History Repeating Itself

When I was in high school, it often perplexed me, why were so many millions of people living in socialist-communist systems around the world? I realized that in most cases, it wasn't by choice really, they didn't have democracy or political freedom like us, and were basically oppressed by communist political leaders. But still, how did this manage to happen to so many people? I remember watching the Tienanmen Square incident, wondering if the people would be able to rise up and defeat their oppressors. I would later watch them tear down the Berlin Wall, and celebrate some semblance of victory over oppression, but the question still nagged me... how had all of these millions of people gotten so far off track? How did an elite few in the ruling class, manage to override the human spirit of millions? So I began to read and study up on Socialism and Communism, Marxist and Leninist philosophies, and how they evolved. This wasn't stuff we ever really learned in school, in fact, most of my schooling consisted of anti-communist propaganda, and a really slanted picture of how it was presented. You could look at the pictures from Russia and Cuba, and it was easy to see these people had much less than a typical American. Was this the best Communism had to offer? It seemed clear to me, American capitalism and freedom was much more desirable, so why had so many people limited their potential with another ideology? Didn't the leaders understand their people would be better off in a capitalist system? None of it made much sense to me, until I began to read and study the history.

What is ironic, is the way in which Communist Marxist ideals were initially founded. It's precisely what we see happening across America today! The elite class played on the emotions of the working class. First, by generating envy and resentment between those who have and those who have not. They formed coalitions under the banner of the "workers party" and established a template of representing the "working class" under the premise of delivering a better way of life. Many bold promises were made, the "workers party" was going to make life better for everyone, at the expense of the wealthy and elite. Envy is one of the easiest human emotions to stir, it's easy to conjure resentment for those who have more than you, and easy to imply the reason is because they took advantage of you in some way to get more than you unfairly. Thus, it stands to reason, you are justified in taking back that wealth and redistributing it to the masses. Communism/Marxism relies on this class envy, and it was wildly popular among the people. Over time, the ideology permeates its way into the political structure, and a sort of "deal with the devil" is struck. People sacrifice their liberty and freedom in exchange for a promise of a better life, and it is done incrementally over time.

The first phase is relatively easy, but it's the linchpin for the entire philosophy. It all hinges on "responsibilities" of the individual. Taking away your 'responsibilities' is easy to do, no one likes to be responsible, for anything. As you willingly cede your responsibilities to the government, more and more of your personal freedoms become irrelevant. But people don't care because "no responsibilities" sounds like such a good thing. This is what happened, this is how so many millions of people fell into the trap of Communist-Socialist-Marxism. Once the steel jaws of the trap close, it's over, you're trapped, you become a subordinate of the state, and all your personal freedoms are gone forever. The next impetus of the philosophy is destroying faith, we curiously also see this happening across America. All-out war on Christian beliefs, Jewish beliefs, any religious beliefs... under the insidious guise of some mythical "separation of church and state" which liberals have conveniently interpreted for us. You see, removing religious faith is crucial to implementation of Communism, because the people must have only one entity in which to have faith in, the state. The state can not compete with God, therefore, God has to be eradicated from society. Once the people only have the government to rely on, it makes implementation of the ideology much easier.

Many very smart and intellectual people, will look at Socialism in its purest form, and estimate it to be a significantly better system for everyone, because it fosters a more equal distribution of wealth and prosperity. But the historical failures of this system have always been apparent when practiced. There is a difference between what looks good on paper, and what works practically in a society. A Communist-Socialist-Marxist type system, is totally and completely controlled by a central governing body, or "ruling class" elite. Because of the nature of human nature, and the attribute of human greed, this always ends up resulting in massive corruption and graft. Those who are of the "ruling class" have considerably more than the "average worker" in the end, because they control all the power. Over time, this obvious imbalance begins to weigh on the psyche of the "working class" and something interesting starts to happen. Productivity begins to decline rapidly, as people are faced with the dismal prospects of never having anything more in life, regardless of how hard they work or what they do. This sense of hopelessness and despair perpetuates itself, and eventually, the economical aspects of the society collapse, as the state has no ability to raise spirits and increase productivity. Through the centuries, the "ruling class" has tried a number of measures to induce enthusiasm in this environment, most notably, by military aggression and wars.

