OT: I want my country back....

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Proof Carter's deregulation policies caused the inflation?

Thing, none of us will be able to "prove" what caused what. To this day, you have leading economists on both sides arguing the cause for the '08 financial crisis and it's always fueled more by ideology than science, since as you know, economics isn't a cut and dry empirical science with clearly defined causes-and-effects.

The cause of the '08 financial crisis is pretty cut and dry. It was a 30 year culmination of deregulation, corporatism, and as you mentioned everyone in America becoming obsessed with excess and refinancing their house so they could take a vacation.

Same thing with why the economy still sucks. The economy sucks because the middle class has no purchasing power thus there's no demand. It's pretty re ed to argue otherwise when the reason is that simple.

You have to ask yourself why these deregulating campaigns happened in the first place? The fact that the corporations had the kind of influence to have the most powerful politicians do their bidding is the issue at hand here. If Carter (a bleeding heart), Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Obama (a supposed bleeding heart who cares about the "little guy") can be corrupted, who can't? This is what I meant when I said I was a "realist." Who exactly are you going to "elect" that is beyond corporate influence?

Who can't be corrupted? Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are two prime examples.

It's bull to call Obama a bleeding heart, the fact people think he's a bleeding heart liberal is an example of how re ed both sides are. His economic policies are middle-right wing, as were Clinton's. The last president who I'd consider a bleeding heart liberal was FDR.

But they are still headquartered in the US. I'm talking about the threat of moving everything abroad.

They would still be headquartered in the US with increased tariffs. The fact you're really worried about making sure we give corporations a big enough blow job so they stay here shows how controlled you are by people like the Koch Brothers who want people to think government is the problem.

we need to fellate corporations as much as possible

Before we debate this point further, I'm sure your definition of "small government" differs from mine. Or maybe not, since you seem to not be in favor of Big Brother policies like SOPA, PIPA, the Patriot Act, etc. Which begs the question: If you don't trust the government to monitor our lives in that aspect, why would you trust them to effectively regulate the marketplace and spend our tax dollars wisely?

My definition of small government is the utopia libertarians like Reagan have been promising for 30 years. The rich pay 75 year lows in taxes and have lower regulations than ever, but for whatever reason the small government effect has yet to take place.

I also think the two are different because we don't need the government monitoring our personal lives with stuff like the Patriot Act. It serves absolutely no purpose. Regulating the marketplace and protecting people does however serve a purpose, and it's not something people can do without strong enforcement from government.

Like I said, I'm a protectionist in theory, but I'm not sure of the efficacy of high tariffs in a globalized economy.

Germany's 19% VAT on imports seems to be pretty efficient. Tariffs on imports are what protects domestic business.

On the other hand, I'm also an advocate of consumer freedom, even in the face of "patriotism." If some Jap manufacturer can make a better TV (and cheaper, but more expensive to Americans because of tariffs) why should I be forced to purchase the inferior American counterpart because the duty tax makes the Japanese television more expensive?

Yeah, there's no perfect solution. I kind of think a sustained middle class that has well paying manufacturing jobs is more important than being able to buy a Jap TV.

The tax on imports also hasn't stopped Germany from totally dominating our auto industry in terms of quality.

And again, why do you want to give these "corporate shills" more money and power?

Saying I want to give them more money and power is typical gross libertarian oversimplification. I want to make it so that in order to become president in this country, you don't need to be a millionaire backed by billionaires.

Obviously, they sold us out a long time ago, so why are you under the impression that "if we just returned to the government we had between 1930-80, it will all go away?" Who is going to be the proverbial "messiahs" to make it all better?

Libertarian =/= AnCap.

Ah yes, the part where libertarians say they're not anarchists, they just happen to make the same blanket statements about government that anarchists do.

No. I'd rather his smaller compe or also not have to be subject to these fines or be forced into a lobbying contest which he probably can't afford.

I'd rather a big government that destroys him for breaking the law.

Again, I'm not an AnCap.

You just happen to agree with AnCaps on everything.

I'll be in favor of regulation when it can be fairly applied. As it stands, it favors the richest and most powerful, and this dream of returning the government to its former "1930-80" regulatory, high tax rate glory that you keep referring to is just that, a dream, and no less deluded than the Anarcho-Capitalists you mock. Until then, keep the two separate, with minimal, sensible regulation, like the enforcement of contracts, fraud protection, etc. Until you can purge these regulatory bodies of their corporate infection, they're more wasteful and detrimental than anything.

