News Stories

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

So I don't trust Corporations or Government, and you trust Government but not Corporations. Interesting positions we take.

i didn't say i trust the government either.

basically this is what needs to happen for society to function.

Voters ----watches---> Government --- Watches ----> Corporation

The voters need make sure government is run efficiently and the government needs to make sure the corporation run legally. When the voters sleep on the job, everything go bonkers. Remember Government is suppose to reflect the public/voters, if Government isn't working. The public/voters need to start looking in the mirror.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

So I don't trust Corporations or Government, and you trust Government but not Corporations. Interesting positions we take.

One (the US govt) has at least a bit of a control knob (voting booth, recalls, etc). The other (large corp.) has no knobs at all reachable from the community. In fact, history shows us they'd just as soon gun down troublemakers be they consumers or employees. Corporate rule is like the worst facets of feudalism without any of the "social contract" real feudalism had. The more eyeballs pointed in all directions and the more "balance" the better... frankly, "gridlock" is, under normal conditions, a good idea.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Vexx

One (the US govt) has at least a bit of a control knob (voting booth, recalls, etc). The other (large corp.) has no knobs at all reachable from the community. In fact, history shows us they'd just as soon gun down troublemakers be they consumers or employees. Corporate rule is like the worst facets of feudalism without any of the "social contract" real feudalism had.

Oh but you do have a choice. By not buying their products. Just like voting, get enough people to go along with you, and those corporations will be forced to make some kind of change. Unfortunately, most people are lazy, or can't be bothered with such things(hmmm same as voting...).

And how much control do we really have over our Government? The system is extremely corrupt, and even politicians with good intentions, either don't last long, or they become part of the system over-time.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Wow, another person who I normally don't agree with, I find myself agreeing with today. What is the world coming to?

There's not much reason to be surprised, it isn't like all position abput a subject are white or black.

Bachmann launches 2012 presidential bid
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...75P1G320110627

She is barely less incoherent ( some would say a flake) than Palin, no ?

[Ithekro]

I think all this is why I proposed a fourth balance on the Governement back in college. The People. Basically as techology increases, more and more people have access to the internet, which means more and more people can watch the government, which means more and more people can have a say in the government. Basically altering the Representative Democracy (A Republic) into a something like a Full Democracy, where the people can vote directly on what the Governement does. Not a complete Democracy, since the representatives would still be in place, but after they try to pass something, it goes to the People before it becomes law. The President can still Veto it, but with the Public on him as well he might not do it...then it would have t go back to Congress for the 2/3 majority to pass over his Veto...and possibly pass the Public vote as well. The Supreme Court can still tell off the Public if the law is unconstitutional (They've done that plenty of times to California Propositions).

Just one more check...something that We the People can do to keep an eye on our repressentative and perhaps the corperations as well via that eye in the government...since they would have to deal with us all on a different level if the majority could stop Congress cold.

It might be a poor idea...but it was something I though of in a Political Science class when were were talking about the differences between a Republic and a Democracy. At the time we figured a Democracy on the scale of the United States was not possible, but considered the Internet to be a way to make it possible.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Oh but you do have a choice. By not buying their products. Just like voting, get enough people to go along with you, and those corporations will be forced to make some kind of change. Unfortunately, most people are lazy, or can't be bothered with such things(hmmm same as voting...).

And how much control do we really have over our Government? The system is extremely corrupt, and even politicians with good intentions, either don't last long, or they become part of the system over-time.

Try not buying something from Pepsico... GE... Monsanto... conversely, try buying something from XE Corp., Lockheed, Boeing. You aren't their customers. Don't like your employer's health insurer? Tough, you can't take your benefits fund and go shopping. The only lever you actually have with corporations is some form of oversight from the community. In this case, the community is the "state" as elected.

Naturally, the corporations are doing all they can to eviscerate/hijack/pwn the government - and frankly, I think they succeeded.

[Ithekro]

Well to be fair, they didn't really need to try...we elected them to office in the past so they just too their business with them into the Government. (Think of all the old time tycoons that have been elected to public office since the 1800s. Or how many corperate headman's children have been elected to office.)

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Well to be fair, they didn't really need to try...we elected them to office in the past so they just too their business with them into the Government. (This of all the old time tycoons that have been elected to public office since the 1800s)

There's been a quiet "class war" since the 1850s... and simple historical observation shows that every time these 'tycoons' have gotten what they want - it breaks the country.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Oh but you do have a choice. By not buying their products. Just like voting, get enough people to go along with you, and those corporations will be forced to make some kind of change. Unfortunately, most people are lazy, or can't be bothered with such things(hmmm same as voting...).

And how much control do we really have over our Government? The system is extremely corrupt, and even politicians with good intentions, either don't last long, or they become part of the system over-time.

in theory just as the consumers are suppose to be able to force corporations with their pocket books. voters should be able to vote out politicians they don't agree with. However real life is more difficult then theories. The problem with modern days politics is that the politicians are more afraid of the primary voters then the general voters since most of them are in safe seats.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

There's not much reason to be surprised, it isn't like all position abput a subject are white or black.

Bachmann launches 2012 presidential bid
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...75P1G320110627

She is barely less incoherent ( some would say a flake) than Palin, no ?

Herman Cain is the only one so far that I have any interest in, and even with him I'm not holding my breath. I know a lot of Democrats who won't be voting for Obama, and a lot of Republicans who won't vote for the likes of Romney, Gingrich, Perry, Palin, etc.

I wonder how much further things have to go, before third parties actually have a chance...