Nationalism is a tool developed by Socialists to attempt bringing the human spirit back into play, and increase economic productivity from the masses. It often works for short periods of time, but ultimately fails because most of the human spirit is broken, realizing the stark reality of the dismal course in life they have set for themselves. The promise of "Hope and Change" are unfulfilled, and Nationalism is merely another ploy to further exploit the people, and the people begin to realize that. In all of human history, this idea of statism, communist socialist Marxism, has failed time and time again. It keeps being repackaged and redistributed to a new generation of uninformed people, who don't have the capacity to understand or comprehend history. Humans continue to become emotionally dependent on this failed ideology, over and over again, because of one primary thing... human greed and envy.

Now, we see this everyday in America. The HCR issue has perplexed me, trying to understand why it's so damn important to the liberals, but I think I can see what the motivation is, and again, it is rooted in class envy. People see doctors making exorbitant amounts of money, living plush opulent lifestyles, and they know of some Aunt or Uncle who is faced with medical bills they can't possibly pay, and it's the same old jealousy and envy tugging at their emotional heartstrings. They view HCR as a way of punishing the rich greedy doctors, while rewarding the "working class" through 'redistribution' of wealth. We see the insidious and seemingly attractive notion of relieving us from responsibilities, in exchange for a "more fair" system. All the while, inching us closer and closer to total Communism. Oh, they will become all offended that I dare use the word "communist" to describe their plans, because they know and understand most intelligent people simply don't believe in it, or think it's best for America. It's become too stigmatized to ever fly in America, so anyone who dares to suggest that is what is happening, is marginalized and made out to be a kook, a nutcase, someone who is being hyper-extreme and ignorant. Yet, that is the road we are traveling down, just like millions of other people around the world have done in the past, and lived to regret. The question is, do we realize this yet?
 
You're seeing it happen now, dixie. The big corporations first gain the trust of the populace and then start removing the opportunities. When enough people are put out of work, they then flock to the government and its promises.

how do we regain prosperity when multnationals destroy the standard of living based on "free market" principles?

Did you read the chapters on fascism? Because that what communism and socialism really are.
 
Nationalism is a valid construct, because that is the basis on which we are governed. That doesn't mean racism, or that a nation must conquer the globe; it means the governing stucture must make policy that puts the well being of it's own citizens first, above other citizens of other nations.
 
You're seeing it happen now, dixie. The big corporations first gain the trust of the populace and then start removing the opportunities. When enough people are put out of work, they then flock to the government and its promises.

how do we regain prosperity when multnationals destroy the standard of living based on "free market" principles?

Did you read the chapters on fascism? Because that what communism and socialism really are.

Nationalism is a valid construct, because that is the basis on which we are governed. That doesn't mean racism, or that a nation must conquer the globe; it means the governing stucture must make policy that puts the well being of it's own citizens first, above other citizens of other nations.

You don't realize it, but you are actually assisting them with your repeated messages about "multinationals" etc. That's part of the "class warfare" message.... getting the "working class" to become envious of those they perceive as having more wealth and power than they have. This is how the statists convince people they need government to 'regulate' capitalism, to 'control' the powerful corporate machine. Capitalist free markets are the enemy of Communist Socialism, and those free market capitalists can not exist without being multinational.
 
You don't realize it, but you are actually assisting them with your repeated messages about "multinationals" etc. That's part of the "class warfare" message.... getting the "working class" to become envious of those they perceive as having more wealth and power than they have. This is how the statists convince people they need government to 'regulate' capitalism, to 'control' the powerful corporate machine. Capitalist free markets are the enemy of Communist Socialism, and those free market capitalists can not exist without being multinational.

Class warfare is real. It's management versus labor. Managers now have no allegiance to fellow citizens, and only look at profit.

Most workers are not in UNIONS, they're not COMMUNISTS, but they are having their lives ruined by managers preferring overseas wage slaves.

