Capitalism vs. Statism

[Michael Archer]

You fascist in any way, Michael?

 

I literally coughed while eating something when I read this.

 

How could you possibly think I'm a fascist?

 

There's no difference between fascism and socialism.

 

More anarchists than capitalists on here.

 

I swear, I haven't voted in this poll.

 

Where are those three great minds? I MUST MEET THEM.

 

Second, Anarchy is defined as "lack of government". Anything beyond that single fact is not covered in the term "Anarchy".

 

i.e. lack of any objective body to establish laws and order i.e. the individual is left to the whim of the first thug he meets.

 

I do look deeper then into the dictionary definition, Bullseye.

 

Michael Archer: You recently stated, "Corporations are human beings. All of corporation is is a collection of human beings."

 

Do you feel this way about a union?

 

Yup.

 

How about a government?

 

You mean as in having the same rights as an individual? Yup.

 

Do you believe that people should be allowed to own other people?

 

Are you guys even reading what I'm typing?

[danielsangeo]

There's no difference between fascism and socialism.

 

I literally coughed while eating something when I read this.

 

Do you believe that people should be allowed to own other people?

 

Are you guys even reading what I'm typing?

 

How about answering the question?

 

EDIT:

Also, what gender is Walmart? I ask because Walmart was founded in 1962 and as of 1980, if Walmart is male, then he is required, by law, to sign up for Selective Service and, if the draft is reinstated, he would have have to go fight in a war. Is Walmart right-handed or left-handed? What's his waist size? I ask because if he goes into service, he'll have to have a uniform. Did Walmart sign up for Selective Service? If not, why not?

[Doom Shepherd]

Did Walmart sign up for Selective Service? If not, why not?

 

I believe you can find his name on the rolls next to "Teamsters," "United Auto Workers," and "American Federation of Teachers."

 

Yeah, that's right, if non-person groups shouldn't have political rights... what are we ever going to do about the massive hypocrisy of the fact that we already allow non-person groups to have political rights?

 

I know, in the interests of Democracy, let's advocate for stripping ALL such groups of these powers! Not just the ones that will donate mainly to our political opponents!

 

(I won't hold my breath.)

[danielsangeo]

Let's remove corporate personhood first. Unions have very little power and we can get them next.

 

Teamsters, I think, you would consider a large union. In 2010, the Teamsters spent $2.1 million on lobbying.

 

FedEx, by itself, spent $25.6 million on lobbying.

[Doom Shepherd]

Let's remove corporate personhood first. Unions have very little power and we can get them next.

Why wait?

 

Teamsters, I think, you would consider a large union. In 2010, the Teamsters spent $2.1 million on lobbying.

 

FedEx, by itself, spent $25.6 million on lobbying.

 

But on the other hand, in direct campaign donations (lobbying, under the table), the Teamsters blew FedEx out of the water, 4.8 million to 1.0 million.

 

In fact, the list of top all-time campaign donors tells quite an interesting (and top-heavy) story:

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

 

1 ActBlue $52,443,515

2 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $45,237,853

3 AT&T Inc $41,197,490

4 National Assn of Realtors $39,707,910

5 National Education Assn $36,310,095

6 Service Employees International Union $35,873,039

7 American Assn for Justice $33,980,771

8 Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $33,475,254

9 Laborers Union $31,331,267

10 American Federation of Teachers $31,021,128

11 Teamsters Union $30,632,309

12 Carpenters & Joiners Union $30,572,687

13 Communications Workers of America $29,445,653

14 American Medical Assn $27,405,040

15 United Auto Workers $27,106,207

16 United Food & Commercial Workers Union $26,788,209

17 National Auto Dealers Assn $26,625,992

18 Machinists & Aerospace Workers Union $26,349,874

19 United Parcel Service $24,450,717

20 American Bankers Assn $24,105,244

 

FedEx is #32.

 

Now here's something strange... AFSCME actually claimed to CBS to be spending a staggering $87.5 million on the 2010 election ALONE. For some reason this money isn't even counted here.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20020498-503544.html

[danielsangeo]

Wait, what? "Lobbying under the table"? You mean, individual campaign contributions by private people who happen to be members of a specific union? Unreal. Are you also going to count the individual campaign contributions by private people who happen to be employees of a specific company into your figures?

 

By the way, your list is a bit fatuous. There are far more companies than unions. And unions represent the people. Companies represent themselves.

[Doom Shepherd]

Wait, what? "Lobbying under the table"? You mean, individual campaign contributions by private people who happen to be members of a specific union?

 

No, I'm not counting that at all. Neither is the site above.

 

And unions represent the people. Companies represent themselves.

 

"Vir, I have only seen political naïveté this complete once before – in a speech before the Centaurum by Lord Jarno. When he was finished, we recommended that he be sterilized in the best interests of evolution. But then we remembered that he was married to Lady Jarno, so really there was no need."

 

Unions, especially public-employee unions (AFSCME, SEIU, etc.) bargain with Democrat-controlled legislatures for more money, then kick back support (contributions, rent-a-crowds, and campaign tactics of dubious legality) to those same Democrats. You may not want to hear that (or want anyone to say that) but it is true.

[danielsangeo]

I'll thank you for not insulting me in the future.

 

Also, do you have any evidence of anything you just claimed?

