The Solicialist Utopia of Venezuela has Issues...
Comments
-
I decided what was best for you was a witty pictorial depiction of an ongoing issue.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
I was specifically asked for the last time.GrundleStiltzkin said:
No need to travel that far, frenTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Rio 2016.2001400ex said:
Cause no one shops at Walmart, right? The vast majority of people will just buy the cheapest shit. Then complain that the corporations destroyed the environment.Fenderbender123 said:lol @ comparing big business to India.
Businesses have to earn their customers. Government doesnt. Businesses have competition. Government doesn't. Which one is more likely to rape and pillage again?
If people value a rape and pillage free society, they will just not do business with people who rape and pillage.
And yes government is different than corporations. When was the last time a government dumped raw sewage in the water in the name of profit?
-
Oh so America is now Brazil? Where the OCEAN is so polluted you get sick in it. Fucktarded response of the day.
-
You asked for the last time a government dumped sewage in the water and I answered you correctly.2001400ex said:Oh so America is now Brazil? Where the OCEAN is so polluted you get sick in it. Fucktarded response of the day.
Why do you hate facts? -
Port Angeles.2001400ex said:Oh so America is now Brazil? Where the OCEAN is so polluted you get sick in it. Fucktarded response of the day.
-
Which system produced the most environmental destruction? The Soviet block or America fuck yeah?
Capitalism has the money for the government to tax to clean the air and water and the entities to hold accountable for the air and water.
The government won't hold itself accountable -
When was the last time a corporation was able to tax citizens because of an annual loss?2001400ex said:
Cause no one shops at Walmart, right? The vast majority of people will just buy the cheapest shit. Then complain that the corporations destroyed the environment.Fenderbender123 said:lol @ comparing big business to India.
Businesses have to earn their customers. Government doesnt. Businesses have competition. Government doesn't. Which one is more likely to rape and pillage again?
If people value a rape and pillage free society, they will just not do business with people who rape and pillage.
And yes government is different than corporations. When was the last time a government dumped raw sewage in the water in the name of profit? -
Just when I thought Honda couldn't be any more of an ignorant dipshit, he proves me wrong. Fuck man. You're part of the problem. Too bad you and those like you can't just commit mass suicide all at once.
-
Haven't we gone over this. We need to be environmentally responsible but at to what level? In a global economy, we can't willingly put large disadvantages to our economy when other countries don't play by the same rules. We're no china or India, but we also can't be Sweden or Switzerland, we have too much infrastructure. Hth2001400ex said:
And destroy the environment to provide lower prices. Funny how that works.greenblood said:
Until another company comes in and decides to get their piece of the pie which in turn lowers prices and margins. Funny how that works.2001400ex said:
So you disagree that, if given the opportunity, corporations won't rape and pillage? Corporations need free will to invent, improve, etc. But they also need to be provided some rules or they will take advantage of everything and let the country rot. Basically like India.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Holy Berniebro...2001400ex said:
I have to keep my word count down so I don't go over the limit. Here is the message, I'll type it slowly so you understand.Fenderbender123 said:
The way you worded your question makes it difficult to answer. It's not about me and what I can do...it's about everyone and what we would all do in the absence of government. It's about free choice/free market/voluntarism (whatever you want to call it) being a more efficient and valuable method of solving problems because there is more accountability and flexibility. If we can solve our problems more efficiently, then we will have capacity to solve other problems, which means more problems overall get solved.2001400ex said:
If you like rivers that catch on fire, sewage in the water, terrible smog, no infrastructure, etc.Fenderbender123 said:Here's the thing, Hyundai. Yes, that city is a bigger shithole than anywhere in America. But a country's type of government is not the biggest determinant of standard of living. Culture, work ethic, habits, problem-solving, ability to obtain resources, etc...those are the things that make up our quality of life.
Just like how that city in India is considered a better place to live than other places in India, America would be a much better place too with a government that has a smaller or non-existent role.
Shut the fuck up. America is great right now. Seriously, what's so intrusive about the government right now that you can't live your life as you want?
