|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 9:56:38 GMT -5
Sometimes his anti-corporation schtick reminds me of Occupy Wall Street. Lots of outrage, no understanding. Okay. Every time I read what you write, I see a Koch's hand making your mouth move, so I guess we're even! (Even the GOP is finally getting wary of them.)
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Jul 9, 2015 10:13:42 GMT -5
Maybe But Ive seen here and in other countries how mad people get when the gravy train derails. I see that Greeks government workers can retire at 50, now thats a nice gravy train. If they are unionized you can bet they will act like the union people in Wisconsin. A great gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair will just be the beginning. Socialists always want more more more,(from somebody else) any serious reduction will be met with violence. How much longer will Germany put up with footing the bill for them. Not much longer I think.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Jul 9, 2015 10:31:48 GMT -5
Sometimes his anti-corporation schtick reminds me of Occupy Wall Street. Lots of outrage, no understanding. Okay. Every time I read what you write, I see a Koch's hand making your mouth move, so I guess we're even! (Even the GOP is finally getting wary of them.) Are the Koch brothers hiding under your bed, too?
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 12:25:36 GMT -5
Are the Koch brothers hiding under your bed, too? Am I wary of their attempts to reshape the country to service them? Sure. I don't know if that means they're "under my bed" or not.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Jul 9, 2015 12:42:10 GMT -5
Are the Koch brothers hiding under your bed, too? Am I wary of their attempts to reshape the country to service them? Sure. I don't know if that means they're "under my bed" or not. So much so that you think the U.S. corporate income tax code is somehow reasonable?
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Jul 9, 2015 13:08:09 GMT -5
Are the Koch brothers hiding under your bed, too? Am I wary of their attempts to reshape the country to service them? Sure. I don't know if that means they're "under my bed" or not. I can well understand why you would be annoyed at the Kochs. Not sure why you can't "accept" the reality of various viewpoints all electing to influence a democratic representative government? Are all groups who seek to influence public policy egregious in your world, or just the ones you choose not to understand?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:21:18 GMT -5
I think EY truly believes all of our consumer goods are made at night by teams of fairies, and that corporations have nothing to do with all the things he uses every day, from gasoline to socks. You'd be wrong, but that's familiar territory for you. I'd prefer to see companies sink or swim on the merits of their products, and not on whether the government, either party, favors them or not. I find the slavish devotion of you and Ranger John to the Republicans kind of odd, when they're not all that conservative any more (fiscally, anyway - they're still pretty repressed socially). They've never been strong advocates of average Americans (but if you're wealthy they're in your camp), but recently their exclusive interest is in corporations. Corporations are great wealth engines; run well, they produce greater than the sum of their parts. However, I have no wish to be governed by them, because capitalism in its purest form is merciless to people. Yet you want the government big enough to destroy businesses that don't toe whatever atrocities they impose, like in Oregon. You also want them big enough to decide what the states, cities, and towns will do as far as zoning laws, and their "diversity", as defined by Washington. That means you will have a government big enough to be bought by the highest bidder, as Hillary was.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 19:21:33 GMT -5
So much so that you think the U.S. corporate income tax code is somehow reasonable? Where did I say that?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:22:51 GMT -5
I think EY truly believes all of our consumer goods are made at night by teams of fairies, and that corporations have nothing to do with all the things he uses every day, from gasoline to socks. You'd be wrong, but that's familiar territory for you. I'd prefer to see companies sink or swim on the merits of their products, and not on whether the government, either party, favors them or not. I find the slavish devotion of you and Ranger John to the Republicans kind of odd, when they're not all that conservative any more (fiscally, anyway - they're still pretty repressed socially). They've never been strong advocates of average Americans (but if you're wealthy they're in your camp), but recently their exclusive interest is in corporations. Corporations are great wealth engines; run well, they produce greater than the sum of their parts. However, I have no wish to be governed by them, because capitalism in its purest form is merciless to people. I'm not "slavish" to the Pubs, I just see them as far better than the racists, homophobic, mysoginistic Marxist Party. We only have a choice of 2.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 19:23:12 GMT -5
