Have and have not, goodbye America

[Mike Ault]

The folks on the liberal side of the isle like to point to the Nordic countries as shining examples of how well socialism works. They are, however, still market economies - only market economies with relatively high tax rates, which in turn allows them to provide a healthier cohort of social programs (healthcare and retirement). It seems to me this is less about the success of socialism as it is the ability to curb the grift. The tax $ are actually going toward their intended use and not being scraped by fraudsters, politicians, and the politicians' sycophants.

And one of those Nordic countries (Norway) pays for its Universal Health healthcare and generous retirement plan by nationalizing its hydrocarbon resources and funneling the profits towards those programs. I don't know why Americans put up with multinational corporations pumping and selling all their oil out from underneath them onto the world market. Most Americans would be economically better off with a plan like Norway's.

 

[alebrewer]

And one of those Nordic countries (Norway) pays for its Universal Health healthcare and generous retirement plan by nationalizing its hydrocarbon resources and funneling the profits towards those programs. I don't know why Americans put up with multinational corporations pumping and selling all their oil out from underneath them onto the world market. Most Americans would be economically better off with a plan like Norway's.

I think it's a slippery slope to start nationalizing industries. From my perspective, a much better approach would be to eliminate the grift. We're already paying ~ 35% to 40% of income in various taxes. That is more than sufficient to fund legit govt functions. No reason to allow the government to take over industries. I guess if you're communist that sounds like a good thing (as that's the definition of communism).

Unless you eliminate the grift, then all nationalizing industries will do is continue to widen the wealth gap.

 

[Mike Ault]

I think it's a slippery slope to start nationalizing industries. From my perspective, a much better approach would be to eliminate the grift. We're already paying ~ 35% to 40% of income in various taxes. That is more than sufficient to fund legit govt functions. No reason to allow the government to take over industries. I guess if you're communist that sounds like a good thing (as that's the definition of communism).

Unless you eliminate the grift, then all nationalizing industries will do is continue to widen the wealth gap.

The threat of a "windfall profits tax" always seemed to get their attention. You leave all economic decision-making to private industry and you end up with what we have. A third world country borrowing to live like a first world one whose industries were hollowed out in favor of the lowest price point on the planet. We will never, ever be able to compete against countries who allow their citizenry to be worked like slaves and their country's environments to be decimated by forever chemicals. So, we need to have a better plan. That plan does not include letting capitalists move all of OUR MONEY around to suit them. Again.

 

[alebrewer]

The threat of a "windfall profits tax" always seemed to get their attention. You leave all economic decision-making to private industry and you end up with what we have. A third world country borrowing to live like a first world one whose industries were hollowed out in favor of the lowest price point on the planet. We will never, ever be able to compete against countries who allow their citizenry to be worked like slaves. So, we need to have a better plan. That plan does not include letting capitalists move all of OUR MONEY around to suit them.

Again - stop the grift, problem solved. I am not an anarchist. I believe govt does have a legitimate role: (1) national defense, (2) enforcement of property rights, (3) maintenance of highway systems, (4) buoy for market failures (primarily due to indivisible products - police, fire, education, etc.), and MAYBE a central bank (but only if on the gold standard).

As for the rest of your lament, we are not a third world country. That's one of the silliest things I've heard in a while.

 

[Mike Ault]

Again - stop the grift, problem solved. I am not an anarchist. I believe govt does have a legitimate role: (1) national defense, (2) enforcement of property rights, (3) maintenance of highway systems, (4) buoy for market failures (primarily due to indivisible products - police, fire, education, etc.), and MAYBE a central bank (but only if on the gold standard).

As for the rest of your lament, we are not a third world country. That's one of the silliest things I've heard in a while.

Silly? What does $40 trillion in debt and the world reserve currency status of the petrodollar do for us? It allows us to live like an economically viable first world country by masking the Third World economics propping the whole enterprise up. Have you got $40 trillion spotted sitting around somewhere so we can actually be the country you think we are? I didn't hear anything about "protection of American workers" in that libertarian rant of yours above. Don't you think government has a legitimate role in protecting the health and safety of the population? Do you believe that all labor laws should be rescinded and we should go back to 12-year-olds working in factories?

