Quote:
Originally Posted by gmc
posted by quinns commentary
You have anti-trust laws and environmental legislation but also a culture that tries to portray such laws as interfering with business-socialistic in nature and giving too much power to government and corporations that buy off politicians to weaken or abandon such legislation. Environmentalists are tree-hugging lunatics that are part of a left wing conspiracy to destroy the american economy. Who decided that was fair? Who has the power and how do you stop those who would take it and use for their own benefit. The arguments has been going on since time immemorial socialism is just one line of it.
posted by quinns commentary
You do actually have a good point there but it's not so much dependence on government as forgetting that we can't all work for it. Someone needs to -generate wealth from somewhere. It's not just socialism that is a problem though, for a while there there was the notion that we didn't need industry and we could all survive and do well in an economy that revolved around financial services and selling each other mortgages. Monetarism is going to go down as one of the sillier economic theories. Most european nations cherry pick bits from socialism-so do americans -at it's heart is the basic idea that the people should rule and all are born equal entitled to be free to live our lives as we choose. We should all have a chance. That's where it all stems from, who rules, who decides what is fair? I would put it tp you the final say should not rest with corporations or politicians (OK maybe the latter but only if they really understand who they work for) or Politics is how argue about the ways to that end and socialism is just one aspect of it. All of them now reject one of the major tenets of it that the state should own everything. it just doesn't work all you do is create a new set of masters that take everything. power is an end in itself to some people.
Political theories aren't a religion-though you would think they are the way some people go on about them. pick the bits that you think will work. Why should a label put you off doing something.
|
Considering the number of times Microsoft has been fined-not just in America but all around the world- for anti-competitive practices like deliberately setting out to destroy other companies with better products it's kind of a moot point. How many livelihoods and great companies has he destroyed? But he always bleats he's just being picked on. Microsoft is a classic example of why you need anti-trust laws. A capitalist economy can't allow companies like Microsoft to get away with it. Intel are at it as well-looks like the EU is about to impose a massive fine on them for using their market clout to try and shut out AMD.
AS you point they apparently have not gotten away with it. I still say the creation of new technology and all that goes with it far out weighs these issues which likely occurred long after Microsoft created the business in the first place.
Who gets to decide what is fair? take education for example, should only the rich get to college or should you have some means to ensure that all get a fair chance at it regardless of the wealth of their parents. I happen to live in a country where free and compulsory education to at least primary level has been the norm for two or three hundred years with ready access to university for those who could pay to attend lectures. When you look at the numbers of scots behind the scientific and engineering developments that have shaped the modern world the benefits are incalculable. Look round your house-I can guarantee that you will find at least two things that owe their existence to a scot somewhere along the line.
Of course only the rich should not be the one to go to college and in the US anyone with the right stuff can go to college if they want to. I went to college for nine years at night, paid in part by spending two years in the army. My four children went to private schools, I mortgage my hose twice to make that happen and ten years after the youngest graduated I am still paying off the loans, but it happened. In the US the biggest problem is that 40% of students drop out of high school and in some urban areas it is 70% drop out rate, that is outrageous and dangerous.
Why on earth do you think that? Surely it depends on how you structure things in the first place.
Your right it does depend on how the system is structured and that is what I meant to say.
Except to have a society where everyone is given e same chance. Your view on income is interesting-are you saying that someone who chooses to become a nurse and -earns less that say a TV presenter or a lap dancer that person is somehow a failure? or that the guy emptying the bins is somehow of lesser value than a hedge fund manager. Which is more valuable to society? We can live without tv presenters and fund managers but you would notice if there were no nurses or bin men. That some people earn more than other doesn't reflect on their worth or capabilities as human beings. Do you not have an obligation to everybody in society just as they do to you?
I am not saying that at all, I am saying that each person defines success in their own way and it is not always nor should it be money. There are many lower income jobs that have more value and contribute more to society than some jobs making big bucks.
So you need to have some means of holding politicians and companies to account for what they do and the ability to impose severe enough sanctions on them that they will be forced to behave.
I agree but that never seems to happen