit.

"It is especially not trivial now, because millions of Americans are dying to be enlisted -- enlisted to fix education, enlisted to research renewable energy, enlisted to repair our infrastructure, enlisted to help others. Look at the kids lining up to join Teach for America. They want our country to matter again. They want it to be about building wealth and dignity -- big profits and big purposes. When we just do one, we are less than the sum of our parts. When we do both, said Shriver, "no one can touch us.""

When Reagan famously said, "government is not the solution; it is the problem," too bad he didn't practice what he preached.

Friedman is a cheerleader for both the Iraq war and neoliberalism, i.e., the corporate globalization policies of deregulation, privatization and free trade. He doesn't have much credibility, but occasionally says something that isn't stupid.

I've seen quacks like him all the time, eloquently explaining the problems. But when it comes to solutions, it's the same old big government shit.


Ok Ray what is the solution?

Friedman is a cheerleader for both the Iraq war and neoliberalism, i.e., the corporate globalization policies of deregulation, privatization and free trade. He doesn't have much credibility, but occasionally says something that isn't stupid.
~NULLIFIDIAN

Indeed, in fact having reading The World is Flat I would have thought Friedman Ray's kinda guy.

"Indeed, in fact having reading The World is Flat I would have thought Friedman Ray's kinda guy."


Friedman isn't extreme enough for Ray. Anything short of anarcho-capitalism is socialist.

Nullifidian


Friedman is a cheerleader for both the Iraq war and neoliberalism, i.e., the corporate globalization policies of deregulation, privatization and free trade. He doesn't have much credibility, but occasionally says something that isn't stupid.

Posted by nullifidian at 2008-05-04 05:30 PM

I agree with you totally re the part I put in bold. I trust nothing that Friedman says. He is exactly what you said he was -- a cheerleader for both the Iraq war and neoliberalism, i.e., the corporate globalization policies of deregulation, privatization and free trade...

Of course we all want Friedman pretends to want himself (but doesn't) when he says Americans want to start taking care of our own country. BUT notice what Friedman does at the end of his article. In the second to the last paragraph he puts in a good word for Obama. Why? Because he likes Obama? Hell, no. Friedman wants Obama to run against McBush because all the polls are showing that if it came down to Obama v. McBush right now -- McBush would win. McCain = Bush. THAT is what Friedman and his ilk want -- 8 more years of Bush.

You will need to read between the lines from now on. I have seen other staunch Bushlovers -- like Peggy Noonan -- write pro-Obama commentaries. They know they can overthrow Obama in the general election and get in McCain. DON'T BE FOOLED.

I don't like any of the three candidates but I'm wise enough to know how politics work and am sitting back and watching. The Republicans -- especially the free trade Neocons like Friedman -- are subtly putting in pro-Obama hints here and there. Then if they get the Obama/McCain campaign they are drooling for, they will bring out hidden ammo I'm sure they've got up their sleeve to use against Obama and will do so close to the election and we will end up with -- God help us -- McBush.

Zap

There is no solution. This country is in debt to amounts too large to comprehend. It's downhill well into the next decade.

Anything short of anarcho-capitalism is socialist.

Well they are polar opposites. There are limits to how much socialism a capitalist society can afford without being overwhelmed. That is where we are today.

There are limits to how much socialism a capitalist society can afford without being overwhelmed.
~Ray


Purposely achieved.

"There are limits to how much socialism a capitalist society can afford without being overwhelmed. "

Given the multiple crises--financial, social, political--racking global capitalism, one might ask just how much capitalism society can afford.

Great find 2 1/2 hours late.

Ouch. Sorry, Zap. I've merged them.

Given the multiple crises--financial, social, political--racking global capitalism, one might ask just how much capitalism society can afford.

Isn't like the socialists to blame capitalism on everything they screw up. Actually, capitalism is doing exactly what it is supposed to do: bankrupt nations that take on socialist commitments they can't afford. More to the point, it's a law of nature. You can't spend what you don't have.

