Spoon PoeticJust the SC jackpot alone is something like 23 mil at this point. 100,000 jackpot would never get players.
CobnatWhere else are people going to put there money? I mean, 100,000$ is still a lot of money for a lot of people, people would pay 10$ if there was a slight chance it could turn into 100,000$.
civilian_number_twoThe companies now aren't developing alternatives. And I wasn't talking about fossil fuels. It was CFCs that depleted the Ozone layer (and will do for the next few decades whether we stop using them or not), and it was state-funded scientists that discovered that. Corporate scientists stopped research when they were in danger of corroborating what their opponents were finding. There is no profit in being a whistle blower unless there's somethign to back you up. Lacking any government science, we'll be back to the pollution of the Industrial Revolution. I know you doubt it, and so do a lot of theorists, but I'm describing the history, the checks and balances of a system that is actually in use right now. You are describing a theoretical model for which there is no example.
CobnatI am not saying that Libertarianism is some kind of ideal government which will solve the worlds problems, I am saying that it is better then the systems we have now. I mean, companies pollute all they want now anyway, why? Because of loopholes in the laws. Politicians are talking about reducing green house gases by 20% in 15 years, that is too little too late.
civilian_number_twoYou even suggest that the country ought to fall apart, break into smaller economies, etc, and that this would be better no matter what.
CobnatBetter? Depends what you define as better.
civilian_number_twoWhere are your historical examples?
CobnatGive me a historical example of a government that has not fallen into anarchy because of civil unrest.
civilian_number_twoI'm not going to get into a military history argument here, but none of those is an example of a militia defeated a standing army.
CobnatWhat about the countries that gained independence from France and Spain by force? What about Boer War? Plus what I mentioned before; the countless partisan units operating against Nazi Germany during WW2.
civilian_number_twoYes. With help from the government. With no help from the government, you suggest that folks would just contribute exactly as much on their own, or possibly more. I doubt it, but I guess that doesn't matter to your argument. And the corporations, which contribute tons, do it for tax breaks, and they'd lose these breaks in your flat tax system. I promise you a lot of those folk would stop contributing and the poor would suffer.
CobnatThey pay no taxes regardless of donations. Most donations come from entrepreneurs (former businessmen) who either want to do good or whose conscience has gotten the better of them.
civilian_number_twoThere was some suggestion somewhere in all that about how the minimum wage was a plot to hurt the poor, that without a minimum wage folks would be able to negotiate thier own salaries, and that those salaries would be better. I don't know how you think that would work. If corporations are itching to pay people what they're worth, and if as you say the corporations pay less tax than their smaller competitors, then why do the corporations always suggest that the minimum wqage should be lowered? And when they can't lower it, why do they pay exactly minimum wage? Maybe I don't understand the suggestion made about minimum wage being devise to hurt the poor, but it seems counterintuitive since the corporations are happy to pay it and would love to pay less, despite not having as you say to pay very high taxes. I'm honestly confused by this.
CobnatYou didn’t even read what I wrote. Therefore I will not before refuting you. Just for the note; my point is that minimum wages hurt small businesses, not the ‘poor’ as you mentioned.
JordanScientific research for the most part is a massive money pit that never yiels immediate results. The only way to get corporations or any business to sponser such a thing is the potential to make a profit within 10 years.
Canada is seeing this now with oil sands. Many oil extracting companies and refining plants have shelled out massive doe to universities (namely UofA) to come up with solutions to make the process of harvesting oil from sand a profitable one. They've finally done it and right now a major parcel of land has been carved up between a handful of big oil companies to start extracting the oil via a complicated melting process.
This was a successful investment. Other investments like hydrogen cells have not been so succesful. They still have limited use, and the process of stablizing the hydrogen requires an intensive fossil fuel burning process, such that it negates the purpose of the cell.
But not all scientific research is profitable. State of the art bio research labs that monitor the toxicity levels, in Vancouver lower mainland for example, cost shit loads to build and run. These scientists can go for a few years without publishing any results. Then one day, after lots of money is spent, a graph on an overhead is produced. It shows the contaminent levels in a near by river over the course of say 3 years. The study concludes that toxicity is rising. Who just made a profit off that? Nobody. Without government spending, these important facts would go un-noticed.
Without these facts, guys like david suzuki wouldn't have a branch to stand on. The Canadian building Code has been ammended a lot based on the research of non-profitable organizations that conduct field tests and monitor lakes, wet lands, and the air we breath. Corporations and large firms usually continue to go about whatever it is they're doing until it becomes illegal, and the government decides that.
We'd never know CFC's destroy the ozone layer, we'd be using envriomentally unfriendly chillers, refrigerants, building materials, etc.. hadn't some group of people taken the time to explore these issues.
Corporations can invest, if it's porfitable. ANd heck, they often toss fat checks to small R&D teams, if only to look good. TRust me, I work for a big firm, and the second we sponser something, we have a newsletter out a day latter patting ourselves on the back.
NOTE- I just bumped off civillians last comment, which was kind of long, go read it, bottom of page 2... sorry
CobnatIf we run out of fuel source then we will enter a dark age. If that happens then companies will soon become extinct. The corporates know this, soon they will start investing money into alternative fuels if they haven’t already.
SladeHahahahahahahaha! Cobnat, were you seriously calling for a flat tax system? It only takes a sixth or seventh grade education (assuming you're in a good school system) to do a little bit of math and discover how absurd that is. 10% of the wage of a person who makes 10,000$ a year is A LOT more out of his/her wallet than a person who makes 50,000$ or 100,000$. The reason we have a graduated income tax in the states is because, firstly, the government wants lots of our money, but it's graduated so that it ideally screws the poor over less, and the wealthy can give up buying that second gold-plated yacht every year with their money to support government. I dunno if you meant a flat tax or not, I only noted Civ 2 thinking you meant that, so I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that you've already realized that it doesn't work and isn't fair to anyone who the taxes actually effect to a great degree.
CobnatI stated that it would be best if the max tax is 10%. Obviously the rich would be taxed more then the poor. I think 1% for every 10,000$ earned would be a good system.
SladeIt's also entertaining how you hold people in positions of power in the government to such low regard in regards to corruption, but somehow making these same people out to be competative large to global business owners capable of buying their own police force (and being required to) will become saints under less taxation and when given more economic power.
CobnatWhat economic powers? The corporates use the government to massively tax small businesses (aka competition) while they pay virtually no taxes at all.
SladeMinimum wage exists to prevent companies from completely screwing over workers and charging whatever they want. Minimum wage is grossly low in this country in most areas, many fight to keep it low, and if it goes up, prices go up to perpetuate the income gap and take advantage of the situation, not due to any real rise in demand. It's not here to oppress the poor, and nowadays, companies can get around it by hiring illegal immagrants or sending all of their jobs overseas to where they are allowed to slash their wages to ridiculously low amounts. The next time you can't understand your Indian tech support guy when your computer breaks, you can thank free market policies.
CobnatYou know, it would be nice for you to read what I wrote instead of assuming what I wrote. As for exporting jobs, since that is internationalism, I am against it. Plus if everyone in the country is jobless because they are exporting jobs, how are they going to buy the products?
This post has been edited by Cobnat: 04 October 2007 - 03:56 PM