[Song]

I voted for anarchy, it only comes nearest to what I want though (the

classic anarchy is to crude imho).

What I like would be a 'gift economy'.

There is probably a fancy name for it, but I don't know it.

In short: Everyone gives what he can and everyone gets what he wants.

 

Well, but that probably will never happen (I don't give up hope though).

The technology for it is ready (or could be easily developed because then

it would be easier to research), but our mind is still countless millennia

from it away, even thought it could happen now...

[Doom Shepherd]

I'll thank you for not insulting me in the future.

I haven't insulted you YET.

 

Also, do you have any evidence of anything you just claimed?

Yes. My eyes and ears work, and I am capable of accurately analyzing sensory input.

 

(This is my way of saying that my evidence that the sun comes up in the East in the morning is "get your ass outside at dawn.")

 

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nlrb-accuses-seiu-affiliate-of-illegally-punishing-and-retaliating-against-sodexo-employees-who-opposed-union-106767943.html

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deborah-burger/seius-latest-disgrace_b_96399.html

In its latest deplorable action, the Service Employees International Union bused in hundreds of its purple clad staff to break up a conference of union members and activists Saturday night in Dearborn, Mich.

 

Ironically enough, union democracy and empowering workers was one of the themes of the conference, sponsored by the magazine Labor Notes, that SEIU and its President Andrew Stern attempted to close down.

 

And if you want to be entertained, you can always search "SEIU attack" on YouTube.

 

Aas for my "own" union, AFSCME, (not that I really had a choice to join them or not, since I wanted a say in what happened to the money they were taking out of my paycheck anyway...) well... maybe next time I'll keep one of the screeds they send me instead of throwing it in the trash, but suffice it to say I've read things I know are false in them.

[Michael Archer]

[quote]How about answering the question?[/quote] I've always advocated individual rights being upheld; this is no way comes with the right to own slaves. [quote]Also, what gender is Walmart?[/quote] Do you have Asperger Syndrome? I ask, because people who do take things extremely literally. Walmart, [i]for all intents and purposes[/i], is a person i.e. it has the same rights as a person; no more, no less. [quote] I know, in the interests of Democracy, let's advocate for stripping ALL such groups of these powers! Not just the ones that will donate mainly to our political opponents![/quote] Democracy? Are you a statist, Doom Shepard? [quote]I voted for anarchy, it only comes nearest to what I want though (the classic anarchy is to crude imho). What I like would be a 'gift economy'. There is probably a fancy name for it, but I don't know it. In short: Everyone gives what he can and everyone gets what he wants.[/quote] Anarchy is indeed, statism. But that's not anarchy; "from each, according to his ability" is communism.

[danielsangeo]

How about answering the question?

 

I've always advocated individual rights being upheld; this is no way comes with the right to own slaves.

 

Also, what gender is Walmart?

 

Do you have Asperger Syndrome? I ask, because people who do take things extremely literally.

 

No, I do not have AS. A person has a gender. Walmart has no gender. It is NOT, for all intents and purposes, a person. It does not live. It does not breathe. It is not a member of the Homo sapiens species. It is not a person. At all. Walmart is a fictional construct invented by government to allow specific persons to organize for protection of various things. The corporation exists to create a wall of legal liability; stockholders, directors, officers aren't typically liable for a company's debts and obligations, for example.

 

It is not a person. It's not taking things extremely literally. It's a legal concept created by government, not a person, not even for all intents and purposes.'

 

But, thanks for asking if I have a psychological condition. Real classy.

[Michael Archer]

Daniel, are saying that Walmart has no rights? If yes, how does that make any sense when all Walmart is, is a collection of people who do have rights?

[danielsangeo]

Walmart doesn't even technically exist. It has no form. It has no shape. It is completely intangible.

 

The people have rights, but Walmart, itself, not even technically existing, does not. It is a legal concept, nothing more.

[riv3tkopf]

There is no "other" option, I personally support technocracy, a system where decisions are made by experts in relevant fields.

[ProHypster]

There is no "other" option, I personally support technocracy, a system where decisions are made by experts in relevant fields.

That is a very popular idea with the inteligentsia. I thought about it being practical in a future. Except in a more complicated sort of communist way were there are 100's of parties specialising in their fields... It's not going to be called anything with the word communist in it of course.

 

But yeah right now it's not close to practical, we need to form the ideology then a party first.

[Song]

I finally found a english version of what I would like to have.

There you go:

http://falkj.info/FJO_s_cu_b124.htm

 

I think it might be not easy to understand without the whole 'story' of it though.

So if you are interested in a possible utopia, you could read the whole book front

to back online here:

http://falkj.info/FJO_s_cu.htm

[danielsangeo]

I would like to ask:

 

What do you call a society that completely abolishes the state (that is, no governing body whatsoever) but also abolishes capitalism (no private ownership)?

[BTGBullseye]

I would like to ask:

 

What do you call a society that completely abolishes the state (that is, no governing body whatsoever) but also abolishes capitalism (no private ownership)?

Anarchy.

[Doom Shepherd]

I would like to ask:

 

What do you call a society that completely abolishes the state (that is, no governing body whatsoever) but also abolishes capitalism (no private ownership)?

 

An unsupervised elementary school. And trust me, you do NOT want to have to live in one.