Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

What system is better.

Page 1 of 18 [ 276 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 18  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

What system is better?
A system where the government owns the means of production and distribution 59%  59%  [ 19 ]
A system where the corporations own the means of production and distribution 41%  41%  [ 13 ]
Total votes : 32

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 2:45 pm

makes more sense with the title...


_________________
We won't go back.


Last edited by Sweetleaf on 27 Nov 2011, 1:17 am, edited 2 times in total.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

21 Nov 2011, 3:35 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
so what system sounds better?


Badly put. The choice should be:

1. Government owned

2: Privately owned.


Corporation is only one form of private business. And there are government corporations, for example the U.S. Postal Service. It is a half breed: half corporation half government entity.

And just to register my preference: I prefer the means of production to be privately owned with the exception of monopolies of force to wit; the armed forces and the armed police. Fire companies could be either government or privately operated. There are many volunteer private fire companies throughout the United States.

Also the Coast Guard could be part of the U.S. Navy or it could be a privately operated service.

Governments have little or no incentive to be efficient or honest. Whereas private groups in a competitive environment do. All they have going for them is the good will and preference of their customer base. When businesses become monopolies and government regulated beasts they loose what incentive they have to do the right thing or to be efficient.

ruveyn



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 3:44 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
so what system sounds better?


Badly put. The choice should be:

1. Government owned

2: Privately owned.


Corporation is only one form of private business. And there are government corporations, for example the U.S. Postal Service. It is a half breed: half corporation half government entity.

And just to register my preference: I prefer the means of production to be privately owned with the exception of monopolies of force to wit; the armed forces and the armed police. Fire companies could be either government or privately operated. There are many volunteer private fire companies throughout the United States.

Also the Coast Guard could be part of the U.S. Navy or it could be a privately operated service.

Governments have little or no incentive to be efficient or honest. Whereas private groups in a competitive environment do. All they have going for them is the good will and preference of their customer base. When businesses become monopolies and government regulated beasts they loose what incentive they have to do the right thing or to be efficient.

ruveyn


Lol yes lets go back to privately owned fire companies so if someone cannot afford to pay for that service their house can be left to burn.....wonderful. Also I think the pigs who sit on top of our corporatocracy have made it quite clear they have no incentive to be efficient or honest, they think they can buy the politicians and own the freaking world.....well they can't.

And privately owned military? now that's just downright scary......even more scary then the cops being used by the people who operate the private corporations and buy our politicians to use brutallity against people who happen to be using their first amenendment rights.

The government should have incentive to do what is right and be efficient.......because if they don't the people get pissed, and won't take it anymore which is the way it should be.....unfortunatly a lot of people would rather just do what the government/corporations tell them to and think what they want them to.

Anyways, I would argue that neither of those systems are very good......and at the moment I think the whole system is flawed the government and the economic system.



NineTailedFox
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 84

21 Nov 2011, 3:48 pm

I'm with Noam Chomsky on this. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wriQGI5NGOM[/youtube]



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 3:59 pm

NineTailedFox wrote:
I'm with Noam Chomsky on this. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wriQGI5NGOM[/youtube]


Hmm those are all very good points.



Telekon
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 411

21 Nov 2011, 4:53 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Lol yes lets go back to privately owned fire companies so if someone cannot afford to pay for that service their house can be left to burn.....wonderful.


Why would you have to pay up front? The fire company could put out the fire before sending you a bill (if you didn't have fire insurance). If someone can afford a house, surely they can afford to pay the cost of dousing a fire.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 4:57 pm

Telekon wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Lol yes lets go back to privately owned fire companies so if someone cannot afford to pay for that service their house can be left to burn.....wonderful.


Why would you have to pay up front? The fire company could put out the fire before sending you a bill (if you didn't have fire insurance). If someone can afford a house, surely they can afford to pay the cost of dousing a fire.


Well what if they put the fire out, and then you cannot afford to pay the bill......I don't think running the fire service like our healthcare system is a very good idea.

here is an idea, maybe everything should not have to be bought.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

21 Nov 2011, 4:58 pm

I would prefer a mix of a few "crown" corporations mixed with *responsible* free market capitalism. The government and corporations are in many ways just different faces of the same bureaucracy, and domination by one or the other is equally bad. A certain balance is needed for there to be equilibrium in the system. Like what we've got going here in Canada


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Telekon
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 411

21 Nov 2011, 5:03 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Telekon wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Lol yes lets go back to privately owned fire companies so if someone cannot afford to pay for that service their house can be left to burn.....wonderful.


Why would you have to pay up front? The fire company could put out the fire before sending you a bill (if you didn't have fire insurance). If someone can afford a house, surely they can afford to pay the cost of dousing a fire.


Well what if they put the fire out, and then you cannot afford to pay the bill


The house doesn't burn down and the bill is sent to a collection agency.

Quote:
......I don't think running the fire service like our healthcare system is a very good idea.

here is an idea, maybe everything should not have to be bought.