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Herman Cain is the only one so far that I have any interest in, and even with him I'm not holding my breath. I know a lot of Democrats who won't be voting for Obama, and a lot of Republicans who won't vote for the likes of Romney, Gingrich, Perry, Palin, etc.

I wonder how much further things have to go, before third parties actually have a chance...

you mean Cain of the "I won't sign any bill over 3 pages"? Which is shorter then a pizza menu

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

you mean Cain of the "I won't sign any bill over 3 pages"? Which is shorter then a pizza menu

The ''I won't sign any bill over 3 pages'' was used by John Stewart used on one of his show. After that Cain accused him to be a racist...

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

The ''I won't sign any bill over 3 pages'' was used by John Stewart used on one of his show. After that Cain accused him to be a racist...

but Cain did say it.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

you mean Cain of the "I won't sign any bill over 3 pages"? Which is shorter then a pizza menu

I haven't heard that, could you send a link to the video/audio?

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

I haven't heard that, could you send a link to the video/audio?

Cain wants to stop lawmakers from passing bills that are over three pages long. Talk about small government.
"Don’t try to pass a 2,700-page bill," Cain said to a responsive audience in Pella, Iowa, on Monday.
"You and I didn’t have time to read it. We’re too busy trying to live — send our kids to school. That’s why I am only going to allow small bills — three pages. You’ll have time to read that one over the dinner table," Cain said.


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/wash...ree-pages.html

here you go.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/...y_bill_lo.html

this one has the actual video.

Originally Posted by ganbaru

There's not much reason to be surprised, it isn't like all position abput a subject are white or black.

Bachmann launches 2012 presidential bid
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...75P1G320110627

She is barely less incoherent ( some would say a flake) than Palin, no ?

Speaking to Fox News, Bachmann said that she had the same spirit as Waterloo’s own John Wayne. One can only assume that she was referring to the movie star, who was born in Winterset, Iowa, roughly a three-hour drive from Waterloo. The problem, however, is that Waterloo appears to have much closer ties to serial killer John Wayne Gacy, the "killer clown" who had his first criminal conviction there.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/...e_house_r.html

which John Wayne was she referring to?

[Decagon]

@corporations n'd government,
I think it's easier to blackmail or shame a politician out of office than it is to dismantle a multinational's executives and board of directors.

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

which John Wayne was she referring to?

That's silly. She's supposed to shoot for that Fox News contributor position after the elections are over.

[justinstrife]

Can't say I'm against his idea. Part of the problem with our Government, is things have gotten far too complicated, and filled with loop-holes for all of the special interests. Hell our entire Founding Documents for this country don't even make a dent on that 2700 page monstrosity that is Obama's Healthcare Reform.

[james0246]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Can't say I'm against his idea. Part of the problem with our Government, is things have gotten far too complicated, and filled with loop-holes for all of the special interests. Hell our entire Founding Documents for this country don't even make a dent on that 2700 page monstrosity that is Obama's Healthcare Reform.

That's a bit of a false equivalence. The original population of the country was only a few million and consequently incomparable to the 300 million living here today (the GDP/etc of the founding country is also incomparable to today). Additionally, at the founding, there weren't mega-corporations trying to control the pharmaceutical/health care industries. Et cetera, et cetera. So, a 2700 page bill makes sense for the size and scope of our current nation...though I readily admit that the HRC bill was undoubtedly loaded with a variety of extras and miscellaneous addendums that are pointless or completely unnecessary to what the Bill is/was supposed to accomplish.

That being said, I do agree that the current form of US government is unnecessarily complicated...I do believe part of that is simply due to the size of the country and its desired place in the world, but it is still painfully obvious that there is less transparency than there should be (and there is no clear cut solution to fixing the problem).

[DonQuigleone]

I think John Huntsman, and Fred Karger are the most interesting candidates myself.

But they're from the moderate wing of the republican party, and with the rightward shift they've been having lately, I don't their chances are too high. But I only think a moderate candidate will have any chance of challenging Barrack Obama.

Of course Obama will have some difficulties considering not much has changed, and there isn't much hope either...

My own view on democracy is, echoing Synaesthetic that it's very important for society to be in continuous struggle with itself, no side should ever come out on top.

While we know why we don't want government or Corporations to come out on top, it's equally important that the people don't come out on top either. Just read a bit about the mob rule that was endemic in many greek democracies, and that mob rule tends to devolve into dictatorships and persecution of minorities way too easily...

If any group grows too secure it stops striving to do anything. Humanity thrives in the face of adversity.

It's interesting to note that the US government was founded with this sort of thing in mind. The "founding fathers" intended that the various instruments of government be in continuous deadlock so that it would be difficult to make radical changes. The US has had a long history of the kind of deadlock we're seeing right now, and you could say this has been very successful. Most of the greatest successes of the state have taken place when the governments were least secure.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Can't say I'm against his idea. Part of the problem with our Government, is things have gotten far too complicated, and filled with loop-holes for all of the special interests. Hell our entire Founding Documents for this country don't even make a dent on that 2700 page monstrosity that is Obama's Healthcare Reform.

Honestly, I'm not against the idea either. Nobody likes to read walls of text that're worth 2700. As you say, part of the problem is how bureaucratic things have become. Having short bills that get straight to the point in their content would be a good idea, I think.

As for control over corporations, the only people who have any real say over what goes on with the board of directors are the shareholders. The thing is, only people who own over a certain percentage of a company's shares can take part in voting and board meetings, so in the end, it's still the rich who decide who else is going to be more rich and powerful, and the people themselves, the customers, have little to no control over the decision making. The most people can do is boycott a company, but that's rarely feasible when companies are so big that people can't do without them out of habit.