Government is not the problem; corporations are the problem. Our government was founded to be motivated by liberty. Corporations are motivated by greed. They are parasites.
Friedmans's book was crap. Reagan was an idiot. That's all I got.

Government is not the problem; corporations are the problem.

They are joined like Siamese twins. You can't separate one from the other. Government is the enemy of liberty, whether through the corporations or by any other means. Always has; always will, by the very fact that government has a monopoly on coercion and violence.

"Isn't like the socialists to blame capitalism on everything they screw up. "


And free market fundies blame government for every market failure.

Forget it Ray,
Government is our only hope to survive the mulitnational corporate nazis.

Forget it Ray,
Government is our only hope to survive the mulitnational corporate nazis.

Posted by igmoramus

said Ayn Rand?

No, BANI, said me.

"that government has a monopoly on coercion and violence."

If you exclude gangs, organized crime, corporations, warlords, etc. Get a clue. When corporations threaten or fire workers for engaging in union organizing, or anything else, that's coercion. When they hire goons to break up strikes, that's violence. Apparently you are completely ignorant of the history of the labor movement. Corporate coercion is a far greater presence in the daily life of a worker than government coercion.

And free market fundies blame government for every market failure.

Posted by nullifidian

That excuse goes back to the 30s, yet they keep making the same mistakes only bigger.

"You can't spend what you don't have."

Ray hit's the proverbial.

That's what it all comes down to. People consuming and consuming & thinking that buying shit is going to make them happy, even when they can't afford it. And what they wind up with is a mountain of debt and a garage full of junk.
Whatever happened to living withIN your means?

Government is our only hope to survive the mulitnational corporate nazis.

Posted by igmoramus

The last I heard, the Nazis had a lot of military and police power. What armies do the corporations have?

trillionairs have private armies that think they are CIA agent & so forth...lol

If you exclude gangs, organized crime, corporations, warlords, etc. Get a clue.

How much military and police power do they have? Should Washington be in fear of them?

When corporations threaten or fire workers for engaging in union organizing, or anything else, that's coercion.

That's your crazy definition. The freedom to associate is a basic liberty.

When they hire goons to break up strikes, that's violence. Apparently you are completely ignorant of the history of the labor movement.

Those days are long gone. Now they hire security police to protect their property from vandals.

Corporate coercion is a far greater presence in the daily life of a worker than government coercion.

Government workers get fired and laid off too.

The last I heard, the Nazis had a lot of military and police power. What armies do the corporations have?


Please Ray, if you control the politicians you don't need a military.

And you know that!

Government is our only hope to survive the mulitnational corporate nazis.

And to what flag do mulitnational corporate owe allegiance?

What armies do the corporations have?

Well the United Fruit Company has the American Army and the CIA to do their bidding since the 1930's.

The Iraq War was started not because of the threat of terrorism but because a consortium of BigOil interests wanted to de-nationalise Iraq's oilfields.

Most of American policy over the last sixty years or so has stemmed from an agenda from multinational corporations (mostly American based) not any long term needs/desires of the people despite wotever propaganda yer MSM is pitching this week.

One of the cold hard facts that the Media is largely in existence to distract from and counter.

Be Well.

If you exclude gangs, organized crime, corporations, warlords, etc. Get a clue.

How much military and police power do they have? Should Washington be in fear of them?

Posted by Ray


In your anarcho-capitalist paradise, it won't be Washington in fear of them, it will be all of us.

Please Ray, if you control the politicians you don't need a military.

And you know that!

Posted by Zap

Well I do know that the size of our military is an ominous sign to how much the politicians control us.

Well I do know that the size of our military is an ominous sign to how much the politicians control us.
~RAY

Indeed, and what the rest you just won't admit?

Ray, I'll restate this as a question again.

Government is our only hope to survive the mulitnational corporate nazis.

