Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
I wanna see this bill.
|
|
nutjob
Gym climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
I don't generally participate in political threads, but I have a simple question for the Republican or Libertarian folks around here:
How does an unregulated free market best serve the interests of people?
Yes free markets initially produce innovation and success depends on meeting what the customers and markets want. But then you cross a point when the successful competitor is dominant, and they can crush competition so customers have no alternatives. And they can treat their employees poorly, take away benefits in the name of customer satisfaction and being competitive, etc....
The natural progression is for aggregation of power and wealth into the hands of few successful folks at the expense of the majority. It is a positive feedback system where the more you outpace your competitors, the more your economies of scale and resources to fight make it impossible for them to beat you. In the absence of regulation, we end up with at best an economic feudal system and at worst a widespread economic totalitarianism.
What I REALLY can't accept (but I sort of understand) is how the Republican party has convinced almost half the population to support this corporate-friendly model that is not in the interest of those who vote for it!
The only way it can work is by lumping in those who don't directly understand the long-term consequences of this point, and are more focused on the issues that seem close to them like abortion, religious teaching in schools, fear of change or diversity, and resentment of giving away hard-earned money to free-loaders.
What they don't get is that some very successful corporations are the biggest free-loaders the world has ever seen, more dangerous than any street thug or beggar. It is the finest distillation of organized crime. And it is not just "white collar crime" because it literally costs the blood of poor people sent to the front lines of wars.
|
|
nutjob
Gym climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
I get the idea of frugality, personal stewardship and responsibility, and even religious conservatism if people strongly believe in their faith. But this all should have NOTHING to do with granting corporations and very rich people more power to stay in their positions at the expense of the rest of folks!
I would like to see a political discourse that addresses this basic problem, and it is generally unaddressed by Democrats who stay on a fantasy "spend more than we have" model that gets more votes from people who want something from someone else (I like and agree with this part of Ayn Rand philosophy), and Republicans who are trying so hard to fight that notion that they will give everything away to corporations and create a different kind of evil. I don't know what the right balance is, but I see it as an eternal war that cannot be conclusively won. It is not good versus evil, but two sides who each see one evil but don't really appreciate the other. The eternal struggle between personal rights and corporate rights (or more generally, the age-old rich versus poor, strong versus weak) is perhaps inevitable and right to keep balance in the world.
Basic items to address:
 How to preserve the good things of free markets like innovation, personal reward for working hard and smart and producing something of "value" (that's its own long debate to define value and the problems in our society that are spawned by what we choose to value)
Is there a simple way to ensure that wealth can be amassed only by creating something of value? Or will it always come down to defining all the corner cases and exceptions and discovering loopholes created by our inability to define what counts as "value"? It seems that the world is complex enough that many things can be deemed valuable and serve a real beneficial purpose even though they can also be abused. This inevitably leads to more complexity of laws and regulations and of strategies to circumvent them. That is the root of the economic crisis. It seems to be a never-ending battle that will just get more and more complicated unless we completely revert to a system with banks only issuing loans for money they have collected, and money being created only when work is performed to create something that another is willing to pay for (rather than when someone incurs a debt and a bank issues a loan). This would throw the world back to stone age agrarianism and greatly slow the pace of technological innovation. Whether or not this is a good thing is subject to debate. This is only one part of a crazy complicated beast.
To really fix our society's financial problems, do we have to start with a clear statement of what we value and what we want to encourage and protect? How far does this need to be articulated so we have a measurable system to compare whether or not our policies are meeting the stated objective?
Do we need to have a government change to first vote/agree on what the priorities and relative weights of different criteria are, and then choose a policy that will meet those objectives? Without this, how can we measure the impact of our policies and decide whether or not
If we don't rise to this level of governing, this ability to articulate a very specific desired policy and prioritization, and separate this from the choice of actions to achieve that outcome, we create a vacuum that invites special interests to feast in the chaos
Is there any place that has these and many more issues laid out in a logical hierarchical fashion the way a complicated technical problem might dissected and solved? It seems like a good thing for collective effort to make the world a better place, rather than mindless repetition of political positions.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
How does an unregulated free market best serve the interests of people?
It is crazy! You DO need some regs in place to monitor things. Ya gotts have some basic regs, and enforcement of them.
|
|
nutjob
Gym climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
It is crazy! You DO need some regs in place to monitor things. Ya gotts have some basic regs, and enforcement of them.