Capitalism can totally exist without multinationals. Stop with your globalist bullshit. You're retarded.
 
Class warfare is real. It's management versus labor. Managers now have no allegiance to fellow citizens, and only look at profit.

Most workers are not in UNIONS, they're not COMMUNISTS, but they are having their lives ruined by managers preferring overseas wage slaves.

Capitalism can totally exist without multinationals. Stop with your globalist bullshit. You're retarded.

Okay, let's look at it from another perspective, shall we? If you go to Wal-mart to buy a computer keyboard, you'll likely pay less than $20 for one made in Indonesia, by Operator #37, who makes about $3 a day. Now, you could opt to give the cashier an extra $5 for the keyboard, but the money would probably just go into his or her pocket. You could mail a check to the Indonesian keyboard manufacturer, but the money would likely go into the pocket of some 'manager' or corporate big wig. You could send the $5 to the Indonesian government, but it would likely go into the pocket of some political leader. You could send the $5 directly to Operator #37, and the state would confiscate it. So, no matter what you do, the Operator #37 is not helped by your generosity. Your philosophy is, to not buy an Indonesian-made keyboard at all, buy an American-made keyboard and pay more for it. That's fine, but what happens to Operator #37 then? Well, if the Indonesian keyboard maker isn't selling keyboards, they can't pay Operator #37 even the paltry $3 a day... If you are Operator #37, would you rather have $3 a day or $0 a day? It's a real simple choice. Granted, it would be better if Operator #37 could make $7 an hour, but that isn't reality. There is no way to make that happen for them, no matter if we buy their keyboards or not.

You are opposed to multinational corporatists, but I say, let's put our multinational entrepreneurs up against theirs and see who comes out best! We've been doing this a lot longer than others, and our entrepreneurial spirit is much stronger and vibrant. Yeah, our "rich people" get richer, and as a result, they buy things and hire people to do things for them, they pay more taxes on their profits and stuff they buy, and we all prosper as a result.
 
Okay, let's look at it from another perspective, shall we? If you go to Wal-mart to buy a computer keyboard, you'll likely pay less than $20 for one made in Indonesia, by Operator #37, who makes about $3 a day. Now, you could opt to give the cashier an extra $5 for the keyboard, but the money would probably just go into his or her pocket. You could mail a check to the Indonesian keyboard manufacturer, but the money would likely go into the pocket of some 'manager' or corporate big wig. You could send the $5 to the Indonesian government, but it would likely go into the pocket of some political leader. You could send the $5 directly to Operator #37, and the state would confiscate it. So, no matter what you do, the Operator #37 is not helped by your generosity. Your philosophy is, to not buy an Indonesian-made keyboard at all, buy an American-made keyboard and pay more for it. That's fine, but what happens to Operator #37 then? Well, if the Indonesian keyboard maker isn't selling keyboards, they can't pay Operator #37 even the paltry $3 a day... If you are Operator #37, would you rather have $3 a day or $0 a day? It's a real simple choice. Granted, it would be better if Operator #37 could make $7 an hour, but that isn't reality. There is no way to make that happen for them, no matter if we buy their keyboards or not.

You are opposed to multinational corporatists, but I say, let's put our multinational entrepreneurs up against theirs and see who comes out best! We've been doing this a lot longer than others, and our entrepreneurial spirit is much stronger and vibrant. Yeah, our "rich people" get richer, and as a result, they buy things and hire people to do things for them, they pay more taxes on their profits and stuff they buy, and we all prosper as a result.


All money "just goes into someone's pocket". And one way trade imbalances only suck money from the society overtime.

All people who actually work for a living lose when it's multinationals versus multinational.

Who is the the 'us', or the 'we' when you use the the phrase "our multinationals". Multinationals are not "ours". That's clear in their treachery.
 
All money "just goes into someone's pocket". And one way trade imbalances only suck money from the society overtime.

All people who actually work for a living lose when it's multinationals versus multinational.

Who is the the 'us', or the 'we' when you use the the phrase "our multinationals". Multinationals are not "ours". That's clear in their treachery.