And to what flag do mulitnational corporate owe allegiance?

In your anarcho-capitalist paradise, it won't be Washington in fear of them, it will be all of us.

Posted by nullifidian

I don't presume to know if or how such a system would work, nor have I argued for it. Thatt's another straw man argument.

The problem this nation faces today, is one that is eating away at our economy and civil liberties.

And to what flag do mulitnational corporate owe allegiance?

I haven't taken any surveys. The fundamental business model is to convert resources into things people want to buy. The world is their market, as applies to any corporation in the world.

Unlike government, they can't force people to buy what the sell or force people to work for them.

You have a problem with that Zap?

Considering how government has been growing faster than the economy, I looks to me like government takes care of itself above all else.

Unlike government, they can't force people to buy what the sell or force people to work for them.

You have a problem with that Zap?

Well first I think your premise is simplistic bullshit and yes I do have a problem with it.

Ray as you have stated before your utopia only exists in books it has never been proven to work in the real world.

"The fundamental business model is to convert resources into things people want to buy. "

Let me fix that for you.

The fundamental business model is to convert resources into commodities and then use marketing tools to persuade people that they must have them.

"I don't presume to know if or how such a system would work, nor have I argued for it. Thatt's another straw man argument."

Selective memory flag. You have argued for anarcho-capitalism or something approaching it for years, Mises.

The fundamental business model is to convert resources into commodities and then use marketing tools to persuade people that they must have them.


'Persuade' is a far-cry from 'force', Nulli.

"Unlike government, they can't force people to buy what the sell or force people to work for them."

Well, they can't put a gun at your head. But they can impoverish you, if you aren't willing to play by corporate rules. If you think coercion requires guns you're a fool, and you don't understand even the dictionary definition of the word.

Zap

I have no vision of a utopia. I take a Darwinian view of social change.

Ray as you have stated before your utopia only exists in books it has never been proven to work in the real world.

You misunderstand. There are sound economic principles just like there are sound scientific theories that explain cause-and-effect relationships. When societies violate those relationships, there are predictable negative consequences.

As an engineer, I have to be aware of the laws of physics to make successful designs. To the degree I adhere to those laws, whether consciously or unconsciously, will my designs work as expected.

Anytime some system breaks down, it broke down because it violated principle of nature.

Null,


I don't pretend that "anorcho-corporatism" is perfect. However, I have worked for 6 different companies of varying size, in 3 different industries since graduating from college. I have watched how much effort is put into trying to change the business models of each to keep up with ever-shifting demand of consumer-base. Taken further, I have seen considerable brain-storming, with varying degrees of success, toward trying to develop new markets and new demand.

I know that at the highest levels, shenanigans play a role. However, the current system is not so nearly as 'controlling' as many from your side of the aisle make it out to be.


Gotta run - I'll check back tomorrow.

Considering how government has been growing faster than the economy, It looks to me like government takes care of itself above all else.

Posted by Ray


Absolutely!

You have argued for anarcho-capitalism or something approaching it for years, Mises.

Posted by nullifidian

See my post at 8:43. I have long argued that Austrian Theory is founded on basic principles nature, hence scientific. You have always insisted all theories of economics are ideological.

You can't create anything that violates the laws of nature.

"Coercion is the practice of compelling a person to behave in an involuntary way (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats, intimidation or some other form of pressure or force. Coercion may typically involve the actual infliction of physical or psychological harm in order to enhance the credibility of a threat. The threat of further harm may then lead to the cooperation or obedience of the person being coerced."

In other words, what bosses do to their workers everyday.

Well, they can't put a gun at your head. But they can impoverish you, if you aren't willing to play by corporate rules. If you think coercion requires guns you're a fool, and you don't understand even the dictionary definition of the word.

Posted by nullifidian

There was a story on this site not long ago that the US has the highest incarceration rate on the world. If memory serves it's three million out of 300 million. That's what happens when you don't play by government rules.