I can well understand why you would be annoyed at the Kochs. Not sure why you can't "accept" the reality of various viewpoints all electing to influence a democratic representative government? Are all groups who seek to influence public policy egregious in your world, or just the ones you choose not to understand? I do not regard corporations as people, and would strip them of the right to speak to politicians were it my choice. I do not agree that money is the same thing as speech, and would favor a Constitutional Amendment (if that's what's required) to sharply limit the ability of people to spend on politics.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 19:24:22 GMT -5
Yet you want the government big enough to destroy businesses that don't toe whatever atrocities they impose, like in Oregon. You also want them big enough to decide what the states, cities, and towns will do as far as zoning laws, and their "diversity", as defined by Washington. That means you will have a government big enough to be bought by the highest bidder, as Hillary was. If a business refuses to obey the law, then it must be brought to heel, sure. A business is not a church; it's a simple concept but so far it has eluded you.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:24:15 GMT -5
Are the Koch brothers hiding under your bed, too? Am I wary of their attempts to reshape the country to service them? Sure. I don't know if that means they're "under my bed" or not. Yet, you have no problem with the NAZI Soros, or any of the Marxists buying Democrats reshaping the country into Greece, or worse, Kenya.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:25:24 GMT -5
So much so that you think the U.S. corporate income tax code is somehow reasonable? Where did I say that? First, on nearly every thread that involves, even peripherally, corporations. Second, in the thread on gay "marriage".
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:26:56 GMT -5
I can well understand why you would be annoyed at the Kochs. Not sure why you can't "accept" the reality of various viewpoints all electing to influence a democratic representative government? Are all groups who seek to influence public policy egregious in your world, or just the ones you choose not to understand? I do not regard corporations as people, and would strip them of the right to speak to politicians were it my choice. I do not agree that money is the same thing as speech, and would favor a Constitutional Amendment (if that's what's required) to sharply limit the ability of people to spend on politics. Would you also strip unions, political parties, and nonprofits? Corporations are made up of people. Those people have the right, enshrined in the 1A, to petition the government. The fact that they do so collectively as a corporation doesn't change that right, any more than it does when part of any of those other associations I mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:27:58 GMT -5
Yet you want the government big enough to destroy businesses that don't toe whatever atrocities they impose, like in Oregon. You also want them big enough to decide what the states, cities, and towns will do as far as zoning laws, and their "diversity", as defined by Washington. That means you will have a government big enough to be bought by the highest bidder, as Hillary was. If a business refuses to obey the law, then it must be brought to heel, sure. A business is not a church; it's a simple concept but so far it has eluded you. That depends on the law. If you look at what happened, and is happening, in CA, where businesses do, mostly, obey the law, you'll see what myopic serfdom leads to.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 19:29:30 GMT -5
Yet you want the government big enough to destroy businesses that don't toe whatever atrocities they impose, like in Oregon. You also want them big enough to decide what the states, cities, and towns will do as far as zoning laws, and their "diversity", as defined by Washington. That means you will have a government big enough to be bought by the highest bidder, as Hillary was. If a business refuses to obey the law, then it must be brought to heel, sure. A business is not a church; it's a simple concept but so far it has eluded you. And a black is not a black, outside their neighborhood, if they own a business. A Jew is not a Jew outside of his neighborhood, if he owns a business. A gay is not a gay, outside of his bar or whatever, if he owns a business. Got it. Everyone is a blankfaced serf if they bother to start a business.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 19:31:18 GMT -5
Would you also strip unions, political parties, and nonprofits? Corporations are made up of people. Those people have the right, enshrined in the 1A, to petition the government. The fact that they do so collectively as a corporation doesn't change that right, any more than it does when part of any of those other associations I mentioned. Yes. The individuals who work for a corporation are people and can speak as they wish. The corporation, itself (and the union, charity, NGO, whatever) should NOT be permitted to speak. It can petition its members to speak as it wishes them to (but any sort of coercion would be illegal). I also think the CEOs, presidents, chairment, etc. of organizations should be held accountable with jail time for crimes committed by their organization. Leadership should involve inculcating legal and moral behavior. Surely you favor legal and moral behavior.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 19:33:23 GMT -5
And a black is not a black, outside their neighborhood, if they own a business. A Jew is not a Jew outside of his neighborhood, if he owns a business. A gay is not a gay, outside of his bar or whatever, if he owns a business. Got it. Everyone is a blankfaced serf if they bother to start a business. This is quite a bizarre stretch from "a business is required to serve all customers".