How is it a dream when other modern countries have the same structure? It's easily attainable if the population isn't religious and knows what's best for itself.

It's not a catchphrase if it's an accurate description of what's going on. Again, I don't get your contention here. When you say Obama is a corporate shill, you're essentially acknowledging the fact Crony Capitalism exists.

It's a catch phrase because it's what capitalism is. There's no difference between Crony Capitalism and plain old capitalism.

So why do you want to expand the power of these corporate shills? I haven't yet met a liberal who is consistent with their idea of what the government should be. Talk to any Liberal, and he'll contort his face in disgust telling you about the government's deplorable foreign policy, their resistance to social justice causes like gay marriage and immigration, the Patriot Act, and how the government is in the pocket of corporations, but yet they still call for an expansion of government intervention in the marketplace to get the 1% to "pay their fair share" and to stop evil multinational corporations from raping baby seals. They obviously don't trust the government to do anything else, yet they completely trust them to "regulate" the marketplace? The irony.

Because regulating the marketplace is something no one other than the government is capable of doing. If there was a better alternative, I'd be all for it.

Libertarians despise neoconservatives.

Except for the ones like Rand Paul and Paul Ryan who endorsed/ran with Romney

No. In a free market, government would stay away from a situation like that. I have no idea how you believe the government handing out welfare money to corporations is an example of a "free market."

Because in a free market corporations have the power to swallow government up for their own interests.

A perfect example of this is the prison industry. We decided to privatize the prison industry because it's more efficient than big bad government and as a result it's led to a prison industrial complex that keeps the war on drugs around.

Limited government intervention in the marketplace doesn't automatically mean "small" or "impotent" government. It just means the government should not overtly interfere in the market.

In America limited government has correlated with impotent government.

like SOPA, which I know you're against (I think), is an example of "government interference in the marketplace." Not all government regulation seeks to protect the rare spotted horn lizard and ensure our safety from madcow disease.

Yeah and I'm not making blanket statements that all regulation is good.

[pad300]

Agreed. America is obsessed with capitalism and thus has an extremely individualistic culture where everyone is told you should as many people over as possible in order to increase your net worth because you don't wanna be a socialist who tries to help the common good.

I don't think you've taken my point. As an example of culture that I am talking about, are you familiar with the concept of "trust society" vs "clan society"? I trust my neighbor to give back (and not wreck) the circular saw I lend him. I trust the bank to not abscond with my money. I trust the cop/judge to adjudicate fairly between me and the guy I have a dispute with. I trust the people at the YMCA with my kids when they go to swimming lessons. As opposed to I can't trust my neighbour\the bank\the cop\etc. as they are not my blood kin...Africa, the middle east (excepting Israel), the third world in general are "clan societies". The nicer places in the world are typically "trust societies".

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I don't think you've taken my point. As an example of culture that I am talking about, are you familiar with the concept of "trust society" vs "clan society"? I trust my neighbor to give back (and not wreck) the circular saw I lend him. I trust the bank to not abscond with my money. I trust the cop/judge to adjudicate fairly between me and the guy I have a dispute with. I trust the people at the YMCA with my kids when they go to swimming lessons. As opposed to I can't trust my neighbour\the bank\the cop\etc. as they are not my blood kin...Africa, the middle east (excepting Israel), the third world in general are "clan societies". The nicer places in the world are typically "trust societies".

America is becoming a clan society if you look at how many libertarian militias are being formed, tbh.

[HI-FI]

I don't think you've taken my point. As an example of culture that I am talking about, are you familiar with the concept of "trust society" vs "clan society"? I trust my neighbor to give back (and not wreck) the circular saw I lend him. I trust the bank to not abscond with my money. I trust the cop/judge to adjudicate fairly between me and the guy I have a dispute with. I trust the people at the YMCA with my kids when they go to swimming lessons. As opposed to I can't trust my neighbour\the bank\the cop\etc. as they are not my blood kin...Africa, the middle east (excepting Israel), the third world in general are "clan societies". The nicer places in the world are typically "trust societies".

interesting post, better than the other . though you could argue that things are becoming increasingly balkanized, and therefore back to "clan societies".

