Some people think we need less government

If the entrepreneurs and business man who establish these companies do nothing then why don't you compete with them? If it is so easy, then do it, otherwise for one reason or another they are better at competing in this field then you, and pass on more value to the consumer. What gives you the right to take their money? Before you say "Oh they should pay their workers more" Please list the name of a fortune 500 company that can double its salaries and stay profitable. Then go to 20%, then tell me who will invest in this no profit company to keep it going? etc...

Anyway, all those goods were brought to you by capitalists. That is how I can make the connection. Capitalists brought the the PC to the public, cars and transportation and the freedom that comes with it too.

 

Without the power to meddle in the economy, it would be the government the Framers envisioned.

Why would you put money into politics if the government had no power to improve or reduce your economic position?

A sports team would be more satisfying.

 

Okay, I'll let you know. In the meantime, robbing the bank still warrants jail and it's still illegal. Again, I choose to blame the thief, not the fact the the vault door inside the bank was open.

 

Since it is an inside job by the people who run the bank they wont be pressing charges. Maybe we shouldn't keep giving them more money.

But yes, anyone who tries to take advantage of a government who soaks up everyone's tax money is just as bad as the government itself for taking it for that purpose.

 

Before I comment, I think these two URLs will help with this as well (Which I will also tie in with my comment): http://www.ted.com/talks/james_b_glattfelder_who_controls_the_world.html & http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0025995. Word of advice, put your thinking caps on.

I think a lot of the problem comes from the amount of control private companies have over the government. We can't just automatically look at one side of this argument and chalk it up as such. If I continue what pimptight stated of Monsanto, the FDA creates avenues that allow big corporations like this to have their way with our everyday lives. What do you think would happen to us? Either we better come up with several million dollars to let them look the other way or we're going to be in serious trouble.

If we take some of the information from my URLs I provided, what you will begin to see is how the structure is within various companies is (Not any one in particular, but how they flow from one another). You believe that you are working for a small company when, in fact, you are actually working under a huge umbrella that you're not even aware of. In which case, that bigger company will begin to try to pass legislation so it can continue to grow. While it buys out multiple companies and makes it look like they have no control over it, they absolutely do. This is where we begin to see monopolies formed and how the government has allowed them to do this to continue to control our lives. When I see folks like Bill Gates & Mark Zuckerberg talking about how more coding needs to be in the schools, I laugh because they are apart of the problem.

My thought of this is better government regulation & controls over the market. Capitalism can work, the problem is private companies buy out politicians to only make it work for them. FDA & EPA are regulators that can work. The problem is they allow themselves to be bought out at the expense of the health of the consumer. Too much of that has gone on and needs to change.

 

Constitutional amendment is the only way to change this, so write the amendment with very specific language that levels the palying field.

My preference would be to remove all campaign finance laws for the primary. If you can gain 5% of the vote, each candidate will then recieve equal public funding.

This funding should be highly limited with a expectation of social media being used as the primary means of communication.

 

Whose primary?

 

So what about less personal control over individual people, and more control over big corporations to ensure decent wages and good working conditions?

Seems like progressives are control-freaks and power hungry, and they want to run peoples personal lives, telling them what type of light bulbs they can buy. They SAY they just want to go after big corporations, but their actions have demonstrated they are not content with that.

 

Who runs and works for corporations? All corporations are is a business entity that allows practical investment by others. You too can own a piece of any corporation. Instead of this vague evil corporation, lets get down to brass tacks. What is one of the companies you want to control, and tell what to do, or how to do it? Lets get a name and start working with specifics.

 

But how much is the question. I happen to take a more geo-libertarian view on it, that I am less concerned by ownership of capital, and more concerned over ownership of land and natural resources.

 

For the price set by the market by people like you. Which is the price you will get to sell it at. Who would set the prices if there was no market for something like Google?

 

There is some truth to this, but we also have to recognize that some people are much more consumer power than others, it is hardly a "democratic" system.

