Free_Marxet's forum posts
[QUOTE="Free_Marxet"][QUOTE="Famiking"] Who's more immoral, the government that allows it to happen, or the multinationals that actually carry out the evil deeds?And wouldn't labour laws be anti-capitalist? ;)FamikingIm definitely not advocating labor laws of any kind, and that is very clear. big business and government are largely the same things, because they play such important roles in each others existence. If these big businesses didnt get government support in the first place (especially in the third world nations) they would have to follow what people actually pay them for, which would typically be bad news for huge corporations seeing as they often get tax dollars People pay them for making cars, which is what GM was doing, now they don't want cars and GM is going down the toilet. And yeah, it's sad we give handouts to companies like that, we should nationalize them instead, and not just in the short-term either. I fail to see how nationalization would benefit anyone. nobody wanted gm cars, why would we need our tax dollars going to them?
[QUOTE="trix5817"]
[QUOTE="twogirlz"]And I say this with a :) Cause the Netherlands are Neutral, and all drugs are legal. There isn't even a drinking age. You can practice any religion you want, and it uses an open economy. I'm definatley moving here, screw the backwards Republican liarsjointed
Wow, I guess you don't know what Liberal means.
That's a True Conservative/Libertarian country if it's actually what you described. Free market and you can do anything you want as long as you don't harm anyone or obstruct them from doing the same.
Liberals believe it's alright for the government to control your life and the economy.
Seems like YOU don't know what liberal means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
"Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity", that's an exact description of how the Dutch are trying to structure their government.
liberal has historically meant free markets and individual liberty, what hes talking about is classical liberalism which currently goes by the name libertarianism.Who's more immoral, the government that allows it to happen, or the multinationals that actually carry out the evil deeds?[QUOTE="Free_Marxet"] its not that the free market turns into corporatism, its that governments support it and turn it into corporatism by the exploitative and abusive practices we call politics and/or democracy. Multinationals couldnt do those things without corrupt government first and foremost. its more of a government problem than a business one.Famiking
And wouldn't labour laws be anti-capitalist? ;)
Im definitely not advocating labor laws of any kind, and that is very clear. big business and government are largely the same things, because they play such important roles in each others existence. If these big businesses didnt get government support in the first place (especially in the third world nations) they would have to follow what people actually pay them for, which would typically be bad news for huge corporations seeing as they often get tax dollars[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You must trust your government implicitely. Governments only tell you what they want you to hear. Sure, and this is exactly why people should research the facts themselves. I dont think that really ends up happening, like ever... I really dont want to trust my fate to the rest of society[QUOTE="jointed"] Nah, it's not at all like that. Sure, the thought of cameras on public property can be a little unsettling, but if you use rational thinking, it's not a big deal. It's like the cameras in banks or supermarkets, without security guards. And they're only positioned on busy streets and squares. jointed
Erosion of liberties starts slow and everyone accepts them at face value. im not exactly a fan of marilyn manson, but his quote "the weak ones are there to justify the strong" always made a lot of sense to me, and i think it really explains how the erosion of liberties take place.[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]
Well, that's exactly it; as long as we've got a reasonable and moderate government, it's not a worry at all, but it is setting a bit of a scary precedent as regards privacy.
According to Wikipedia "In 2007, the UK watchdog CameraWatch claimed that the majority of CCTV cameras in the UK are operated illegally or are in breach of privacy guidelines."
It's probably not a massive infringement in most cases, but it goes to show how easily and unconsciously we waive our liberties.
LJS9502_basic
Nah, it's not at all like that. Sure, the thought of cameras on public property can be a little unsettling, but if you use rational thinking, it's not a big deal. It's like the cameras in banks or supermarkets, without security guards. And they're only positioned on busy streets and squares. You must trust your government implicitely. Governments only tell you what they want you to hear. this is true. but, we in america have a lot of surveillance as well especially in big cities.[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"] It's actually worryingly close to Orwell's vision. In some places, CCTV cameras can also be used to relay speech via a speaker on the camera.LJS9502_basic
Log in to comment