[ElNono]

I don't get the point if these discussions dough..like 99.9% of the time the republicans enter the thread as republicans and leave the thread as republicans same with democrats..seems like pages and pages of arguments for nothing..FYI I read none of this thread..

Ill bet no one has ever changed their party based on any of the 13,000,000 trillion arguments in that political forum..

Listen to God. He'll show you the path. God bless.

[baseline bum]

I don't think you've taken my point. As an example of culture that I am talking about, are you familiar with the concept of "trust society" vs "clan society"? I trust my neighbor to give back (and not wreck) the circular saw I lend him. I trust the bank to not abscond with my money. I trust the cop/judge to adjudicate fairly between me and the guy I have a dispute with. I trust the people at the YMCA with my kids when they go to swimming lessons. As opposed to I can't trust my neighbour\the bank\the cop\etc. as they are not my blood kin...Africa, the middle east (excepting Israel), the third world in general are "clan societies". The nicer places in the world are typically "trust societies".

Really? You trust your bank and your judges?

[midnightpulp]

[QUOTE=DUNCANownsKOBE;6597731]

The cause of the '08 financial crisis is pretty cut and dry. It was a 30 year culmination of deregulation, corporatism, and as you mentioned everyone in America becoming obsessed with excess and refinancing their house so they could take a vacation.

Says who? Paul Krugman.

Who can't be corrupted? Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are two prime examples.

Two examples compared to what, 300 on Capital Hill?

They would still be headquartered in the US with increased tariffs. The fact you're really worried about making sure we give corporations a big enough blow job so they stay here shows how controlled you are by people like the Koch Brothers who want people to think government is the problem.

I'm not against that in theory, but I would like to see work in practice, in the United States and not in Germany. The very fact German automakers stay in Germany despite the taxation could be simply out of nationalistic pride. If Chevy could save a penny on the dollar, you can bet they would move everything to Mexico or Singapore. Despite all the flag-wavers and yellow ribbon wearers, Americans aren't very patriotic in practice if they can save a buck. Like I said, I'm 60/40 on this issue. I'm for supporting American companies who manufacture domestically and hire Americans, but I'm also for maximizing the value of my hard earned dollar. But I get where you're coming from and don't disagree.

My definition of small government is the utopia libertarians like Reagan have been promising for 30 years. The rich pay 75 year lows in taxes and have lower regulations than ever, but for whatever reason the small government effect has yet to take place.

Like I've shown, other developed countries are more loosely regulated and even pay similar corporate tax rates as the US, like Australia.

I also think the two are different because we don't need the government monitoring our personal lives with stuff like the Patriot Act. It serves absolutely no purpose. Regulating the marketplace and protecting people does however serve a purpose, and it's not something people can do without strong enforcement from government.

Don't disagree with that. But do you see how an overly regulated marketplace can phase out smaller compe ion, or at the very least, make harder for them to compete? I work in the film industry, and because of the all the fees, permits, and other bull , only the richest studios can afford to shoot in Hollywood while smaller studios have to shoot in places like New Mexico, Arizona, Canada, etc. Friend of mine is going to shoot his film in in' Prague because of the tax breaks. So Americans are denied a job opportunity on that film because the city government of Los Angeles thinks it's a great idea to make shooting a movie more expensive than the actual cost of shooting the in' movie. And who benefits in the end? MGM, Dreamworks, Paramount, etc.

Saying I want to give them more money and power is typical gross libertarian oversimplification. I want to make it so that in order to become president in this country, you don't need to be a millionaire backed by billionaires.

And how do we do that? I dig your idealism, but I have no idea how to make it a reality in this country. I also have no idea how to separate government from business, either. I just know I became highly soured on government intervention in the marketplace when they handed out 900 billion in welfare to their cronies. And what really added insult to injury is when these executives were giving themselves bonuses when it was explicitly stated they were not to do so. And all Obama could say was, "Shameful." No one went to jail. Nothing happened.

Ah yes, the part where libertarians say they're not anarchists, they just happen to make the same blanket statements about government that anarchists do.

I'm not an anarchist, though. Right now, the major regulatory bodies are corrupt as , filled with corporate shills. Get rid of them until a better, more honest, alternative presents itself.

I'd rather a big government that destroys him for breaking the law.