They are renting your time. If you don't want to do what they ask, you can always quit. It's called freedom of contract. You're out in Lalaland.

ff for nullie

In other words, what bosses do to their workers everyday.

Posted by nullifidian

I have to remember that you hate work, rather live off of those who do work. I'm amazed anyone would want to employ you. Or many nobody does employ you. You're on welfare.

"You're on welfare."

Brilliant retort, assclown.

i thought it was funi, 2:>)

Touchy. Touchy. Touchy. You insist I should judge you by what you post.

I have to remember that you hate work, rather live off of those who do work. I'm amazed anyone would want to employ you. Or many nobody does employ you. You're on welfare.
~RAY

Ray were you kidnapped by BL2?

"I have to remember that you hate work"

Ray is one of these brainwashed capitalist stooges that think as society gets progressively richer, people should work more, not less.

Zap- I've got BL2 so pissed off, he won't go near me.

I don't see the connection.

Ray is one of these brainwashed capitalist stooges that think as society gets progressively richer, people should work more, not less.

Posted by nullifidian

That was a bail of hay. My former career was designing factory machinery that would reduce labor.

When is the last time you ever held a job?

Zap- I've got BL2 so pissed off, he won't go near me.

I don't see the connection.


Damn I'm jealous, or should I say, Damn.....Im..... jealous..




Really, you don't see a connection?

A shame.

When the labor movement achieved the 40 hour work week, Ray would've been siding with the Wall Street Journal and calling it socialist appeasement of lazy workers.

"When is the last time you ever held a job?"

The last time you came up with an intelligent thought.

When the labor movement achieved the 40 hour work week,

Very amusing. It wouldn't have been possible without the capital investment to improve labor productivity.

The last time you came up with an intelligent thought.

When recently I concluded you are a welfare parasite. Good night.

"Very amusing. It wouldn't have been possible without the capital investment to improve labor productivity."

Very amusing indeed. As if the 40 hour work week was an altruistic act upon the part of capitalists, who wouldn't have capital in the first place if not for the workers who produce it.

"When recently I concluded you are a welfare parasite. Good night."

And Ray concludes his "case" with an ad hominem. You lose.

When recently I concluded you are a welfare parasite. Good night.

Posted by Ray


Well, that settles that! lol

Very amusing. It wouldn't have been possible without the capital investment to improve labor productivity.

Hm. 'Cause and effect' dyslexia.

This will require taxing the rich. Corporate Media must ridicule and crush this idea immediately.

Ray says "More to the point, it's a law of nature. You can't spend what you don't have."

Then why does Bush and Repubs do this? (cause it makes the Chinese happy?)

People consuming and consuming & thinking that buying shit is going to make them happy, even when they can't afford it. And what they wind up with is a mountain of debt and a garage full of junk.
Whatever happened to living withIN your means?
Posted by Stickman

Television, and endless hours conditioning through media marketing have intentionally created the illusion that "things" are what gives a person worth in this world.
"Things make you who you are."

This works to the advantage of the entity selling the product, and (if the product is an ego/status building product) usually to the disadvantage of the consumer, as there will ALWAYS be next years "newer-nicer" product.

It's a never ending cycle of status based, ego-enhancing marketing/conditioning that the mindless conformist sheep "must have."

Nutcase,

Well, the "rich" pay all the taxes, so that goes without saying. Of course, since the guy who owns a little corner grocery has income in the "rich" bracket, before he pays his expenses, he gets hit with terrible taxes, even though he doesn't see most of that money....Not exactly rich, although the taxes to keep him from hiring anybody to help him.

Depends on what the definition of "rich" is, I suppose...Really, they should just say that the "capitalists" pay taxes and the socialists leach off them. Of course, it might not exactly match the Robin Hood myth they have going, if the wording were "Tax the capitalists, and help the Socialist leeches".....