Let's clear up a misconception you seem to have here. ALL multi-national corporations are owned by someone. They are simply corporations who operate in multiple nations, hence the term "multinational." Now, they are either owned by financiers and banks, who are beholden to stockholders and investors, or they are directly owned by the public, controlled by shareholders and boards of directors, or they are owned by the state, under the auspices of representing the people. In absolutely NO case, are they operating as self-reliant entities of their own volition, they are always operated by people. By "our multi-nationals" I mean the multinationals owned by American interests from within the borders of the United States and her territories.

As treacherous as you may think they are, they are essential for economic prosperity, regardless of the political system they operate under. Now, if you had some magic potion you could release upon the world, and make everyone think and act like you, perhaps we could operate in a world devoid of multinationals, and we could all be global isolationists, and it would probably work out to our advantage to do that... but you have no such potion, and it's not likely the world will awake tomorrow and suddenly share your world view. That fact realized, what is your objective? To destroy economic prosperity? To further enslave us to the state? Because that is precisely what will happen if we traipse off down your crazy road.
 
Let's clear up a misconception you seem to have here. ALL multi-national corporations are owned by someone. They are simply corporations who operate in multiple nations, hence the term "multinational." Now, they are either owned by financiers and banks, who are beholden to stockholders and investors, or they are directly owned by the public, controlled by shareholders and boards of directors, or they are owned by the state, under the auspices of representing the people. In absolutely NO case, are they operating as self-reliant entities of their own volition, they are always operated by people. By "our multi-nationals" I mean the multinationals owned by American interests from within the borders of the United States and her territories.
Exactly, there's no real bond between any multinationals and the citizenry. It may just mean their owners reside here. It doesn't mean they give hiring preferences to americans or anything meaningful like that.
As treacherous as you may think they are, they are essential for economic prosperity, regardless of the political system they operate under. Now, if you had some magic potion you could release upon the world, and make everyone think and act like you, perhaps we could operate in a world devoid of multinationals, and we could all be global isolationists, and it would probably work out to our advantage to do that... but you have no such potion, and it's not likely the world will awake tomorrow and suddenly share your world view. That fact realized, what is your objective? To destroy economic prosperity? To further enslave us to the state? Because that is precisely what will happen if we traipse off down your crazy road.

They are not essential for economic properity. That's just something you keep saying, because you're a brainwashed imbecile.
 
Exactly, there's no real bond between any multinationals and the citizenry. It may just mean their owners reside here. It doesn't mean they give hiring preferences to americans or anything meaningful like that.

That's where you are absolutely wrong, almost ALL corporations, multinational or not, are inherently bound by the people who operate/own them. This can be MANY shareholders, stockholders, and financial backers from all persuasions. In NO case is a corporation a self-reliant entity not beholden to anyone but itself. They DO operate with objectives directed toward the profit of their business, but that is the nature of all capitalism. Do you oppose capitalism? Would you rather have communism? Those are your only two choices, really. Pick one!

They are not essential for economic properity. That's just something you keep saying, because you're a brainwashed imbecile.

No, 'brainwashed' people repeat the same mindless nonsense over and over, the same catch-phrases, like "multinational globalist fascists" and stuff. They seldom think past their own rhetoric, and continue to repeat the same thing continuously, as they dismiss anything contradictory to their rhetoric without further consideration or thought.
 
That's where you are absolutely wrong, almost ALL corporations, multinational or not, are inherently bound by the people who operate/own them.
Bound to what?

They outsource as many american jobs as possible these days.
This can be MANY shareholders, stockholders, and financial backers from all persuasions. In NO case is a corporation a self-reliant entity not beholden to anyone but itself. They DO operate with objectives directed toward the profit of their business, but that is the nature of all capitalism. Do you oppose capitalism? Would you rather have communism? Those are your only two choices, really. Pick one!
That's a relatively small amount of people. The people who own them benefit, but the other citizens of the nations where the owners reside don't get a benefit. They outsource as many jobs as they can.