And he hardly ever gets destroyed. He pays his fine and goes back to polluting the environment or making lead paint. So if nothing is going to happen to him, the better solution for me at the moment is at least make it so where nothing happens to the little guy, either, and he can compete on a level playing field. That sounds cynical, but I have no other answer. Until these regulatory bodies stop being feel good mouth pieces ("You see, American public, we got BP to pay a heavy fine! We're doing honorable work here and protecting Americans!") and start actually sending some assholes to jail (who aren't simply fall guys), they're useless in my book.

How is it a dream when other modern countries have the same structure? It's easily attainable if the population isn't religious and knows what's best for itself.

Is their structure any different from ours, though? Australia is freer economically in pretty much every relevant metric. So is New Zealand. Denmark, etc.

It's a catch phrase because it's what capitalism is. There's no difference between Crony Capitalism and plain old capitalism.

We have different definitions of capitalism, I guess.

To me, capitalism is the right for me hire you as my accountant and the right for you to charge me whatever you want, with you en led to the "private property" of your profits from that transaction. Or maybe you define what I think of as capitalism as mercantilism.

Because regulating the marketplace is something no one other than the government is capable of doing. If there was a better alternative, I'd be all for it.

And like I've shown, the marketplace in those example countries isn't too stringently regulated, and their societies aren't plunging into ruin and chaos. It seems your issue is more with our comparatively lower corporate tax rate than deregulation.

Because in a free market corporations have the power to swallow government up for their own interests.

A perfect example of this is the prison industry. We decided to privatize the prison industry because it's more efficient than big bad government and as a result it's led to a prison industrial complex that keeps the war on drugs around.

And who issued the War on Drugs?

But yes, despite what you think of me as an AnCap, I'm not in favor of privatizing prisons or even health care, because I think those industries should be driven more by morality than profit.

[pad300]

Really? You trust your bank and your judges?

I'm in Canada son. Just to put that in perspective, if the Canada Revenue Agency (our IRS) had started targeting a political faction like the IRS has, the government would have fallen by now (ie the equivalent of the president being impeached).

[baseline bum]

I'm in Canada son. Just to put that in perspective, if the Canada Revenue Agency (our IRS) had started targeting a political faction like the IRS has, the government would have fallen by now (ie the equivalent of the president being impeached).

Ah, makes more sense in Canada where, to quote boutons (), responsible people run the nation and not corporations.

[pad300]

America is becoming a clan society if you look at how many libertarian militias are being formed, tbh.

interesting post, better than the other . though you could argue that things are becoming increasingly balkanized, and therefore back to "clan societies".

You ain't even close to that of kind of yet (at least once you get out of the inner city ghetto's). I'll admit your trust levels are going downhill - so are ours (Canada). Large amounts of non-assimilated immigration has impact. So does government policy - larger bureaucracies where you don't need to rely on your neighbors and being in their good graces - appear to reduce trust levels over time...

[pad300]

Ah, makes more sense in Canada where, to quote boutons (), responsible people run the nation and not corporations.

We got our fair share of corporations too. From my perspective, your political rats are worse than ours, because you (americans) have gotten to used to being rich enough to not have to care who's in charge and doing what... Personally, I trust the Republicans to assholes a significant portion of the time, but to keep their word (on a national scale at least) once they give it. The Democrats are significantly worse, because they are assholes at least as often, if not more, and their word simply isn't good. I will also note, that I suspect that the Tea Party is probably the single best thing to happen to US politics in the last 20 years.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Says who? Paul Krugman.

Says anyone with common sense. What do you think caused the financial crash?

Two examples compared to what, 300 on Capital Hill?

I gave you some examples. I didn't say the ratio was high

I also think plenty of politicians would become uncorruptable if it wasn't so easy for corporations to buy them.

I'm not against that in theory, but I would like to see work in practice, in the United States and not in Germany. The very fact German automakers stay in Germany despite the taxation could be simply out of nationalistic pride. If Chevy could save a penny on the dollar, you can bet they would move everything to Mexico or Singapore. Despite all the flag-wavers and yellow ribbon wearers, Americans aren't very patriotic in practice if they can save a buck. Like I said, I'm 60/40 on this issue. I'm for supporting American companies who manufacture domestically and hire Americans, but I'm also for maximizing the value of my hard earned dollar. But I get where you're coming from and don't disagree.

