civilian_number_twoWhat about the folks who don't have families, or those whose families are too poor to support them? This goes for elderly as well as children.
CobnatWell I am sure that there will be a wealthy businessman with a big heart, like Bill Gates. Those who do not have families will rely on donations. News keeps leaking out here in Australia about government owned/funded homes being a literal death factory for the unfortunate anyways, where the owners keep government funds and don’t spend anything on the mentally ill or enfeebled. So I have to say that it is probably best that it is not government funded at all and it really solely on donations. People arent as cold hearted as you think.
civilian_number_twoTo give you a Capitalist template, consider the treatment of orphans during the English Industrial Revolution. Orphanages, privatised but government funded? Honestly, what's the difference? And donations? That's a shoddy way to run an economy.
CobnatWe are talking about orphanages. Since most orphanages nowadays run on donations, it will not be a massive step.
civilian_number_twoHow about if one megafirm threatens not to carry a company's product unless it sells it exclusively through them, and even then only if it reduces the quality of the product so that it may be sold for a greater profit to the megacompany? Capitalism has no mechanism for ensuring that the best product is made available for the best price; the story of the Tucker cars is a classic case, and the story of Rubbermaid and WalMart is a contemporary one.
CobnatWe are taxed and our taxes are being used by the government to buy products from big companies. They tax small business over 40% tax (in any given western nation) while charge big businesses less then 5% or not at all. If you believe that this system is good then fine, keep believing it but I would rather choose a state in which family businesses could prosper rather then a state which is solely run by the rich.
civilian_number_twoAs for these family firms, they could make the best product ever, but they'd have to lease their property from some Monopoly. If the Monopoly felt threatened by their product, they'd have nowhere to sell it.
CobnatI am talking about bakeries, import-export businesses and the like. Although if someone does make a product that is absolutely revolutionary then I am sure they will have no problem selling it, since the reason big companies get away with so much is because they are given immunity by the welfare state.
civilian_number_twoYou haven't read much about the formation of tyrannies and the anti-trust laws, have you?
CobnatWhat do you suggest? Tight control on big business? Its not going to happen, they run the economy. Though if the taxes are lowered for low-income earners then at least they will have a chance at buying a house and car and paying it off in their lifetime.
civilian_number_twoPolice investigators were impotent as far as proving that lead accumulated toxicity in humans. Such a thing needs to be proven scientifically, in a lab.
CobnatWell the labs would be owned by the police but if they aren’t I am sure that a person could start a business intended to help the police in this regard.
civilian_number_twoYou've heard of economies of scale, I'm sure. Some advances and discoveries are impossible except on a grand scale, the sort of scale affordable only by giant corporations or by governments.
civilian_number_twoThe folks putting lead into gas weren't interested in taking it out, and so they didn't fund any studies. etc etc. What would the cops do? Ask complainants to pee in a cup, and then test the pee for lead?
CobnatSo what are you paying your taxes for if the police or so incompetent?
civilian_number_twoNo it isn't.
CobnatYes it is, how else could you explain the restrictions of freedoms in western nations these past 40 years?
civilian_number_twoLike the US, I suppose. You know there are state controls all oevr the place, right?
Agreed. But there are numerous ways to control social spending without getting rid of it altogether. You're talking about throwing the baby out with the bath water.
CobnatI am not suggesting a revolution. Howard did that here with the Industrial Relations laws and fucked over everyone who didn’t have an individual contract. I am talking about a slow and steady (in other words a moderate) path towards more economic and social freedom.
civilian_number_twoWhy do you say you are sure of this? The US's history is based on foreign trade and Imperialism, but you're sure it would do just fine if it dropped that altogether? Please let me know of your sources.
CobnatNope. Please don’t misunderstand me, if the U.S disintegrates into smaller states because it cant help raping other nations, I wont lose sleep.
civilian_number_twoNot nations as large and as prosperous as the US, no. None. And for all my rhetoric I'm not really talking about exploiting, I'm talking about having foreign operations at all. These are often in places where they are in danger of foreign military takeover. It is the existence, if not the actual presence of the US military that makes these operations possible.
CobnatIs it really all that good that American companies are exporting jobs? They are exploiting people in poorer countries and at the same time not helping to hinder unemployment in their own country. This can only help the corporate ‘elites’.
civilian_number_twoProponents of laissez-fair capitalism generally don't think about running a nation; they just figure get rid of government and everything will be fine on its own.
civilian_number_twoThis is pwing mainly to a distrust of government, which I appreciate, btu it inevitably leads to all sorts of after the fact backpeddling like the bit above about orphans and elderly, and loads more assumptions about things that have never been tested, like their free market model (conveniently established after the ruling elite has already been established) and the holy power of donation.
CobnatSince most people would have a bigger wallet (since there would be less taxes) why wouldn’t they give money to the unfortunate?
civilian_number_twoWhen pressed for what would run society in a completely tax-free economy, Ayn Rand insisted it could be run entirely on donations and lotteries. Lotteries! The whole notion is half-assed.
CobnatI cant speak for Rand but I for one do not believe that a 100% libertarian country would work, what would work is one with minimum taxes and minimum involvement in the economy and society.
This post has been edited by Cobnat: 26 September 2007 - 03:13 AM