I oppose internationlist fascism, and the government rejecting sensible trade policy if favor of globalist brainwashed nonsense.
No, 'brainwashed' people repeat the same mindless nonsense over and over, the same catch-phrases, like "multinational globalist fascists" and stuff. They seldom think past their own rhetoric, and continue to repeat the same thing continuously, as they dismiss anything contradictory to their rhetoric without further consideration or thought.


You keep doing that. YOu keep saying "everyone wins when 'our' multinationals do well." That's bullshit. There's no 'we', there's no 'our'.
 
Bound to what?

They outsource as many american jobs as possible these days.

Multinational and national corporations owned and operated by American interests are bound by the interests of the American people who own them. Outsourcing happens because it is economically advantageous to the corporation, which is in turn, advantageous to the people who own interest in the corporation. The success of the corporation generates tax revenues and produces jobs, which benefit the rest of the people who don't have a direct interest in the corporation.

That's a relatively small amount of people. The people who own them benefit, but the other citizens of the nations where the owners reside don't get a benefit. They outsource as many jobs as they can.

No, it's a relatively LARGE number of people, when you start factoring in all of the assorted support industries, and residual effects of their capitalism. You want to imagine a 'multinational' as being some entity operating of its own volition, to the detriment of society, when in actuality, it is the culmination of people who have economic interests at play for the prosperity of all society.

I oppose internationlist fascism, and the government rejecting sensible trade policy if favor of globalist brainwashed nonsense.

Well here you are repeating your brainwashed lines again... international fascism? We can't really demand that Indonesians make keyboards cheap for us! We can't demand the Chinese government pay their workers better! Those would be "fascist" in nature, and we aren't inherently fascist people. We can either choose to do business with these nations or not... if we don't, the people of those nations suffer even more. We could attempt to cajole multinationals into paying more tariffs, fines, fees, and taxes... but that would be the "fascist" thing to do, not conducive with capitalist systems.

You keep doing that. YOu keep saying "everyone wins when 'our' multinationals do well." That's bullshit. There's no 'we', there's no 'our'.

No, of course not... not in YOUR fantasy world, anyway! There are only evil multinational fascist corporations out there gobbling up everyone's wealth and prosperity and leaving us all with gruel to eat! We're just mortals, unable to do anything about these evil entities operating on their own accord on a mission to destroy humankind. Wake up and smell the coffee! ALL CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE! OWNED BY PEOPLE! OPERATED BY PEOPLE! MADE POSSIBLE BY PEOPLE! Not a damn one of them could ever operate independent of PEOPLE! NONE of them are inherently trying to destroy the lives of PEOPLE! Get your head out of your ass and understand you are promoting the exact thing the Socialist Communists want you to promote, like a brainwashed little prole! Attack capitalism! That's the fucking answer, right? WRONG!!
 
Multinational and national corporations owned and operated by American interests are bound by the interests of the American people who own them. Outsourcing happens because it is economically advantageous to the corporation, which is in turn, advantageous to the people who own interest in the corporation. The success of the corporation generates tax revenues and produces jobs, which benefit the rest of the people who don't have a direct interest in the corporation.
The people who own them may live overseas, and are relatively few in number.

The main value for the public in general is the day to day employment they provide. And in an outsourced context, that is a very negligeble benefit for most citizens.

Are you for corporate taxes high enough make up for the public benefit that is lost due to outsourcing?
No, it's a relatively LARGE number of people, when you start factoring in all of the assorted support industries, and residual effects of their capitalism. You want to imagine a 'multinational' as being some entity operating of its own volition, to the detriment of society, when in actuality, it is the culmination of people who have economic interests at play for the prosperity of all society.
All of the supporting industries outsource as well.

Are you for making corporate taxes high enough to make up for all the dollars lost through outsoucring?
Well here you are repeating your brainwashed lines again... international fascism? We can't really demand that Indonesians make keyboards cheap for us! We can't demand the Chinese government pay their workers better! Those would be "fascist" in nature, and we aren't inherently fascist people. We can either choose to do business with these nations or not... if we don't, the people of those nations suffer even more. We could attempt to cajole multinationals into paying more tariffs, fines, fees, and taxes... but that would be the "fascist" thing to do, not conducive with capitalist systems.
Assistance from the world bank and IMF all come with strings attached, namely, the rulers must make their citizens wage slaves for western industry.

