Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How can you maintain a monopoly when you have to reapply for the position every few years?
Do you think private prisons are a good idea knowing that the taxpayer now pays a private company to provide the service instead of a government representative who is beholden to the Democratic vote?
If you have a profit minded Corporation in charge of your prison they have an incentive to create crime not stop it ..
this undermines the legitimacy of the system inherently.
"Reapplying" for the position is controlled through heavy regulation/massive "pay to play" fees all enacted by the previous figureheads at the behest of oligarchy.
"Reapplying" for the position is controlled through heavy regulation/massive "pay to play" fees all enacted by the previous figureheads at the behest of oligarchy.
And that could all be fixed if we eliminated corporate bribery name three other countries you think do it better than America 1975
How are you going to eliminate corporate bribery when the people who would need to pass those laws are owned by the corporations?
Yeah good point, i figure it would take something pretty impressive.
I feel like we have a "de facto" privatised situation now and THAT is the problem.
1975 pre-regan we had a near PERFECT political system, democracy works but handing our country over to corporate prostitutes would be the last thing we should do. I joke that we solved our corporate bribery problem by electing corporate representatives instead of presidents.
Yeah good point, i figure it would take something pretty impressive.
I feel like we have a "de facto" privatised situation now and THAT is the problem.
1975 pre-regan we had a near PERFECT political system, democracy works but handing our country over to corporate prostitutes would be the last thing we should do. I joke that we solved our corporate bribery problem by electing corporate representatives instead of presidents.
New deal-Regan= Americans greatest years...very very relevant
Regan started the privitazition of government services...busted unions and and was America's first confirmed corporate president! Not to mention increased the drug war.
Small government=weak government=corporate agenda 101
New deal-Regan= Americans greatest years...very very relevant
Regan started the privitazition of government services...busted unions and and was America's first confirmed corporate president! Not to mention increased the drug war.
Small government=weak government=corporate agenda 101
Privatization is not free market. It just adds another layer to govt spending. Just about everything went up during Reagans term. He talked small and went big, his supporters typically only paid attention to the first part.
How can you maintain a monopoly when you have to reapply for the position every few years?
Do you think private prisons are a good idea knowing that the taxpayer now pays a private company to provide the service instead of a government representative who is beholden to the Democratic vote?
If you have a profit minded Corporation in charge of your prison they have an incentive to create crime not stop it ..
this undermines the legitimacy of the system inherently.
I think I understand what you're saying here & can agree with much.
This is how I 'analogize' ~ we have a 'free market system of government representatives' via the mythical 'invisible hand'.
As per Adam Smith in The Wealth Of Nations:
Quote:
He (or she) generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.
If the core thesis is that human beings have a natural tendency toward self-interest, the expectation that a government representative is not gonna act in their own self-interest is unreasonable & is not reality-based.
Our current systems actually encourage corruption with the corrupting influence of money in everything about the processes from campaign to policy-making.
I never argued for no governing body so I have no clue why you would ask me that.
I keep saying you have no argument because like the typical libertarian they refuse or are unable to define a simple premise like "property". I defined the premise in my first post. I also sourced my authorities like Adam Smith or John Locke.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