What does "basic" mean? It just evolves into a more and more complicated gordian knot, at least when it comes to financial and corporate and environmental regulation. It's a sort of intellectual arms race of regulation and schemes to subvert it. There is no such thing as basic if you really try to protect people when some groups stand to make A LOT of money by doing things not in the common interest, and this leads to bigger government.
The idea of small government is appealing, but it's taking an overly simplistic view of the real complexity that exists in our world.
And "enforcement" boils down to headcount to research who is violating and who is not, and then a fair due process to issue penalties, provide recourse for corporations to defend themselves against wrongful accusations or misinterpretations, and then this is just more big government!
Again, the real solution requires more complexity and a bigger government than we like to accept. But if we don't accept it, we create another type of beast.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 12:08am PT
|
LEB...Never mind..!
|
|
nutjob
Gym climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 12:20am PT
|
I would like to see an example of a "very wealthy" person who is "exploiting" us. I would like to get a handle on what you are referencing here.
I was taught to analyze who has something to gain or lose when I evaluate an argument that cannot be easily reduced to unalterable facts.
Here are some examples:
http://www.alec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Energy_Publication
Just picking a random doc and analyzing for 3 minutes...
Kyoto also subverts the best-known method for achieving a healthy environment: a healthy economy. While it may be counterintuitive to some, to many Americans it is a self-evident truth. The luxury of environmental protection depends on having the monetary resources to pay for it.
I disagree. It is only self-evident to those who value an acquisitive lifestyle at the lowest possible immediate financial cost, without regard to the long-term costs of deforestation, toxic pollutants, over-fishing, etc. If we assign a rigorous valuation to the environmental and health costs of unfriendly environmental policies, we would see that a long-term environmentally sustainable approach is more economically conservative for the system as a whole. The challenge is that the ones who benefit in the short term are not held accountable for the long term real costs, and this is exactly where the federal government should be involved!
Another random doc from the site...
America has plentiful energy resources, but many of them are too expensive given current technology and current prices. That will change over time. Our biggest threat today is not uncertain future threats because of a lack of energy independence, but the certain, current threat of high energy prices that constantly create a drag on the economy and reduce our economic efficiency.
The implicit value in this argument is that energy independence, if a useful goal at all, is best met through short-term strategies to consume our fossil fuel stores without regard to the economic consequences of fossil fuel-based energy, and zero articulation of how our goal energy independence should be tied to investing in alternative energy sources to make them a reality. Other energy sources will automagically "change over time" with no government intervention. Not as long as we have groups like ALEC pushing the fossil fuel agenda! And yet look on your personal tax returns, and ask yourself why every citizen who files a tax return sees a line item for petroleum tax credits. How many people benefit from these lines on the tax return?
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f8830--2005.pdf
In case I didn't connect the dots cleanly enough, the corporate ALEC members from petroleum industries or those who have environmentally friendly by-products are the power folks who are exploiting us poor folks.
Without providing specific links, let's shift gears and just casually mention the Weapons of Mass Destruction --> Dick Cheney --> Halliburton --> exlusive cost plus contracts connection. Even putting aside the extremely serious issue of spilled blood of soldiers on our side and soldiers/civilians on Iraq side, who was the winner here? How do you justify our current economic problems, the small dollar amounts we're trying to shave off of widely agreed important things (infrastructure and education and healthcare), the amount paid to private war contractors, policies like Jeeps burned in fires because they got a flat tire and it was on a cost plus contract, etc....
Do you really not see these things?
My ability to give examples is limited only by my willingness to spend time here.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 12:29am PT
|
LEB..i work with a bunch of unionized republican tea baggers..Most of them are great guys , hard working and would give you the shirt off your back but listening to their anti-government rhetoric is hysterical as they take their paid holidays , comp time , and other benefits that are non- existent in most of the private sector...How's that for an example..? RJ
|
|
nutjob
Gym climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 12:44am PT
|
You are addressing a DIFFERENT question from that which I posed to you. We are not discussing optimal utilization of resources within a society.