 

Egregious codswallop. No one dies from what they eat assuming they don't choke ther organic bananna. People die because eventually freaking entropy wins. When all we had was socalled natural food famine was common and people died in their forties. They are now dying in their late seventies and early eighties. We eat more and exercise less and then wonder why we get fatter.

And now you're going to trot out the crap about big portions served in restaurants and fast food joints. Dude no one at the buffet is holding a gun on you to get you to go back to the line with that third plate in fact theyr eally wish you wouldn't . MCDonalds doesn't force you to get the supersize. These things exist because in focus groups and surveys for the last 40 odd years people have asked for indeed all but demanded them.

We live longer and healthier lives than ever before almost in spite of ourselves. The only real problem we have with our current food supply is food borne illnesses. And given the fact that we Americans consume nearly a billion meals a day not including snacks that would be meals in some third world countries and we only suffer some 3000 deaths a year the problem is fairly minor and most of those related to home cooking.

 

Less government means a centralized government (more power) If you try to row against the ideological/political stream you are forced out of the politial system (the media helps to attack you), so the current political system/government is also the wrong one. Direct democracy will never happen (they, rulers/elite don't want to hear what people think, because if people had a voice via the media this political/economic/ideological situation would never have occured/been here today)

 

It isn't supposed to be. The more value you create the more value you can own.

 

Wrong though. Smaller government can't control as much of your life. You know how many legislators there are, do you know how many thousands of regulators?


Democracy by referendum can by tyranny. People can vote away others money. Discriminate against their beliefs sexual orientation etc...This was all figured out 100s of years ago. Read more Stuart mills is the cure.

- - - Updated - - -

My argument is that food quality is reduced by fda regulations which inhibit competition.

 

The people have no voice because they have no brains. What is the sound of one hand clapping?

 

Lot of truth there probably. I don't know of any show that gets to stay on the air with low ratings. The current situation must bemoo pulse with people who vote with their time.

I watch a lot of YouTube. You can find every idea there. It is unregulated Internet capitalism though so that is what you would expect. Tv especially broadcast is highly regulated and beholden to government, the protection they receive makes it a mutual relationship.

 

Johnny the relationship between thegovernment and big business is more akin to the realationship between the mafia and small business people in Little Italy back in the day. You got some protection but the cost was high and you knew that if they wanted something no matter what you gave it or went down, sometimes literally, in flames. The realtionship is more nearly parasitic than symbiotic with the government being the parasite.

Given that major corporations are in no small way at the mercy of millions of bureaucrats many of whom hate them because of the indoctrination they recieved in what ever school you go to to become a life long dispenser of red tape, you are all but compelled to wonder when one of them is going to grow a set and start posting on the bills they send to their customers exactly what percentage of that bill is a product of government rules and regulations, to say nothing of taxes.

 

One primary for all.

No more party monopolies!

 

Yes, we need less central government. It's not the job of government to tell me what size soda I can buy, or mandate that I purchase health insurance, or a myriad of other things that the central government regulates. There will always be a need for sensible regulations, simply because of human nature. But over the last hundred years or so, the government has embarked on creating a "victim class", people who have been conditioned to believe that they can't make it without government help. And the number of people who believe that is growing, and by doing so, the size of government increase. Until we change that societal momentum, which won't be easy, the size and reach of government will continue to grow. The closer the government is to the people, the better it works. Our problem today is that government has grown so much that it is the end all and be all of politicians in DC. The will of the people matters little.

 

What actions might that be? Because I haven't heard anyone "telling" me I had to buy a certain light bulb. And I fail to see how any of this involves running peoples personal lives. If anything, I'm grateful that we have companies that make light bulbs to begin with. No matter what kind they make.

 

I think were all on the same page here. The question is how do we break the grid lock you are talking about, when the world around us has turned into a mafia to only benefit the few. Excellent eye opening video that just reinforces the notion of how global economies have become cancerous to the common man, with such a tighter centralized power.

 

I'd entertain the idea of getting rid of large corporate conglomerates in exchange for doing away with big government. Limit the size of government and corporations. Surely you "conservatives" can agree with that one, right?