Agreed completely, which is why regulations are more important here than in countries like Germany where there are things like ethics and nationalistic pride. Countries controlled by corporate greed need strong government the most.

Like I've shown, other developed countries are more loosely regulated and even pay similar corporate tax rates as the US, like Australia.

Australia has a minimum wage equivalent to over $16.00 an hour in the US and a 10% VAT we don't have. That's the important thing to keep in mind when looking at tax rates for corporations, we're like the only modern country that doesn't use VATs.

Don't disagree with that. But do you see how an overly regulated marketplace can phase out smaller compe ion, or at the very least, make harder for them to compete? I work in the film industry, and because of the all the fees, permits, and other bull , only the richest studios can afford to shoot in Hollywood while smaller studios have to shoot in places like New Mexico, Arizona, Canada, etc. Friend of mine is going to shoot his film in in' Prague because of the tax breaks. So Americans are denied a job opportunity on that film because the city government of Los Angeles thinks it's a great idea to make shooting a movie more expensive than the actual cost of shooting the in' movie. And who benefits in the end? MGM, Dreamworks, Paramount, etc.

Yeah I don't disagree California is where regulation has gone horribly wrong.

I also think if we publicize things like healthcare it helps smaller business because they no longer have to provide medical care to their employees. The fact we still burden employers with providing healthcare rather than nationalizing it is an example of re ed capitalist bull .

And how do we do that? I dig your idealism, but I have no idea how to make it a reality in this country. I also have no idea how to separate government from business, either. I just know I became highly soured on government intervention in the marketplace when they handed out 900 billion in welfare to their cronies. And what really added insult to injury is when these executives were giving themselves bonuses when it was explicitly stated they were not to do so. And all Obama could say was, "Shameful." No one went to jail. Nothing happened.

Yeah I don't consider that big government. I consider that a government that underwent 8 years of weakening by from Bush that was completely at the mercy of the banks and had no better alternative when the banks said, "Give us a trillion dollars or there's gonna be widespread calamity and martial law!"

I'm not an anarchist, though. Right now, the major regulatory bodies are corrupt as , filled with corporate shills. Get rid of them until a better, more honest, alternative presents itself.

Agreed, but we need the FDA as corrupt as it is. The inevitable problem you and I both agree on is that the corruption in these agencies should enrage people and people are simply too stupid to care. The monsanto bull should have provoked riots in the streets.

And he hardly ever gets destroyed. He pays his fine and goes back to polluting the environment or making lead paint. So if nothing is going to happen to him, the better solution for me at the moment is at least make it so where nothing happens to the little guy, either, and he can compete on a level playing field. That sounds cynical, but I have no other answer. Until these regulatory bodies stop being feel good mouth pieces ("You see, American public, we got BP to pay a heavy fine! We're doing honorable work here and protecting Americans!") and start actually sending some assholes to jail (who aren't simply fall guys), they're useless in my book.

The only other answer is radical change that I'm saying we need. Maybe it is idealism, but it's the only thing that'll make a real difference.

Is their structure any different from ours, though? Australia is freer economically in pretty much every relevant metric. So is New Zealand. Denmark, etc.

As I said, Australia's minimum wage is more than double ours, while other countries haven't destroyed unions with "right to work!" deregulation like we did in the 80s. There are significant laws protecting the middle class in those countries that don't exist here.

We have different definitions of capitalism, I guess.

To me, capitalism is the right for me hire you as my accountant and the right for you to charge me whatever you want, with you en led to the "private property" of your profits from that transaction. Or maybe you define what I think of as capitalism as mercantilism.

I didn't hate capitalism until people like Mitt Romney insisted his success is an example of why capitalism is beautiful. If being able to send a company into bankruptcy and profit off the bankruptcy while never providing any value to the company is capitalism then count me out. I'll take the bad side of socialism (welfare) over the bad side of capitalism (a plutocracy).

And like I've shown, the marketplace in those example countries isn't too stringently regulated, and their societies aren't plunging into ruin and chaos. It seems your issue is more with our comparatively lower corporate tax rate than deregulation.

Probably so. That's beside the point since libertarians are also for lower taxes across the board in their effort to shrink government, so I still vehemently disagree with them on the issue.