Nobody in America wants any of the things you listed. If government stopped addressing those issues, and didn't place any barriers on people trying to solve problems, then people would go out and solve those problems of their own free will. If nobody attempts to solve a certain problem, then it's either because:
A ) The problem isn't deemed worthy of solving by Americans, which means if government was solving it, then government wasn't doing it's job and reflecting the values of the people.
or
B ) There is not an efficient way to solve the problem or there are more valuable uses of the time and resources required to solve it, which means if government was solving it, then they were being wasteful.
The latter describes the reason there is a lack of problem-solving in countries like India. That's why nobody...not the free market, not the government...can solve some of the problems they face.
America, though, has gobs of resources, talent, and people with excess time and energy. That's why America can solve problems with government. But, it's also why we can solve problems without government.
Government hasn't invented anything, built anything, cleaned anything, or educated anyone. All of that gets done by people. Government just uses threats of (and actual) violence to influence people. So essentially, you're arguing that we need to threaten people with violence to get them to do things that make society better for people. I'm not saying that isn't a method that yields results, but it's less efficient.
Think about it...if the vast majority of Americans want children to get an education and go to school, why the hell would we need to use violence/coercion on everyone to influence them to do specific things (pay taxes, acquire jobs, construct buildings, etc) that result in the current school system we have today?
The point is that just because government takes charge on solving a certain problem, it doesn't mean that it's the only way. For example, we often ignore free market solutions (how many people have taken action to lower their carbon footprint, donate to charity, or clean up a park?). Also, when government steps in to solve a problem, it decreases/eliminates the incentives people have to address the issue of their own free will, sometimes by making it illegal to do so, but almost always by lessening the problem enough that diminishing returns do not make any additional investments worthwhile (sunk cost).
If the government passed a law stating that we all need to start paying 5% more in taxes to give to people to make soap and distribute to everyone, would you then say we shouldn't get rid of the soap tax because otherwise there would be no way for people to obtain soap?
Read the bold parts if TLDR. And before you ask, yes, I do need to get laid.
If the government doesn't rule the country, then big business will. Big business are not people, my friend. And will rape and pillage the environment and anything else they can to make a profit.
Also, is that the liberal MO? When I'm getting destroyed I throw out the environment card so I look like a care? Why is Hondo weak? -
Fun fact: less than a quarter of the Forbes 500 inherited wealth. The overwhelming majority are self-made.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
You do know that a lot of the rich inherited their wealth, right? No, you probably don't.Sledog said:
Taking from the productive to support the lazy and illegal to the tune of 90% of your wagges seems intrusive to me. If it's not to you send me 40%.2001400ex said:
How did Bernie want more coercive control over people's lives?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Bernie wants even greater coercive control over people's lives. That's bad enough.dhdawg said:
Sanders was good in some ways and bad in others.GrundleStiltzkin said:Only here to say fuck Bernie Sanders, with all integrity and honesty & independence & shit.
However he was not proposing a system similar to venzuela, nor even close to one. -
Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
-
This entire thread you argued that our government isn't too intrusive, now it is? I'm glad you finally agree.2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
-
Yore reading for comprehension is lacking.greenblood said:
This entire thread you argued that our government isn't too intrusive, now it is? I'm glad you finally agree.2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
-
Natural resources are commodities, the prices of which are held in check by supply and demand. Scarcity of resources is a check on resource depletion. As the supply lessens, price goes up until it becomes prohibitively expensive for that resource to be used in any profitable venture. The market is then forced to come up with a more viable alternative. We saw this when the scarcity of wood drove the market to respond with the industrial revolution in the 1800s. It will happen again with oil.salemcoog said:
There are no profitable sewage systems. Some Government is needed.Fenderbender123 said:Government can't run shit well. No surprise.
On the flip side, the fastest growing city in India has no functional government.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/gurgaon/Fastest-growing-city-slowest-moving-too/articleshow/49265874.cms
http://ideas.ted.com/skyscrapers-but-no-sewage-system-meet-a-city-run-by-private-industry/
And yeah, I get it...they have no sewage! There's traffic problems! Sure, every city has problems...especially in India. And honestly, they do get the sewage out via transportation, and could form a sewage system once it's profitably.