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Jul 9, 2015 19:43:47 GMT -5
So much so that you think the U.S. corporate income tax code is somehow reasonable? Where did I say that? Fair enough. You seem just fine with the obscene 35% rate. It's just the GOP attempts to allow corporations to be competitive in the global economy that you've got a problem with.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 20:37:46 GMT -5
Would you also strip unions, political parties, and nonprofits? Corporations are made up of people. Those people have the right, enshrined in the 1A, to petition the government. The fact that they do so collectively as a corporation doesn't change that right, any more than it does when part of any of those other associations I mentioned. Yes. The individuals who work for a corporation are people and can speak as they wish. The corporation, itself (and the union, charity, NGO, whatever) should NOT be permitted to speak. It can petition its members to speak as it wishes them to (but any sort of coercion would be illegal). I also think the CEOs, presidents, chairment, etc. of organizations should be held accountable with jail time for crimes committed by their organization. Leadership should involve inculcating legal and moral behavior. Surely you favor legal and moral behavior. So, do you agree that the same should apply to government? After all, we have a government with the power to reward or punish, dependent entirely on the political leanings of the "corporation". So, if that corporation can be punished as an individual, why can't it speak as one?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 20:39:17 GMT -5
And a black is not a black, outside their neighborhood, if they own a business. A Jew is not a Jew outside of his neighborhood, if he owns a business. A gay is not a gay, outside of his bar or whatever, if he owns a business. Got it. Everyone is a blankfaced serf if they bother to start a business. This is quite a bizarre stretch from "a business is required to serve all customers". Again, blacks wouldn't be required to serve KKK members. Gays have been absolved of serving Christians, or anyone that disagrees with gay "marriage". So, the law is not a law, but a club to enforce immorality and government perversion.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Jul 9, 2015 21:13:56 GMT -5
This is quite a bizarre stretch from "a business is required to serve all customers". Again, blacks wouldn't be required to serve KKK members. Gays have been absolved of serving Christians, or anyone that disagrees with gay "marriage". So, the law is not a law, but a club to enforce immorality and government perversion. And he's absolved liberals from having to provide music for a Republican campaign event. I'm sure if it were the other way around, he'd be furious that a conservative rocker refused to provide music for Hillary Clinton. Because that would be SEXIST! or something.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jul 9, 2015 21:20:14 GMT -5
One of the problems with Greece is that the EU, wanting to control it's 'members', set policies that nearly guaranteed what's happening, given Greece's Socialist idea of "it's someone else's job to take care of ME"
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 21:56:54 GMT -5
So, do you agree that the same should apply to government? After all, we have a government with the power to reward or punish, dependent entirely on the political leanings of the "corporation". So, if that corporation can be punished as an individual, why can't it speak as one? It is made up of people. They can speak for it if they care to. The government should not allow politics to enter into any of its decision making about how to award business to corporations. That's a pipe dream, of course, both sides reward their buddies. But you don't want to bring that up, because Republicans are very good at diverting government money to their business buddies. Hell, 43's war was a lot about that (he may not have meant it to be, but he wasn't very smart and he was manipulated).
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jul 9, 2015 21:58:07 GMT -5
And he's absolved liberals from having to provide music for a Republican campaign event. I'm sure if it were the other way around, he'd be furious that a conservative rocker refused to provide music for Hillary Clinton. Because that would be SEXIST! or something. Don't speak for me. You are usually wrong.
|
|