Right, the question was strong and rich oppressing the weak and poor. I'll articulate the connection a little more plainly:
1. Early wealth and power established in fossil fuels
2. This power is used to modify government laws to create tax credits for petroleum related items, affect foreign policy, suppress innovation that threatens to reduce consumption of fossil fuels and reduce revenues
3. Soldiers die fighting wars that at root are about fossil fuel control, energy efficiency innovation is suppressed (see the movie Tucker: Man and His Dreams), government squabbles over cuts to programs that benefit most of America while preserving fossil fuel credits.
Another example:
Corn subsidies, overproduction of corn, research into alternate uses including sweeteners, epidemic of obesity in America....
Who benefits, and who loses?
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 01:15am PT
|
It is not really wealth, per se, to which you object but rather wealth based in certain market sectors and also (I suspect) certain modalities of accrual. This gets into my whole philosophy about "ethical capitalism" but the hour is late. We will pursue that discussion another time.
Um.. no..
He doesn't object to wealth. He is just saying that wealth leads to power and that power needs something to balance it, usually in the form of some regulations and or government power.
It has nothing to do with "certain market sectors" as any sector can become a problem. He just used oil, because he understands it.
|
|
Jingy
climber
Somewhere out there
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 02:48am PT
|
Klimmer,
I hear ya. Corporate America is definitely not hurting like the rest of us Americans are.
To the point that "He needs to start doing what we asked him to do."
Not totally sure when "we" asked him to do anything. I mean how much pressure has he had from the people? Weigh that against the constant barrage of corporate donors, monied interests and lobbyists all day every day. I agree that the people voted for change when they elected Obama. I was wanting to get whitey the f*#k out of there because the last 4-5 white presidents had screwed the American people out of so much:
They made it ok for companies to send jobs out of the country.
They stole all the savings way back when because all the people that were supposed to be watching over certain transactions were the corporate thieves themselves.
And now that most every level of government has been infiltrated by more and more corporate thieves every level is being run like absolute shite.
I doubt Obama has heard from the general public.
The general public is still super happy about the new cell phone as if that's the thing in life that makes life worth living.
Unfortunately, the people have yet to reach a boiling point. They are willing to allow corporate thieves steal the treasury and bilk the public out of all the gold.
When I think about all the tax breaks, tax cuts and whatnot over the last 30 years…. And yet, we still have unemployment? I thought tax cuts for the job creators (whoever gave the rich and corporate elite this moniker wanted to give them a god-like status, but they are human, and greedy just like one) would have solved all the problems with the jobs already..
Fact is, the job creators have the American public over a barrel. Strange thing I heard this morning that the Taliban had taken a bunch of children hostage in Afghanistan. They are demanding the release of the jailed friends and comrades.
When I heard this story it at some point it sounded like the news caster was talking about America.
"Today the ultra-wealthy and rich corporate leaders have taken the American taxpayers and workers hostage. In return for a few unskilled labor jobs they are demanding that their class be relieved of having to pay taxes at all.
The rich and wealthy are calling for a 0% tax rate on earnings, and demanding that all taxes be paid by the bottom 95% of the American public.
When asked how that would be sustainable? the rich spokesperson said "They could prey for more work."
And still the people don't stand up to be counted.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 05:09am PT
|
It's worthwhile to pay attention to Nutjob's nuance sis, like you, he has a rare mind.
You, on the other hand, don't have a clue, Pat.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 10:22am PT
|
It's not government's place to make jobs. The purpose of government should be to make an environment safe enough for individuals to create their jobs.
Government needs to hold back the invader who would steal the fruits of our good work. Restrain the criminal who would steal our creations. And slow the channels where flows useless immorality that degrades us.
We should strengthen our infrastructure at all times. It's great for speeding commerce. It's much more productive the dropping million dollar bombs on primative tribes on the other side of the world.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
-A community of hairless apes
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 11:03am PT
|
An eclectic mix of fiscal conservatism and social conservatism combines to produce a most appealing and powerful narrative. That's the best explanation for why we have umpteen million middle and lower class folk who could really benefit from "socialist" programs (some even living in trailers barely scraping by) who vote Republican many under the banner of the tea party to reduce if not eliminate government and taxes to the benefit of Wallstreet and billionaires.
From the perspective of memes, sometimes things just fall into place and end up working and so are preserved, and so evolve. I think some of the elements of this sociopolitical narrative - which we see expressed now in the likes of Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Bennett - have come about by this means. I've taken interest if nothing else observing this unfolding (this evolution) going on 25 years now - which we might call "God and Country" - start with the likes of Jerry Falwell, Trent Lott, Bob Dole and Elizabeth Dole, Jesse Helm and then led early on and galvanized by Ronald Reagan.
