Second off, You clearly haven't had to deal with public sector much. One of the downfalls of the lean towards a more socialist approach is you remove the spirit of competition from the equation in a big way. One of the biggest boons of our country is the way technology is embraced here. Competition between markets fuels a thriving economy. Due to the profit motive, companies have incentive to produce better products and services than competitors which in turn creates jobs for citizens. On top of that, as citizens we get the benefit of this in getting the opportunity to seek out reviews and find the best goods and services that are available.
Though I see your point. I also feel that if allowed to do their thing with little or no regulation big bussiness will trample over the little guy, undercut their employeess, destroy our enviroment and continue to make things unavvordable. I do not think the answer to our issue's of having 40% of the welath in 1% of the country will be solved by deregulating the owners of the big bussiness, most of which are in that one percent. Instead I think if you tell them the max salary they can make a year is X Billion then theyw ill strive to get there and stay there. Of course the GVT can then assure quality air regulation, a decent amount of support for the little man working int hat company, and hopefully help them get above that 23,750
But i need only remind you of the time big bussiness took off, and boomed in the 1900's of the need for union groups, and strikes, of the inhumane treatment of workers, working conditions, and even the predijuce towards hiring people of color, oppisite sex, or forign nationality. Big Bussiness isn't sceience the strong do not survive while the weak parrish. The strong ground pound the POSSIBLY strong crippling them refusing to give them an oppertunity to do, and then call them the weak. They make themselves feel better at night witht he concept of 'fairness' but in reality know nothing of it's bounds. They approuch the world of change with a smug look and refuse, and begause they own the wealth they can and will do that.
make no sistake, I know two things of this situation
1: I am never meant to lead anything invovling money, or goverment. I have NO IDEA what I'm doing, talking about, or even how to get it done. I am no better than our founding fathers who were mere philosophers with an IDEA on how a nation should be run. My idea, fix it somehow and my proposed idea, limit the shit out of them, cripple their liberity where it hurts since they don't want to be coperitive towards others. They were allowed that much wealth 40% no less, and onwards of 77& whenw e include the upper 20th quarile, on the concept of the GOP's 'trickle down effect" Which was their sermon in the mid to late 1900's. I notice that you all have had that work out so well why not continue to allow it? It's not like there are people that have busted hteir ass off to get a job, ben refused because they were women, black, irish, italian, catholic, or gay. it's not like Big Bussiness unregulated by the GVT in this area didn't open their arms for us, But that did happen, and they ahve shown to not beable to handle this liberity that the goverment was going to allow them to have.
2: I'm well aware tha what i speak is not just socialism, put a possible road to communism, which is a C word most are not okay with. I'ma lso aware that what I speak possibly violates the first admentment, although I digress them towards the Necesary and Proper clause of our constatution... i'm well aware that this isn't the way to slove our wealth issues. But I do not feel that that allowing big bussiness to be big bussiness will help. Now if we promoted small soul propitary companies while crippling the big bussiness I'd be happy. But ya know ain't nobady got time for that.
Anyway Like i said I ahve a very scewed view of the world that is enver meant to be considered, let alone suggested. I was more or less putting the 'what if' out there. A "What if people considered this where would it go."
type of thing. Consider it playing a part and nothing more. If there were lots of more progressive approuches in the forum I'd be sitting where you are and discussing the prolific discoveries of competition, which IS NECESARY an removing it will result int he collapse of our mediine, technology, and inovation as we know it. We would not be on a world wide web, we would all be running DOS and would neve have this talk, if Microsoft never had compeition, and if people didn't see the pROFIT in the internet. So Cosmic I agree with you. I merely disagree with the casual statment that "Competition will leave everything alive."
this was longer than I wanted... damn
