Asked By: Zero - 1/22/2009

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

1. Logic and objectivity used to rule in the U.S. -- not the case anymore and it's yielded us nothing but chaos.

2. The Constitution spelled it out very clearly -- government was to be minimized...federal governments were confined to their business..and states theirs. Not anymore. Now it's one big convoluted mess where the feds are involved in state issue. It's a power grab.

3. Like business -- resources are scarce. Time is a resource and we shouldn't be committing our time to inconsequential junk science and beliefs there's some eye-in-the-sky w/ a masterful plan for everyone. As dictated by our founding fathers, we are to take our own destiny into our hands. Self-sufficiency, responsibility, integrity, being enterprising, being lawful and retaining ethics should be the foundation of our system. Instead we depend on our government more than ever...the most corrupt group of p****s you'll ever get into one room. It's a joke...and if the men who founded this country were alive today, they'd be loading their muskets and getting ready for some target practice.

+++++++++++++++++++++++
You wrote:
"it's corporations that have FAR too much freedom. The government needs the power to make an appropriate, limited playing field which cannot be cheated by money."

The free-market has decided that corporations rule. It's not like corporations come to your house w/ batons and take your money. It's a two-way street.

I can argue it's the consumer who is greedy and not the corporation -- and now that I think about it, we should regulate the consumer...that's what we'll end up doing anyway by increasing prices. The fact is, corporations have determined how to lower prices to consumers and consumers like that extra weight in their wallet after doing their shopping.

And to put it in perspective -- WalMart will probably be swallowed up by some other corporation w/in the century. The opportunities are plenty -- the trick is identifying them and being able to capitalize. It takes thousands of hours of preparation -- work, school, research. You can't just step up to the plate. You gotta earn it. Market shares shift daily...prepare, focus, get in there and get yours.
++++++++++++++++++++++
Balance -- agreed. The programs put in place should put people back to work. Instead they encourage and reward unacceptable behavior. At some point you say enough is enough. Close the tap and wish them the best.

People have friends they can stay with. People have family they can lean on.

People are resilient and the best motivator is an empty stomach. "Want to eat?"

Have you ever heard of Pavlov's dogs -- the conditioning experiment whereby a moderator rang a bell every time they fed a few dogs -- after a while, the dogs would salivate at the sound of the bell...they didn't even need to see/smell the food.

What happens to people when the government keeps propping them up (ring ring)? Or says we need to "redistribute the wealth" (ring ring)? Or we NEED Universal Health Care b/c people aren't responsible enough to pay their health insurance bill (ring ring)?

At some point a leader needs to look into the eyes of the American people and say -- "The party is over". Reduce government programs by 2/3 -- stop asking taxpayers for more money each year -- more fees -- more raises and take care of yourself.

It's a joke and out of control.

The generation from the Industrial Revolution would also be ashamed of us. It's shear entitlement mentality.

I suspect we could probably loosen unemployment benefits a bit too -- considering we just cut spending by 2/3, we could probably be relatively generous to help bridge a gap b/n jobs...say 2 months maximum...and you have to pay it back. But, we could also make this a free-market's responsibility -- just like a bank loan...w/ low interest rate?

Take care of yourself. That's all I'm saying.

============================================
A) They can just step out of the American playing field and into a country with no rules and minimal (Not true -- corporations are buried in rules and regulations), then sell things to Americans just the same (Again, they must sell items that pass all standards set forth). This allows them to break our rules and take outsource jobs (Our rules encourage outsource on a few fronts. 1. High taxes and fees mean higher input costs. Higher input costs mean less profit. You can't raise prices because you won't be competitive, consumers will shop elsewhere. 2. Litigation in the U.S. is out of control -- why risk everything you've worked for just to have someone who spills coffee on their lap rip away some or all of your profits. We're back to taking responsibility for yourself...now we just get a lawyer and point the finger. 3. Labor is demanding here compared to other countries. U.S. companies go into places like Mexico and in return get cheap quality product and provide a standard of living for all of those people who wouldn't have a stable job -- w/ benefits...w/ stability.) When this is the case, we will always have more imports than exports (Actually, if the dollar is highly inflated, it'd be too expensive to import -- and countries would demand that the U.S. become an exporting state again. We'll always import...but it depends on the exchange rate too). What stopped it in the past was poor communication and slow travel; we no longer have this 'safety'. (True -- but we shouldn't be scared of input/export inequality. It fluctuates all the time.)
B) As somewhat of an environmentalist, I feel that they cannot be allowed to be completely free with their drawing of world resources and pollution of Earth (Agree with you 100? The government needs a rock-solid stance and lobbyists cannot be allowed to weasel them out of it (Agree). It's the governments job to establish the playing field, and money cannot be allowed to buy an exemption from the rules (Agree but with a suggestion. Politician's are subject to the information they get. They're really not experts on anything. Where do you suppose the get the information from? It seems is to me lobbying gets all of the players in the game as it's not left up to the politician to consult an environmentalist on a water issue rather than a farmer. They're both going to have a separate stance. I think lobbyists give both side of the issue...only then can they make a decision. However, I do think money should be left out of it and there should be full disclosure).

It's good you're thinking these things through -- you have some great ideas.
=====================
ooooooh, you opened up a can of worms on taxes!! hehe

Actually, corporations pay an excessive amount of tax. Even if their percentage is lower (which is what most people cling to when screaming about taxes) they pay a huge amount in real dollar value.

Example:

20?f $1000 = $200

20?f $1,000,000,000,000 = $200,000,000,000

You get the idea. Levying more taxes means higher input costs. That could potentially turn into a company relocating headquarters in Mexico and taking their business out of the U.S. completely. But what's a mere 20?ax revenue, right? (sarcasm)

That scrapes the surface.

Feel free to respond if you like...I'm off to bed, so I'll respond in the morn if you write back. If not...thanks for the question and keep thinking!! Remember -- logic, reason, practicality and objectivity will get you further in life than money ever could. Stay smart and keep questioning. ;)
===================
I can't argue with you there...well I can...but I'd just be giving you my opinion. I think you have legitimate concerns and you should narrow in on answers for them. What types of regulations would you propose for corporations? Would you place tariffs on imports American imports to encourage building the products/food/services domestically? Would you abolish NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) as it encourages outsourcing...no tariffs to ship back to the U.S. from Mexico? How would you handle the tip in the playing field to keep international rules similar (Think about farmers and their subsidies. There was a big uproar about U.S. farmer's receiving subsidies b/c it makes their products cheaper on the market relative to China's. Well, in reality, Chinese farmers don't pay for the land, they don't pay for the seed, they don't pay for maintaining the crops, the government takes care of those input costs -- an indirect subsidy in China that allows them to undersell the U.S. farmers...even when U.S. farmers receive the subsidies. So you have to think domestically - and internationally...it's a global world now...tasks aren't as easy as they used to be)?

Again -- I think you have a legitimate platform. I might not agree w/ it all -- but that's the joy of our liberties and individual freedoms offered by the Constitution. You as an individual are entitled as say and a logical platform is your only prerequisite for people to open their ears (and minds?).

Narrow in on some possible directions to these questions and then be proactive. Write op-ed pieces for local papers...write your representative...convince friends and foe to join the cause.

Keep that brain pumping -- life is more rewarding when you can bask in the glory of solving difficult problems...or at least taking part in the decision. Get engaged!!

Thanks again for the discussion -- hope to meet again in YA! Smart people are so much more fun to spar with!!

Answered By: musicman812 - 1/22/2009