We can cut trade ties with nations who don't give their people freedoms, or treat them like wage slaves, and we should.

Those people suffer many times BECAUSE of our interventions.
No, of course not... not in YOUR fantasy world, anyway! There are only evil multinational fascist corporations out there gobbling up everyone's wealth and prosperity and leaving us all with gruel to eat! We're just mortals, unable to do anything about these evil entities operating on their own accord on a mission to destroy humankind. Wake up and smell the coffee! ALL CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE! OWNED BY PEOPLE! OPERATED BY PEOPLE! MADE POSSIBLE BY PEOPLE! Not a damn one of them could ever operate independent of PEOPLE! NONE of them are inherently trying to destroy the lives of PEOPLE! Get your head out of your ass and understand you are promoting the exact thing the Socialist Communists want you to promote, like a brainwashed little prole! Attack capitalism! That's the fucking answer, right? WRONG!!

Yes they are trying to destroy the lives of people. They must to keep getting bank loans from central banker/planners who believe in population reduction on a global scale, and sell that goal to the public based on a mix of resource/climate alarmism and elitism.

I say we only attack globalization aka internationalist fascism. It's not the same as capitalism.
 
The people who own them may live overseas, and are relatively few in number.

Nonsense. Most multinational corporations are owned by a variety of people, not "very few" but "very many" and some might live abroad, but the bulk are US citizens and pay US taxes on their corporate profits.

The main value for the public in general is the day to day employment they provide. And in an outsourced context, that is a very negligeble benefit for most citizens.

No, there is much more value they provide. Materials and support industries come to mind. The day-to-day administration of the various aspects of their corporation, someone has to make their paper clips and notepads... someone has to make the suitcases they keep their money in! Someone has to manage the hotels they stay in, and bring them their caviar and champagne. Someone has to drive them to meetings or fly them to destinations. Someone has to create their Powerpoint presentations, someone has to keep track of the profits and keep an eye on their investments... you don't think this handful of corporate owners do all this stuff for themselves, do you?

How many evil fascist multinational corporations does Ethiopia have? Does it appear to have helped the Ethiopians? What you need to understand is, these evil multinational fascist corporations you keep harping about, are the backbone to our economy, and benefit virtually every American in some way.

Are you for corporate taxes high enough make up for the public benefit that is lost due to outsourcing?

Are you for making corporate taxes high enough to make up for all the dollars lost through outsoucring?

I'm not for corporate taxes or ANY taxes!

Assistance from the world bank and IMF all come with strings attached, namely, the rulers must make their citizens wage slaves for western industry.

We can cut trade ties with nations who don't give their people freedoms, or treat them like wage slaves, and we should.

Okay.... again.... let's say you've invented a magic potion to give everyone, and make them see things your way, and this actually did happen... what would happen to all those individuals in all those countries? Would they be any better off with NO money as opposed to a little money? I get what you are saying, but the solution is not to stop doing business with these countries, as it will only further impoverish the people who depend desperately on our dollars.

Those people suffer many times BECAUSE of our interventions.

So it's better for us to leave them be? Let them suffer in abject poverty without even the minuscule amounts they are currently afforded? How does that help them and not hurt them even more? I don't follow your logic.

I say we only attack globalization aka internationalist fascism. It's not the same as capitalism.

Yes, globalization and international business is indeed a part of capitalism, you can't divorce them from each other. You can make them an enemy, create a boogie-man, pretend that they are evil entities operating of their own volition to the ultimate detriment to mankind, but that is a fallacy and a fantasy. And it plays directly into the hands of Communist Socialists, who wish to destroy all capitalism.
 