What does that mean?



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 5:05 pm

Telekon wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Telekon wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Lol yes lets go back to privately owned fire companies so if someone cannot afford to pay for that service their house can be left to burn.....wonderful.


Why would you have to pay up front? The fire company could put out the fire before sending you a bill (if you didn't have fire insurance). If someone can afford a house, surely they can afford to pay the cost of dousing a fire.


Well what if they put the fire out, and then you cannot afford to pay the bill


The house doesn't burn down and the bill is sent to a collection agency.

Quote:
......I don't think running the fire service like our healthcare system is a very good idea.

here is an idea, maybe everything should not have to be bought.


What does that mean?


Oh yes because after someone loses their house having a collection agency after them is just what they need.

It means everything should probably not be treated like a consumer product.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 5:06 pm

Vigilans wrote:
I would prefer a mix of a few "crown" corporations mixed with *responsible* free market capitalism. The government and corporations are in many ways just different faces of the same bureaucracy, and domination by one or the other is equally bad. A certain balance is needed for there to be equilibrium in the system. Like what we've got going here in Canada


Reasonable, but......how can it be ensured that the balance will be kept in place?



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

21 Nov 2011, 5:13 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
I would prefer a mix of a few "crown" corporations mixed with *responsible* free market capitalism. The government and corporations are in many ways just different faces of the same bureaucracy, and domination by one or the other is equally bad. A certain balance is needed for there to be equilibrium in the system. Like what we've got going here in Canada


Reasonable, but......how can it be ensured that the balance will be kept in place?


Make sure there is never a conservative majority government. Oh wait, we have one right now :P we're all f****d!


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 5:15 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
I would prefer a mix of a few "crown" corporations mixed with *responsible* free market capitalism. The government and corporations are in many ways just different faces of the same bureaucracy, and domination by one or the other is equally bad. A certain balance is needed for there to be equilibrium in the system. Like what we've got going here in Canada


Reasonable, but......how can it be ensured that the balance will be kept in place?


Make sure there is never a conservative majority government. Oh wait, we have one right now :P we're all f****!


So having a non-conservative majority government will somehow fix everything? not so sure about that. It seems it does not really matter whether we elect a conservative, republican, democrat or anything else the same problems continue to exist and even get worse.



Telekon
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 411

21 Nov 2011, 5:17 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Oh yes because after someone loses their house having a collection agency after them is just what they need.

It means everything should probably not be treated like a consumer product.


Why would they lose their house?

The government is poor at allocating resources because they treat them as costs and not as a source of revenue. If you privatized fire departments, the labor and capital would be put to better use and the cost of putting out fires would be greatly reduced. A person who could afford a mortgage could afford to pay the cost of putting out a fire.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

21 Nov 2011, 5:18 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
I would prefer a mix of a few "crown" corporations mixed with *responsible* free market capitalism. The government and corporations are in many ways just different faces of the same bureaucracy, and domination by one or the other is equally bad. A certain balance is needed for there to be equilibrium in the system. Like what we've got going here in Canada


Reasonable, but......how can it be ensured that the balance will be kept in place?


Make sure there is never a conservative majority government. Oh wait, we have one right now :P we're all f****!


So having a non-conservative majority government will somehow fix everything? not so sure about that. It seems it does not really matter whether we elect a conservative, republican, democrat or anything else the same problems continue to exist and even get worse.


No, things were pretty good before they had the majority. Even when it was in a minority it acted in a cavalier attitude though as if it had a majority and disregarded the Canadian political system which led to the vote of no confidence and the flawed election that put them in ultimate power. A majority government in Canada has more power than an equivalent in the US. They can basically do whatever they want. The Conservative government here wants to put as many US style bills in as possible. They are like Republican Lite in a lot of respects, except they are also really sneaky and not a bunch of windbags, so 75% of the s**t they pull off goes without anyone even paying attention.


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,477
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Nov 2011, 5:22 pm

Telekon wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Oh yes because after someone loses their house having a collection agency after them is just what they need.

It means everything should probably not be treated like a consumer product.


Why would they lose their house?

The government is poor at allocating resources because they treat them as costs and not as a source of revenue. If you privatized fire departments, the labor and capital would be put to better use and the cost of putting out fires would be greatly reduced. A person who could afford a mortgage could afford to pay the cost of putting out a fire.


Because their house is on fire.....but I guess depending on how quick the fire trucks get there and how big the fire is would determine the damage to the house. Point is I don't see how privately owned fire companies would help anything....other then create one more thing people have to worry about paying for. Because its not good enough to need health insurance, car insurance, house insurance, life insurance ect. we also need fire insurance.

Sorry just don't see how that would ever be a good thing. Also how do you know a person who can afford a house could afford to put out the fire? not everyone who owns a house has a stable financial situation....sometimes most of their income has to go to the morgage payment, then there is food, electricity, heat, the phone bill, costs associated with kids(a lot of people who own houses have kids) and you really think they can all afford yet another bill on top of that all?