It's the story, stupid. Till the Dems or Independents (a) break out with a powerful inspiring narrative of their own (and, btw, the Scientific Story as revealed by science is not it, at least not completely on its own) and (b) tell it as effectively, compellingly, and passionately as the GOP does with its "God and Country" they won't emulate.
"God and Country" - if not "God and Country and Freedom" - is the Republican narrative. What's the Dem's?
.....
See George Lakoff on effective framing and storytelling in political discourse. Frank Luntz, too, who mostly employs his art and skills for the GOP. Both point out the Republican narrative is polished and tight while the Dem's is loose and uncertain if not nonexistent altogether.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 10, 2011 - 11:07am PT
|
When necessary government can make a difference and in a massive positive way.
The Depression, FDR, The New Deal, the CCC etc.
We could do it again. This is very good use of government.
Bring back the YCC, YACC, and the CCC and put people to work doing wonderful things for our National Treasures: our National Parks, State Parks, National Trails, cleaning up the environment, pushing full steam ahead into clean renewable energies, and repairing our Nation's failing and decrepit infrastructure.
Get off/out of the virtual world and into the real world people . . .
I worked in the YACC for one year back in 1980/1981 in the North Cascades of WA. One of the best years of my life (on my free-time I got in tonnes of climbing with fellow YACCers/climbers). The NPS, FS, BLM, and other agencies got about $7 worth of work for every $1 spent. They celebrated these programs. Kids out of HS and/or now in college got work experience, got to see wonderful wilderness that impresses and changes the individual forever, and many, many projects were done that couldn't have been done. The American people and these Federal agencies got a great deal out of us and we learned and experienced a great deal in return, and have memories to last a lifetime. The stories I can tell. I can go up to the North Cascades today and go into the NPS car camp campgrounds and see the many massive picnic tables made by North Cascades YACC made out of solid thick Cedar with the YACC engraved logo still there. These things last nearly forever. 31 years ago and they are still going strong. (And then Ronald Reagan came along. Uh-oh . . .)
How about the many public works projects done by the CCC? Just drive up and explore Timberline Lodge on Mt. Hood sometime. You can thank the CCC. We could all come up with many other wonderful examples . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps
http://www.ccclegacy.org/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/ccc/
Lecture 19:
Liberalism at High Noon: The New Deal
http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/lectures/lecture19.html
Edit:
HFCS,
The Republican/GOP/Christian-Right Movement is anything but Christian.
Just as Jesus, Emmanuel, "God With Us," called out the High Priests of The Temple of GOD in Jerusalem, and said to them they had the appearance of Holiness on the outside but were dead on the inside, the same can be said regarding The Republican/GOP/Christian-Right Movement.
I'm not really sure you understand this. You can not hold up The Republican/GOP/Christian-Right Movement as an example of true Christianity. It isn't. They are diametrically opposed to most Christian principles. Like Jesus said, you will know them by the fruits of the spirit that they bare.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
-A community of hairless apes
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 11:28am PT
|
I'm not really sure you understand this.
Right back at you.
Whether or not the GOP's narrative is the "true" reflection of Christ and Christians (e.g., in your eyes or others), that is STILL the perception of umpteen millions who adhere to the party.
That is the point I'm making.
I only have to look at my own God-fearing Christian extended family both in Monterey CA and Kansas and their conservative religious values in complete and total support of the GOP for support of this point.
.....
Abortion. Homosexuality. Atheism. Big gov programs, too numerous to count, which support these godless activities. That is all millions of god-fearing (social) conservatives need (to think about) to vote for a Rick Perry or Sarah Palin.
-All of which pertains to the narrative (or software) they have running in their heads - to the benefit of the other side of it (i.e., the narrative) and to Wallstreet and billionaires. Again, that was the point.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 10, 2011 - 11:36am PT
|
I know what you're saying. My extended family also is the same way.
We go head to head all the time. I call them on it and show them the hypocracy of the The Rebublican/GOP/Christian-Right Movement all the time.
They hate that I do that. He-he-he . . .