 

[alebrewer]

Silly? What does $40 trillion in debt and the world reserve currency status of the petrodollar do for us? It allows us to live like an economically viable first world country by masking the Third World economics propping the whole enterprise up. Have you got $40 trillion spotted sitting around somewhere so we can actually be the country you think we are? I didn't hear anything about "protection of American workers" in that libertarian rant of yours above. Don't you think government has a legitimate role in protecting the health and safety of the population? Do you believe that all labor law should be rescinded and we should go back to 12-year-olds working in factories?

If you want to discuss real stuff, I'm happy to. Making statements like us being a 3rd world country just makes you sound like J. It's not very becoming dude. WRT the national debt, it is high, but not out of line with other developed countries (see below), so quit trying to make it sound like we're some albatross. WRT protecting American workers, I'm certain that I'll be WAY further right than you. I guess the first question would be: protect them from what? WRT my opinion about Govt's role in protecting the health and safety of the population - yes, but only insofar as it benefits the country, not the individual. And certainly not the individual at the country's expense. Example: America is better off having a well educated work force. For this reason, I'm in favor of public education. I'm not in favor of public education simply for the purpose of helping folks feel better about themselves.

 

[Mike Ault]

If you want to discuss real stuff, I'm happy to. Making statements like us being a 3rd world country just makes you sound like J. It's not very becoming dude. WRT the national debt, it is high, but not out of line with other developed countries (see below), so quit trying to make it sound like we're some albatross. WRT protecting American workers, I'm certain that I'll be WAY further right than you. I guess the first question would be: protect them from what? WRT my opinion about Govt's role in protecting the health and safety of the population - yes, but only insofar as it benefits the country, not the individual. And certainly not the individual at the country's expense. Example: America is better off having a well educated work force. For this reason, I'm in favor of public education. I'm not in favor of public education simply for the purpose of helping folks feel better about themselves.

View attachment 110290

That's where I lose faith in libertarians. Apparently they're just fine with 12-year-olds working in factories and all the other lamentable decisions & excesses along with predictably poor outcomes for the majority of people in the Gilded Age. As far as "how we rank alongside other world economies", we're doing pretty well when compared with all the other passengers on the Titanic. Which is not saying much.

 

[George Hatch]

If it does in fact cost us five times more to produce something which is vital to our national defense then that means we spend that money rather than economize ourselves into oblivion. We can spend less on sun tanning lotion & our pets. Exporting our shipbuilding & other industrial capacity was no less a bad & shortsighted idea than exporting our nuclear weapons manufacturing capability would've been. You don't do stupid sh*t like that. The fact that we turn all those decisions over to people like Trump whose only loyalty is personal gain is the Achilles' heel of capitalism.

Commerce is commerce. If you want to say the govt should subsidize certain sectors for security purposes that's fine but it's also going in exactly the opposite direction of economic feasibility. Internally inconsistent with the argument that we need to retain those businesses at all costs because we need the money.

Prolly would have eventually happened anyway even if we had reduced the corporate tax structure to zero AND levied more onerous tarriffs on the imports.

 

[alebrewer]

That's where I lose faith in libertarians. Apparently they're just fine with 12-year-olds working in factories and all the other lamentable decisions & excesses along with predictably poor outcomes for the majority of people in the Gilded Age. As far as "how we rank alongside other world economies", we're doing pretty well when compared with all the other passengers on the Titanic. Which is not saying much.

I doubt you'll find a libertarian who approves of 12 year olds performing dangerous jobs (factory or otherwise). That said, I was cleaning chicken houses when I was 12, making $1 an hour. I fail to see how that had an adverse affect on me? Are you going to outlaw allowing kids to work IF THEY WANT TO? Classic communist thought process if so (you know - government owns and directs the factors of production, labor being one). At a high level, I'd lump the efforts of groups like OSHA in the 'protection of private rights and property'. I would say that workers have a right to not fear for their lives when working. I'd also say, though, that if someone WANTED to take on a high risk job - and they thought the compensation was worth the risk - they should have the right to do so.

As to your BS hyperbole about the Titanic - again, please stop. Makes you sound like you're going to drown if it starts raining.

 

[glenn walker]

The Democrat and Republican Pparties are outdated and until the New Order is legally in place Free Medical to all citizens needs to be passed to end that issue. Next end Income taxes on human labour and lower our population to open up housing and jobs.