But how can you argue with the fact that so many people in India are eager to move there? It's obviously less of a shithole than all the cities that have a functional government in that country.
It's the same shit with Somalia...Somalia is a shithole, sure...but it's become LESS of a shithole since the government was all but dismantled. That's what people fail to look at...
Pointing to shitholes like Somalia and parts of India and how they may be a little less shitty to live in than their neighbors with the same functioning government doesn't prove anything.
There will indeed need to be some sort of hybrid economy. Capitalism is all based on growth. If it can't grow, it implodes. There are only so many resources on this planet and eventually growth will stop. -
The government can usurp their ability to defend themselves and commit mass genocide, though.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:Just when I thought Honda couldn't be any more of an ignorant dipshit, he proves me wrong. Fuck man. You're part of the problem. Too bad you and those like you can't just commit mass suicide all at once.
-
Funny how socialist nations have trouble producing really hard to manufacture items that require vast technical skill like toilet paper and food.
-
Sweden.Sledog said:
Quick name a socialist regime in power that was honest? Can't run Bernies plan on 50%. As I've said to others if you want to give away money I'll willingly accept it.dhdawg said:His highest Tax bracket was low 50's and almost everyone's taxes would not have gone up at all actually
Your turn.
Name a capitalist regime that was honest. -
Never trust a SwedeBaphomet said:
Sweden.Sledog said:
Quick name a socialist regime in power that was honest? Can't run Bernies plan on 50%. As I've said to others if you want to give away money I'll willingly accept it.dhdawg said:His highest Tax bracket was low 50's and almost everyone's taxes would not have gone up at all actually
Your turn.
Name a capitalist regime that was honest. -
That's what Julian Assange is thinking.RaceBannon said:
Never trust a SwedeBaphomet said:
Sweden.Sledog said:
Quick name a socialist regime in power that was honest? Can't run Bernies plan on 50%. As I've said to others if you want to give away money I'll willingly accept it.dhdawg said:His highest Tax bracket was low 50's and almost everyone's taxes would not have gone up at all actually
Your turn.
Name a capitalist regime that was honest.
-
Invite Sledog to the suicide party, and everyone is happy.WeAreAFatLesboSchool said:Just when I thought Honda couldn't be any more of an ignorant dipshit, he proves me wrong. Fuck man. You're part of the problem. Too bad you and those like you can't just commit mass suicide all at once.
-
Ding...Ding...Ding2001400ex said:
Yore reading for comprehension is lacking.greenblood said:
This entire thread you argued that our government isn't too intrusive, now it is? I'm glad you finally agree.2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
Hondo is out for the count -
Not Sweden. Ask the women. Not a real socialist country anyway.Baphomet said:
Sweden.Sledog said:
Quick name a socialist regime in power that was honest? Can't run Bernies plan on 50%. As I've said to others if you want to give away money I'll willingly accept it.dhdawg said:His highest Tax bracket was low 50's and almost everyone's taxes would not have gone up at all actually
Your turn.
Name a capitalist regime that was honest. -
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
-
Don't go full retard.Fenderbender123 said:
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
-
Even grundle sees how fucktarded that is. First, do you think or current government has been here since the 1700s? There was barely even a currency or formal taxation then. Second, we had a period of deregulation from the beginning of Reagan's term that ended in 2008. The result was the worst recession since 1930.Fenderbender123 said:
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
If let run loose, corporations will do anything they can to make a profit. And taxpayers are the ones left holding the bag.
The problem is finding the right balance of regulation and free market.
As I've said, no country will be successful with pure capitalism or pure communism. -
Just like you think you'd be safe & sound in national socialism, I'd like to think I'd be OK! in anarchy.2001400ex said:
Even grundle sees how fucktarded that is. First, do you think or current government has been here since the 1700s? There was barely even a currency or formal taxation then. Second, we had a period of deregulation from the beginning of Reagan's term that ended in 2008. The result was the worst recession since 1930.Fenderbender123 said:
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
If let run loose, corporations will do anything they can to make a profit. And taxpayers are the ones left holding the bag.
