Sorry for the snips, my mail server is barfing on big emails right now. No flame war necessary. Just a difference of opinion.
I haven't read anything from Noam Chomsky, although I found several sites about him and his work, and I assure you I will make an effort to do so this evening. "Corporate Capitalism" is almost a contradiction in terms as far as I am concerned. While I know she supported capitalism, I am not so sure about her support for the corporation. Read how she feels about boards and regulatory commissions and such, she was not lauding the company so much as the individual of ability. Another thing, I do realize that the view she put forward is highly idealized, there is much there that could not, and in some cases should not exist in the real world. As far as economic totalitarianism is concerned, I point to my last sentence. I understand that some controls are necessary to prevent the kinds of abuse of power that large companies are capable of. I know that full monopoly would breed stagnation, and eventually some sort of result. But we are not in that state. Now I also know that there are many segments of the economy in the United States that would produce far more if they did not have excessive federal and state legislation cutting into their bottom line, thereby allowing them to hire more, and spend more money on things like R&D or new construction. Again, I would like to make the statement that I feel libertarians are truly the centrists in this nation. We know and understand balance. We are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. "you speak of free markets" - No I didn't. As a matter of fact, and contrary to many libertarians, I think we need to follow some very protectionist policies for several years, allow us to again build our internal industrial base, and lessen the impact that the loss of our trade imbalances with the rest of the world would create. Basically I think we need to make ourselves self sufficient again before we go trying to help fix the rest of the world. I don't think we are a perfect country, not by a long shot, but I don't see anything we can't fix. If we took 10 or 20 years, and focused on fixing our country, rolling back a lot of the legislation and regulation that is strangling business and the individual alike, close vast segments of our federal government in order to support tax cuts, and eventual tax appeal, pull back our military from those places where we do not have a vital strategic interest, and through downsizing get it to be the defense force it was once supposed to be, then I think we would find ourselves in the best country this world had ever seen. Add in a few more things like return to the gold standard, doing away with national level programs and agencies like NEA and such. We would be stable and free, and there would be enough capitol freed up that after a brief period of adjustment all the people who lost those federal jobs would be able to find civilian sector work. "you can't give USSR as an example of what communism is any more than you can give america as an example for what a democracy is." - Well the USSR was supposed to be a socialist haven, where as the Untied States is supposed to be a constitutional republic. Looking in history you will find that the founders of this nation did not want a democracy. They understood that mans man was chaotic and his opinions would change with his emotions. Therefore they set up a government that was supposed to be difficult to change (not the easy flexible, malleable thing we hear about today) where the rights of the individual were supposed to supersede the rights of the group. They set it up in such a way that they hoped that only those people who had a true interest in our government would be able to take part. Originally you had to be owner of physical property of a reasonable value ($500?) in order to vote, which they felt would leaving voting to those who were invested, or had something to loose if the nation were guided in a bad direction. While I personally could not support this method of granting the vote, I could see us following something akin to Heinlein's in "Star Ship Troopers". Basically it was opt in government. Only those people who had served a term of service (military usually, although there were other jobs available) could vote. There were two distinct classes, citizens (had the vote) and civilians (couldn't vote). Now if we look at the numbers voting today, I think you will see that the vast majority of America does not care what happens in government. They complain, and they talk about how they feel on certain issues, but then when it comes time to express themselves in the forum that this nation has for them to do so, they sit at home in front of the damned television. Hmmm I just realized how long I have been writing here :) Back to work. Tim ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
