ScottL wrote:Shouldn't this topic being in General and not News?
The Physorg piece that instigated this was from 3 days ago. It's fair to say the initial instigation for this specific discussion is "news". It's not fair to say that socialist malappropriations of the facts are new.
Comes down to stuff that's not new. What's not new is the correct apprehension of the issue at hand--what Margaret Thatcher said back during the Reagan years:
"The problem with socialism, is that sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Penetrating, astute and correct in more ways than are initially obvious.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
GIThruster wrote:This report is a bunch of useless hype, that draws irrelevant distinctions in order to misdirect people's attention and help form a reason to hate corporations. This is indeed socialist rhetoric.
WillKell wrote:Yes and as soon as we get more socialism, the bottom 1% and the top 5% will all be equally poor, dressed in burlap, just as it has been anywhere before in history.
Since the oligopolies we are seeing today are only possible with government intervention in a truly free market economy (ie. where anti-competitive practices are illegal), couldn't this be seen as anti-socialist rhetoric?
I don't know, it seems GIThruster is still stuck in the Red Scare. It seems from his interjections that the moment anyone brings up any think at all having to do with economics he cries socialist. Even if it's just some stats about the current state of the economy. Clearly, saying anything vaguely related to economics makes you a socialist and a commi.
ScottL wrote:Shouldn't this topic being in General and not News?
The Physorg piece that instigated this was from 3 days ago. It's fair to say the initial instigation for this specific discussion is "news". It's not fair to say that socialist malappropriations of the facts are new.
Comes down to stuff that's not new. What's not new is the correct apprehension of the issue at hand--what Margaret Thatcher said back during the Reagan years:
"The problem with socialism, is that sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Penetrating, astute and correct in more ways than are initially obvious.
This is one of the most misquoted quotes ever...again, here is what she really said, and in context she was directly referring to UK Socialist Government, and indirectly to others...
...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them. They then start to nationalise everything...
Of note is that this interview was from 5 February, 1976 (Pre-Reagan). It is classic Thatcher, and a theme she maintained through most of her career. Having time, the whole interview is worth a read. And then think about what is going on today.
happyjack27 wrote:I don't know, it seems GIThruster is still stuck in the Red Scare. It seems from his interjections that the moment anyone brings up any think at all having to do with economics he cries socialist. Even if it's just some stats about the current state of the economy. Clearly, saying anything vaguely related to economics makes you a socialist and a commi.
No Happy. Portraying simple statistics concerning the wealth controlled by corporate entities as if it were the wealth of the world, is plainly false. This often has the unfortunate outcome to encourage hatred toward corporate America. For instance, this same tactic is used by the World Wildlife Foundation to promote their ethics, which include how immoral it is for corporate America to exist and control funds that are not controlled by the people at large--the rationalization for socialism. This is a class warfare tactic.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
I think when people are struggling and looking for jobs after being laid-off from said corporations they're hurt. I think they're even more hurt to learn that while they were losing their job, said corporations increased profitability. Cisco comes to mind as an example.
People want to work and not all corporations are "evil" but there's very real reason for concern. Our unemployment rate isn't high because people are unwilling to work or from high taxes, it's high because out-sourcing work is cheaper and more profitable.
Perhaps we should consider hiking tax rates on Corporations that out-source jobs while giving massive tax breaks to those who keep them here in the U.S.
I think when people are struggling and looking for jobs after being laid-off from said corporations they're hurt. I think they're even more hurt to learn that while they were losing their job, said corporations increased profitability. Cisco comes to mind as an example.
People want to work and not all corporations are "evil" but there's very real reason for concern. Our unemployment rate isn't high because people are unwilling to work or from high taxes, it's high because out-sourcing work is cheaper and more profitable.
Perhaps we should consider hiking tax rates on Corporations that out-source jobs while giving massive tax breaks to those who keep them here in the U.S.
I have to agree completely. There need to be some extreme measures taken against GE for selling its tech to the Chinese, expecting them to then turn around and outcompete Boeing building planes. That's going to shut down Boeing in less than a decade. Large corporations that take their business overseas need to face extremely stiff penalties that avoid this sort of behavior. Since GE builds engines for both military craft and ships, someone might be able to call in an ITAR card and stop them.
The fact GE is already playing games with their profits and paying NO TAX in the US, shows they're quite willing and able to hurt the US with no fear of consequence.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
I think when people are struggling and looking for jobs after being laid-off from said corporations they're hurt. I think they're even more hurt to learn that while they were losing their job, said corporations increased profitability. Cisco comes to mind as an example.
People want to work and not all corporations are "evil" but there's very real reason for concern. Our unemployment rate isn't high because people are unwilling to work or from high taxes, it's high because out-sourcing work is cheaper and more profitable.
Perhaps we should consider hiking tax rates on Corporations that out-source jobs while giving massive tax breaks to those who keep them here in the U.S.
I have to agree completely. There need to be some extreme measures taken against GE for selling its tech to the Chinese, expecting them to then turn around and outcompete Boeing building planes. That's going to shut down Boeing in less than a decade. Large corporations that take their business overseas need to face extremely stiff penalties that avoid this sort of behavior. Since GE builds engines for both military craft and ships, someone might be able to call in an ITAR card and stop them.
The fact GE is already playing games with their profits and paying NO TAX in the US, shows they're quite willing and able to hurt the US with no fear of consequence.
I'm glad there is some concensus something needs to be done. It's corporations like this that are driving some of the class disparity.
I've often wondered to what extend business decisions are really driven by a subconcious class warfare mentality. For example, in my country we are told that the natural unemployment rate is 8%. When it falls too much below this number wage inflation is supposed to harm the economy, that leads to the question of whose economy is it anyway.
To help maintain this 8% unemployment rate immigration is encouraged at a quarter of a million people per annum. The arguement given is that the declining birth rate will run us out of workers starting 2013. The counter arguement is that the birthrate is in decline precisely because steady 8% unemployment discourages people from having children.