And who issued the War on Drugs?

I know Nixon's administration officially declared the "War on Drugs" and I also know Reagan used it like to over the black community.

But yes, despite what you think of me as an AnCap, I'm not in favor of privatizing prisons or even health care, because I think those industries should be driven more by morality than profit.

But that's my point. In free market capitalism everything is driven by profit. If you want things driven by morality you need a government powerful enough to take certain industries away from the private sector. Publicizing prisons and healthcare goes against every fundamental libertarian belief.

[angrydude]

Thanks to our wonderful school system, the only issue that EVERYBODY knows something about is racism is bad.

Therefore every political discussion just comes down to people talking about that one issue. Basically pounding a square peg into a round hole.

Meanwhile the power elite who care about other little things, like I don't know, money, rob everyone blind.

[midnightpulp]

Says anyone with common sense. What do you think caused the financial crash?

I haven't examine the issue in a while, but when I did, it was one "Nobel laureate" economist saying this, and then the other "Nobel laureate" saying that, and their arguments were always fueled by left or right ideology. No point-of-view that I ever read seemed to be objective about the issue, so I'm unsure what exactly "caused" it.

I also think plenty of politicians would become uncorruptable if it wasn't so easy for corporations to buy them.

Agreed. That's why I'm in favor of a separation between government and business. I just don't know how you can have a regulatory body and keep it free from corruption. Politicians are easily bought because they're humans, and humans like money.

Agreed completely, which is why regulations are more important here than in countries like Germany where there are things like ethics and nationalistic pride. Countries controlled by corporate greed need strong government the most.

And again, the challenge is to somehow get that uncorruptable, strong government in place, one that simply doesn't enact lip service "regulation" that favors the big corporations (since they have the means to operate in such a marketplace). I have no clue how to do that, so that's why I opt for the cynical solution and just desire the government be largely removed from the equation. Now at least Joe's Coffee House will be able compete with Starbucks somewhat because he doesn't have to pay the fees brought on by his violation of the "Non-Degradable Materials Act" that seeks to prevent the use of styrofoam cups.

Australia has a minimum wage equivalent to over $16.00 an hour in the US and a 10% VAT we don't have. That's the important thing to keep in mind when looking at tax rates for corporations, we're like the only modern country that doesn't use VATs.

But isn't Australia's purchasing power about the same since the cost of living over there is higher? Also, I'm not against high taxation of the top earners in theory, either. The fact a CEO makes 400 times more than a rank-and-file is a complete disgrace. I am against high taxation of the owner of Randy's Burgers, who might be a "top earner" on paper, but raising his taxes by even 10% could be disastrous to his business.

Yeah I don't disagree California is where regulation has gone horribly wrong.

I also think if we publicize things like healthcare it helps smaller business because they no longer have to provide medical care to their employees. The fact we still burden employers with providing healthcare rather than nationalizing it is an example of re ed capitalist bull .

Agreed.

As I said, Australia's minimum wage is more than double ours, while other countries haven't destroyed unions with "right to work!" deregulation like we did in the 80s. There are significant laws protecting the middle class in those countries that don't exist here.

Destroying unions is something I'm fundamentally against. To me, the right to assemble and collectively bargain has the right to exist in a free market. I never understood the libertarian fear of unions. It's simply people maximizing their compe ive advantage the same way a corporation does.

I didn't hate capitalism until people like Mitt Romney insisted his success is an example of why capitalism is beautiful. If being able to send a company into bankruptcy and profit off the bankruptcy while never providing any value to the company is capitalism then count me out. I'll take the bad side of socialism (welfare) over the bad side of capitalism (a plutocracy).

And by its strict definition, that's not capitalism. It's plutocracy, as you said. Capitalism is simply the right to the private ownership of the "means of production." And I agree that "pure" Capitalism is a pipe dream. Governments are needed even for the simple task of enforcing contracts.

Probably so. That's beside the point since libertarians are also for lower taxes across the board in their effort to shrink government, so I still vehemently disagree with them on the issue.

As I've said before, I'm not necessarily against taxing the top of the top, but I don't believe a small business owner should be excessively taxed.

But that's my point. In free market capitalism everything is driven by profit. If you want things driven by morality you need a government powerful enough to take certain industries away from the private sector. Publicizing prisons and healthcare goes against every fundamental libertarian belief.

