2009-06-02, 10:30 | Link #2822 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
This is a sad day for American Capitalism and a sad day for America in general. My 2000 Corvette is the last GM vehicle I will own as long as the Government owns an interest in it.
__________________
|
|
2009-06-02, 11:29 | Link #2824 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Also how do you know the founding fathers wouldn't support it? Massive mega corperations like GM simply didn't exist back then. The closest they'd be familiar with would be the East India Company, and even that pales in comparison to GM. Also let's not forget those people were very much pragmatic. The Louisiana Purchase? Jefferson himself thought it was unconstitutional and a gross overstep of the federal government's power. What did he do? He bought it anyway. Why? Because he thought it would help the country in the long run by giving it room to expand. I don't pretend to know what the founding fathers would think of this. They simply never had to deal with anything like it so there's really nothing we can point to and say "Aha! That's what they'd think!" There is one thing I do know, though; there were occasions where they put the good of the country ahead of their own political beliefs. Of course the whole "but the founding fathers" thing is both an appeal to authority and appeal to tradition fallacy, even if we accept that is how they would side on an issue.
__________________
|
|
2009-06-02, 12:36 | Link #2825 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 67
|
The Founding Fathers would probably have been appalled at the existence of extra-governmental power entities like the present form of the legal artifact we call "corporation". What it trends toward isn't 'free-market' at all but its own form of tyranny.
__________________
|
2009-06-02, 12:57 | Link #2827 | |
Licensed Hunter-a-holic
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 35
|
North Korean leader's successor named
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-06-02, 13:13 | Link #2828 | |
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Socialism, on the other hand, did not exist in their time (nor does the modern corporation, of course). All speculation of their potential opinions on the movement is purely that, later speculation. Interestingly enough, I've always considered that potential support for ideologies can come from where an ideology is placed in society rather than what that ideology says. A "progressive" ideology of the time is likely to be supported by, you guessed it, those who are not satisfied with the establishment, be it the enlightenment ideals during the American Revolution, liberal nationalism during the 1848 series of European uprisings (the "Spring of Nations"), all the many strands of socialism following the Industrial Revolution, etc. Heck, Perestroika and Glasnost occupied the same place in the twilight of Soviet history that Bolshevism occupied at its eve. So, by all means, Thomas Jefferson could have been a socialist, if the twist of fate makes it so. Alternate History is the Butterfly Effect at work: it could have been anything, we don't know. He said what he said about all sorts of things he knew in his day and those we could consider Thomas Jefferson's definitive opinions, but he and his generation never knew socialism so one really can't assert that the Founding Fathers definitively disliked it. Much safer to just say you don't like what is being done and why. |
|
2009-06-02, 13:18 | Link #2829 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
Heh, they wouldn't care much about capitalism either. The system is supposed to be small, and the Constitution exists for that sole reason. How can one concurrently favor both small government and socialism?
Edit: in fact, if the government is tiny. No one will ever bother what form it takes: imperialism, socialism, capitalism... whatever |
2009-06-02, 22:09 | Link #2830 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-06-03, 00:01 | Link #2831 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Sweden. Though that's a strawman as I specificly called for a mixed economy. One that isn't afraid to enact a socialist policy when it needs to or a capitalist policy when it needs to.
Nationalizing one company to save it from failure does not a socialist nation make. Yes, it's a socialist policy, but the US has a lot of them already. Further, the government could have saved the US auto industry practically overnight without giving any car company a cent directly. One of the big problems the car manufacturers had was paying for employee health benefits. If the country had socialized medicine, those expenses would have vanished. Incidentily, socialized medicine would likely lower health care costs in general because you wouldn't have as many people being rushed to the emergency room when their medical problems get really bad and they require expensive prodedures because they couldn't afford to go to the doctor when it was a minor problem. Quote:
Sometimes there just aren't jobs out there. Especially when the nation is in a recession and more people are getting laid off every day. It's absolute arrogance of you to claim lack of ambition and drive to work on the part of people who were just laid off because some ceo ran the company they worked for into the ground in search of short term profits and ran off with a huge bonus. It is most certainly the government's job to help its people in situations like that.
__________________
|
|
2009-06-03, 00:09 | Link #2832 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
Quote:
|
|
2009-06-03, 00:15 | Link #2833 |
思想工作
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vereinigte Staaten
Age: 32
|
Socialism DID work. It for for the entire Second World for like 70 years. In fact, at one point, people thought it worked better than capitalism because we had a depression back then.
And socialism still works. The reason why depressions, which are an inevitable by-product of true capitalism, don't f*ck countries up as much as it did in the 30's is because governments all give themselves nice injections of strategically-placed socialism to make sure things stay around. Basically, mixed economy. Every single modern nation uses it. |
2009-06-03, 00:19 | Link #2834 |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
It's a simple fact. The automakers pay huge amounts in benefits to their workers that make up a sizable percentage of their operating costs. If the country had socialized medicine, the companies would no longer have those expenses, as the government would be the ones providing healthcare. Money for medical coverage would come out of tax money, not be paid for directly by the companies. Also, socialized medicine would likely lower health care costs in the long run. The US has the highest cost per person for medical care under the current system. Greater access to medical coverage would reduce the costs long term, so even if you want to claim the companies would still be paying for medical benefits in taxes, which I suspect you're hinting at, the costs would still be greatly reduced over the current situation.
__________________
|
2009-06-03, 05:54 | Link #2835 |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Who hasn't heard of the Tank Man? Not many. I'm not certain since when I've become so cynical in my approach at everyday life. Few things interest me, and even fewer things inspire me. The Tank Man is one of those fewer ones that manages to evoke those strong emotions I ideally try to suppress. The 20-year anniversary is fast approaching. So I thought it's only befitting an article should be posted about those lucky few who witnessed the guy with shopping bags in both hands that stood in front of tanks.
New York Times article.
__________________
|
2009-06-03, 12:05 | Link #2839 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 67
|
Quote:
An article from conservative columnist David Brooks talks about just how broken the GM culture is and how the seemingly left?-but-status-quo-friendly Obama administration is walking into a quagmire with GM. It may become another "Armani suits bailout" with similar rings to the Wall Street bailout that seems to have mostly only helped the top rung pad their path. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/op...s.html?_r=1&em
__________________
Last edited by Vexx; 2009-06-03 at 12:24. |
|
2009-06-03, 13:17 | Link #2840 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
Quote:
You are talking as if health care is free. The government says it's free doesn't mean it will be free. Pharmaceutical companies make good medicine not because they love humanity. Greater coverage?! I sneeze twice per day I must go see a doctor everyday! After eating so much, I must see a doctor too. Blah, I need someone to talk to... hmm how about a doctor! <Meanwhile, Joe who has serious problems with his heart must wait in line to see a doctor who is chatting with me about WoW> Who's freaking care? I PAID FOR THE SERVICE BY MY TAX. Resources are not unlimited, you know. If I were, not just socialism, anything will work. |
|
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
|
|