The problem is finding the right balance of regulation and free market.
As I've said, no country will be successful with pure capitalism or pure communism.
Your fucknut buddies in the blalallalalalalalalalalalklavas would be shot dead in seconds with impunity by Starbucks Security in the anarchic system they seek. -
The government printing money is the biggest problem. We have so many regulations and laws I doubt we really know how many there are. Deregulation since the 30's? Don't see it. The government is the only unrestrained one.2001400ex said:
Even grundle sees how fucktarded that is. First, do you think or current government has been here since the 1700s? There was barely even a currency or formal taxation then. Second, we had a period of deregulation from the beginning of Reagan's term that ended in 2008. The result was the worst recession since 1930.Fenderbender123 said:
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
If let run loose, corporations will do anything they can to make a profit. And taxpayers are the ones left holding the bag.
The problem is finding the right balance of regulation and free market.
As I've said, no country will be successful with pure capitalism or pure communism. -
.
I fucked up the quotes and forgot what I was gonna say and who I was responding to. But I'm pretty sure the point I was gonna make is that I'm definitely right about everything I posted in this thread. -
Since the 30s? Where did you read that? The great depression in 1929 started a period of regulation from then through the 70s. When those regulations were rolled back from early 80s through 2008.Sledog said:
The government printing money is the biggest problem. We have so many regulations and laws I doubt we really know how many there are. Deregulation since the 30's? Don't see it. The government is the only unrestrained one.2001400ex said:
Even grundle sees how fucktarded that is. First, do you think or current government has been here since the 1700s? There was barely even a currency or formal taxation then. Second, we had a period of deregulation from the beginning of Reagan's term that ended in 2008. The result was the worst recession since 1930.Fenderbender123 said:
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
If let run loose, corporations will do anything they can to make a profit. And taxpayers are the ones left holding the bag.
The problem is finding the right balance of regulation and free market.
As I've said, no country will be successful with pure capitalism or pure communism.
Clearly history is lost on you. -
I'm actually searching for 80s communist Russia. They were tuff.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Just like you think you'd be safe & sound in national socialism, I'd like to think I'd be OK! in anarchy.2001400ex said:
Even grundle sees how fucktarded that is. First, do you think or current government has been here since the 1700s? There was barely even a currency or formal taxation then. Second, we had a period of deregulation from the beginning of Reagan's term that ended in 2008. The result was the worst recession since 1930.Fenderbender123 said:
We agree that government is evil, but how do we know it's necessary when we haven't tried going without?2001400ex said:Ah the anti government people just showed up. I like it. Yes government is shitty. Yes taxes suck. Yes some regulations are bullshit. But this is a fact: Government is a necessary evil. I'm with ya on arguing that government is too intrusive and other shit. But you can't argue that corporations will act in the people's best interest.
If let run loose, corporations will do anything they can to make a profit. And taxpayers are the ones left holding the bag.
The problem is finding the right balance of regulation and free market.
As I've said, no country will be successful with pure capitalism or pure communism.
Your fucknut buddies in the blalallalalalalalalalalalklavas would be shot dead in seconds with impunity by Starbucks Security in the anarchic system they seek. -
Forbes 500 what? CEO's?pawz said:
Fun fact: less than a quarter of the Forbes 500 inherited wealth. The overwhelming majority are self-made.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
You do know that a lot of the rich inherited their wealth, right? No, you probably don't.Sledog said:
Taking from the productive to support the lazy and illegal to the tune of 90% of your wagges seems intrusive to me. If it's not to you send me 40%.2001400ex said:
How did Bernie want more coercive control over people's lives?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Bernie wants even greater coercive control over people's lives. That's bad enough.dhdawg said:
Sanders was good in some ways and bad in others.GrundleStiltzkin said:Only here to say fuck Bernie Sanders, with all integrity and honesty & independence & shit.
However he was not proposing a system similar to venzuela, nor even close to one.