That's why I'm only about 60 percent libertarian. I think being 100% attached to any ideology is close minded.

[midnightpulp]

Agreed, but we need the FDA as corrupt as it is. The inevitable problem you and I both agree on is that the corruption in these agencies should enrage people and people are simply too stupid to care. The monsanto bull should have provoked riots in the streets.

Good article that illuminates the unholy union between Monsanto and the USDA:

Our Agriculture Czar, a Big Biotech guy, has brokered a deal for his biotech manufacturer clientele. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack recently announced that the USDA will allow genetically engineered Roundup Ready alfalfa to be planted without restriction (which means a government-brokered deal to force Big Biotech's genetically-engineered products on those who oppose them).

Organic and sustainable farming advocates were disappointed by the decision. "This creates a perplexing situation when the market calls for a supply of crops free of genetic engineering. The organic standards prohibit the use of genetic engineering, and consumers will not tolerate the accidental presence of genetic engineered materials in organic products yet GE crops continue to proliferate unchecked," said Christine Bushway, executive director and CEO of the Organic Trade Association in a statement.



The congressional, corporate-state Monsanto jet set, however, won't allow any such thing to happen to their friends who supply the dough that will keep their congressional seats intact forevermore. So indeed, the tunnel-vision libertarianoids can continue to write me and tell me about this wonderful "free market" for genetically-engineered foods.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...ves/76884.html

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Good article that illuminates the unholy union between Monsanto and the USDA:

Our Agriculture Czar, a Big Biotech guy, has brokered a deal for his biotech manufacturer clientele. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack recently announced that the USDA will allow genetically engineered Roundup Ready alfalfa to be planted without restriction (which means a government-brokered deal to force Big Biotech's genetically-engineered products on those who oppose them).

Organic and sustainable farming advocates were disappointed by the decision. "This creates a perplexing situation when the market calls for a supply of crops free of genetic engineering. The organic standards prohibit the use of genetic engineering, and consumers will not tolerate the accidental presence of genetic engineered materials in organic products yet GE crops continue to proliferate unchecked," said Christine Bushway, executive director and CEO of the Organic Trade Association in a statement.



The congressional, corporate-state Monsanto jet set, however, won't allow any such thing to happen to their friends who supply the dough that will keep their congressional seats intact forevermore. So indeed, the tunnel-vision libertarianoids can continue to write me and tell me about this wonderful "free market" for genetically-engineered foods.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...ves/76884.html

Yeah the USDA is a total joke, the FDA I'd keep around just for drug testing but eliminate the food part of it.

One thing I agree completely with libertarians on is food regulations. All they do in this country is kill mom and pop farms that produce organic food while empowering corporate farms that own the USDA/FDA while growing polluted food filled with garbage preservatives/pesticides. I'd kill all farm subsidies (which would actually make food cheaper since it would take away price floors) and deregulate agriculture.

[midnightpulp]

Yeah the USDA is a total joke, the FDA I'd keep around just for drug testing but eliminate the food part of it.

One thing I agree completely with libertarians on is food regulations. All they do in this country is kill mom and pop farms that produce organic food while empowering corporate farms that own the USDA/FDA while growing polluted food filled with garbage preservatives/pesticides. I'd kill all farm subsidies (which would actually make food cheaper since it would take away price floors) and deregulate agriculture.

No arguments there.

Some more bull :

Monsanto’s Food and Drug Administration can’t close down small dairies and private food clubs fast enough, bursting on the scene with guns drawn as if the criminalized right to contract for natural foods we’ve consumed for millennia deserves SWAT attention.

Now, Obama has the Dept. of Justice going after small farmers under the post-911 “Bank Secrecy Act” which makes it a crime to deposit less than $10,000 when you earned more than that.

“The level we deposited was what it was and it was about the same every week,” Randy Sowers told Frederick News. The Sowers own and run South Mountain Creamery in Middletown, Maryland.

Admittedly, when the Sowers earned over $10,000 in February, and learned they’d have to fill out paperwork at the bank for such large deposits, they simply rolled the deposits over to keep them below the none-of-your- ing-business amount, rather than waste time on bureaucratic red tape aimed at flagging terrorism or other illegal activities.