Nonsense. Most multinational corporations are owned by a variety of people, not "very few" but "very many" and some might live abroad, but the bulk are US citizens and pay US taxes on their corporate profits.
Very few own enough that the stock is enough to survive on. Most people need jobs from corporations, and their stock holdings are miniscule, making the trend towards outsource more impactful than their meager holdings.
No, there is much more value they provide. Materials and support industries come to mind. The day-to-day administration of the various aspects of their corporation, someone has to make their paper clips and notepads... someone has to make the suitcases they keep their money in! Someone has to manage the hotels they stay in, and bring them their caviar and champagne. Someone has to drive them to meetings or fly them to destinations. Someone has to create their Powerpoint presentations, someone has to keep track of the profits and keep an eye on their investments... you don't think this handful of corporate owners do all this stuff for themselves, do you?
and they outsourse as many of those functions as they can to overseas wage slaves.
How many evil fascist multinational corporations does Ethiopia have? Does it appear to have helped the Ethiopians? What you need to understand is, these evil multinational fascist corporations you keep harping about, are the backbone to our economy, and benefit virtually every American in some way.
They used to. But now they're outsourcing as many functions as possible.
I'm not for corporate taxes or ANY taxes!
But you cited "providing tax revenu" as a benefit corporations provide back to the rest of society.
Okay.... again.... let's say you've invented a magic potion to give everyone, and make them see things your way, and this actually did happen... what would happen to all those individuals in all those countries? Would they be any better off with NO money as opposed to a little money? I get what you are saying, but the solution is not to stop doing business with these countries, as it will only further impoverish the people who depend desperately on our dollars.
Paying dictators to enslave their people is disruptive to the natural development of a balanced an sound economy, it puts american out of work too. The only people who win are multinational corporations.
So it's better for us to leave them be? Let them suffer in abject poverty without even the minuscule amounts they are currently afforded? How does that help them and not hurt them even more? I don't follow your logic.
Paying dictators to enslave their people is disruptive to the natural development of a balanced an sound economy, it puts american out of work too. The only people who win are multinational corporations.
Yes, globalization and international business is indeed a part of capitalism, you can't divorce them from each other. You can make them an enemy, create a boogie-man, pretend that they are evil entities operating of their own volition to the ultimate detriment to mankind, but that is a fallacy and a fantasy. And it plays directly into the hands of Communist Socialists, who wish to destroy all capitalism.


They're a part of capitalism now, but they don't have to be, and they're not DEFINITIVE of, or crucial to the existence of capitalism. That's just something you keep meritlessly asserting.
 
Now, we see this everyday in America. The HCR issue has perplexed me, trying to understand why it's so damn important to the liberals, but I think I can see what the motivation is, and again, it is rooted in class envy. People see doctors making exorbitant amounts of money, living plush opulent lifestyles, and they know of some Aunt or Uncle who is faced with medical bills they can't possibly pay, and it's the same old jealousy and envy tugging at their emotional heartstrings. They view HCR as a way of punishing the rich greedy doctors, while rewarding the "working class" through 'redistribution' of wealth.

You want to know what's so important to Liberals? It's being healthy. They want medical care just like a hungry person wants food. An ill person doesn't care how much a doctor is making any more than a hungry person cares how much a grocer is making.

HCR has nothing to do with jealousy or redistribution of wealth. It has to do with pain and illness and, ultimately, survival.

Was it really all that perplexing to you?

Perhaps an example will help. Let's say you required an operation and a government representative visited you and said, "Dixie, go to any doctor and have the operation and we will pay."

So, you check a couple of doctors. One will charge $10,000 for the operation and the other will charge $8,000. The doctor charging $10,000 has a much better reputation and his patients are more satisfied. Which doctor would you choose?

Would you go to the $8,000 doctor because you feel the one charging $10,000 is greedy and you want to teach him a lesson so you avoid him?

The only reason I would care how much a doctor charges is whether or not I could afford him but that's just me.


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
 
Apple. when was the last time you comparison shopped doctors based on what they "charge". Insurance companies have the medical industry all s.n.a.f.u.
 
What do you do when you need a doctor? If you have to pay don't you ask what a procedure will cost?

Mama called the doctor and the doctor said, "no more monkeys, jumping on the bed". Seems kind of late for that kind of advice, but that's what he said.
 
Back
Top