It's for their own good though. Amazingly, I've gotten my dad (GOPer/Baptist most of his life) to rethink somethings and come over to a better understanding. It's taken a very long time and a lot of work though.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Sep 10, 2011 - 11:51am PT
|
It's not government's place to make jobs. The purpose of government should be to make an environment safe enough for individuals to create their jobs.
Government needs to hold back the invader who would steal the fruits of our good work. Restrain the criminal who would steal our creations. And slow the channels where flows useless immorality that degrades us.
We should strengthen our infrastructure at all times. It's great for speeding commerce. It's much more productive the dropping million dollar bombs on primative tribes on the other side of the world.
Amen to that.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 10, 2011 - 12:23pm PT
|
LEB,
I hear you. I understand. I would like to read that book on the CCC. Sounds like a good read.
But the program can be modernized. The YCC and the YACC was modeled on the CCC, but it wasn't exact.
I remember working on my YACC crew and we were doing PCT maintenance around Snoqualmie Pass about the time many hiking the PCT all the way from the CA/Baja, MX border, were coming through. Pretty cool to talk to those hikers.
Anyway, several of the crew were working and listening to "Walkmans." One girl in particular on my crew, very good looking by the way, was way into The Police. She turned me on to that band. We were not really that different from today's kids and teen-agers. Sure we didn't have the internet and all, but young people today are dying to have great outdoor experiences. They just need to be shown once what they are missing and then they are hooked.
Oh yes, let's not forget the time we had a lunch break and our entire crew went skinny dipping just off the PCT in a fine alpine lake. Very nice. Uh, oh, don't tell anyone. We went skinny dipping and ate lots of blue-berries on the taxpayers dollar for lunch. Mybad?
We earned it. We worked our butts off and we had a great time doing so. What youth of America today would not like/want that experience?
In that program we all got certified at a local Community College as "Buckers/Fallers" using Stihl Chainsaws so we could fell trees and know what the heck we were doing and not kill ourselves or others. We used chainsaws day in and out for all sorts of tasks. That was my first college class after HS. In addition, the FS put us all through a course where we all learned how to do the work and use all the tools we were going to be using. The "Pulaski" is a great tool.
We could still do these programs. They would help in so many ways.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 10, 2011 - 12:32pm PT
|
Nope your wrong. We had meetings with the NPS superintendent of N. Cascades and others and they continually said we produced more work and more product than what they (the taxpayer) paid for. I remember the $7/$1 ratio was mentioned often. Many projects were accomplished that would never have been able to be done.
It was a great value for the money.
Edit:
YCC = Youth Conservation Corp (for HSers during the summer)
YACC = Young Adult Conservation Corp (1 year program for HS grads and college students)
They were awesome programs. In some areas there exist something similiar today, but these were Nation-wide programs. Then Ray-gun came along and cut them. Sad day.
YCC
YACC
I've seen this program before. It's a good intro. . . .
The YACC (Young Adult Conservation Corps) Narration by Don Messick
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxSuAPOgXcQ
I believe the North Cascades YACC out of Sedro Woolley, WA, which I was a part of was the largest in the nation at the time. The North Cascades NP was "our office."
Edit:
I found this regarding the N. Cascades NP . . .
"One measure of the park complex's growing pains was the increase in park staff. The staff of seven permanent and forty seasonal employees in the summer of 1969 had increased to forty-two permanent and eighty seasonal members by the early 1980s, and was up to seventy-four permanent and ninety-four seasonal employees in the mid-1990s. The increase was a natural progression in adding needed personnel to the young park; it also demonstrated the need for specialized positions to cover the wide array of management concerns, from law enforcement to specific resource management problems. In addition, the staff was composed of other members, such as Volunteers in Parks (VIPs), Student Conservation Association (SCA) workers, members of the Youth Conservation Corps (YCC), and the Young Adult Conservation Corps (YACC). The presence of these volunteers and inexpensive employees, who numbered some one hundred people in 1980, illustrated the Park Service's interest in using an alternative work force to meet all the demands of park management, demands which could not be met by current funding levels and hiring policies. VIPs and other work groups provided a valuable source of labor for a variety of projects; they helped with revegetation at the subalpine passes, provided information and interpretation in front country areas, built and rehabilitated park trails, organized library records, and conducted research on the park's natural and human history. [1]"
http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/noca/adhi/chap9.htm
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!