While being questioned, the Sowers were finally presented with a seizure order and advised that the feds had already emptied their bank account of $70,000. The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers’ money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy.

Without funds, they will be unable to make purchases for the spring planting.

When a similar action was taken against Taylor’s Produce Stand last year, the feds seized $90,000, dropped the charges and kept $45,000 of the stand’s money.

Knowing that most farms operate on a very thin margin, such abuse of power wipes out a family’s income, and for a bonus, the feds enhance the monopoly power of Monsanto, Big Dairy and their supply chain.

http://lewrockwell.com/rep3/feds-sei...-accounts.html

[dbestpro]

We got our fair share of corporations too. From my perspective, your political rats are worse than ours, because you (americans) have gotten to used to being rich enough to not have to care who's in charge and doing what... Personally, I trust the Republicans to assholes a significant portion of the time, but to keep their word (on a national scale at least) once they give it. The Democrats are significantly worse, because they are assholes at least as often, if not more, and their word simply isn't good. I will also note, that I suspect that the Tea Party is probably the single best thing to happen to US politics in the last 20 years.

So I guess we can expect the Republicans to tell us their going to mess up the country and do it, while the Democrats will say their gonna fix the country and screw it up worse than the Republicans. Choices, choices.

[Rick Santorum]

Wanting to take our country back has more to do with the fact that our country has been hijacked by globalists who have total control over our politicians. They are currently pandering to the interest of foreign national illegal immigrants over american citizens in an attempt to destabilize our country through radical demographic shift and eventually usher in a new world order. Our politicians are conspiring with the heads of transnational corporations who want global governance and total domination, and the first step is to take america down because they can't have their new world order as long as america is the shining example of freedom and liberty. We lose more and more freedoms and march closer toward a police state every day, just check the news police are beating people to death for free speech and protest, all while buying up tons of ammunition and telling us that we aren't allowed to own guns. Freedom of speech on the internet is under attack through bills such as CISPA. Our republic is under attack, don't be so easily manipulated and lead to believe it's just a bunch of mean racist whiteys being meanies to minorities, OP. It's a classic divide and conquer strategy but they're going to fail, the message of liberty is ringing out and reaching more and more people, the bull is about to be put to an end.

[Rick Santorum]

No arguments there.

Some more bull :

Monsanto’s Food and Drug Administration can’t close down small dairies and private food clubs fast enough, bursting on the scene with guns drawn as if the criminalized right to contract for natural foods we’ve consumed for millennia deserves SWAT attention.

Now, Obama has the Dept. of Justice going after small farmers under the post-911 “Bank Secrecy Act” which makes it a crime to deposit less than $10,000 when you earned more than that.

“The level we deposited was what it was and it was about the same every week,” Randy Sowers told Frederick News. The Sowers own and run South Mountain Creamery in Middletown, Maryland.

Admittedly, when the Sowers earned over $10,000 in February, and learned they’d have to fill out paperwork at the bank for such large deposits, they simply rolled the deposits over to keep them below the none-of-your- ing-business amount, rather than waste time on bureaucratic red tape aimed at flagging terrorism or other illegal activities.

While being questioned, the Sowers were finally presented with a seizure order and advised that the feds had already emptied their bank account of $70,000. The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers’ money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy.

Without funds, they will be unable to make purchases for the spring planting.

When a similar action was taken against Taylor’s Produce Stand last year, the feds seized $90,000, dropped the charges and kept $45,000 of the stand’s money.

Knowing that most farms operate on a very thin margin, such abuse of power wipes out a family’s income, and for a bonus, the feds enhance the monopoly power of Monsanto, Big Dairy and their supply chain.

http://lewrockwell.com/rep3/feds-sei...-accounts.html

Yep, the beginning of this post refers to the "green police" phenomenon. Feds have been caught down in south Texas and other rural places trespassing on private property to make sure there are no private gardens and small farms, mapping out the landscape. I know a guy who came up on some feds trespassing and forced them to leave. Some towns are literally shutting down grandma's garden in an attempt to consolidate the food supply and get us on the GMO sterilization poison.

[pikkiwoki]

When I saw the le of this thread, I thought the op was some mexican asking for the Texas back to them.

http://www.imdb.com/ le/tt0284007/



I guess Jesse Borrego got over it, though, 'cause he's a Spurs fan