finally someone tells it like it is.

[h2]

Originally Posted by B-Dub

if we took care of the political corruption and government intrusion on a lot of things, these corporations would "fix" themselves because then they wouldn't have the political control they have, and there are many ways to curb this corruption.

Don't go making sense now, B-Dub! It's obviously not received well by these ignorant commies.

[klassik]

Damn h2 has the right. Idea. Capitalism forces innovation with high reward. Thats why we grew so quickly. You are crazy if you think redistribution of wealth to someone who didn't earn it is still going to cultivate new innovative products and ideas.

[lee majors]

Originally Posted by mart211

You misspelled corporation there...why should we take anything you say seriously after that?

true. true. lol

[h2]

Originally Posted by klassik

Damn h2 has the right. Idea. Capitalism forces innovation with high reward. Thats why we grew so quickly. You are crazy if you think redistribution of wealth to someone who didn't earn it is still going to cultivate new innovative products and ideas.

Exactly. What it will do is eventually give government supreme control of our market.

[lee majors]

Originally Posted by klassik

Damn h2 has the right. Idea. Capitalism forces innovation with high reward. Thats why we grew so quickly. You are crazy if you think redistribution of wealth to someone who didn't earn it is still going to cultivate new innovative products and ideas.

well you know maybe not. but how else would you break up large corporate entities that are growing exponentially. whats your solution?

[h2]

Originally Posted by lee majors

well you know maybe not. but how else would you break up large corporate entities that are growing exponentially. whats your solution?

Since I know you're reading these, but won't admit it: I've already offered that solution. Get the fucking government out of our market. Don't let them decided who the winners and losers are by using our tax dollars to save them. Let consumers decide which corporations are successful based on their ability to produce the best product, at the best price.

Originally Posted by h2

I've never claimed there doesn't need to be checks and balances, but those shouldn't be provided the government - it should be through transparency and a FREE market. Not this controlled "free" market we have now days. As long as corporations exist the Marxist/Left cannot control the means of production and distribution - that's reason enough for me.

[big ben]

Originally Posted by h2

Since I know you're reading these, but won't admit it: I've already offered that solution. Get the fucking government out of our market. Don't let them decided who the winners and losers are by using our tax dollars to save them. Let consumers decide which corporations are successful based on their ability to produce the best product, at the best price.

but you don't have a problem with corporations lobbying and donating?

corporations are good IN THEORY; however empirical evidence shows corporations are not innately good.

it operates on the assumption they stay within the boundaries of their field; which they don't. it goes both ways; letting them be involved on government contracting, lobbying etc. prevents the government from staying out of corporate involvement (shout out to Northrop Grumman!). just like there should be separation of church and state (I say should because there clearly isn't), there needs to be serration of corps and state

[big ben]

Originally Posted by klassik

Damn h2 has the right. Idea. Capitalism forces innovation with high reward. Thats why we grew so quickly. You are crazy if you think redistribution of wealth to someone who didn't earn it is still going to cultivate new innovative products and ideas.

ben franklin, bell, wright brothers, gates, etc....none of their inventions, or really any significant invention or discovery, has been made by corporate r&d dude


not wanting corporations to control the nation isn't communistic. capitalism and corporation are two INDEPENDANT things

[B-Dub]

Originally Posted by big ben

just like there should be separation of church and state (I say should because there clearly isn't), there needs to be serration of corps and state

tell me where in the constitution does it say "separation of church and state" because if you say first amendment then you need to learn how to read.
and yes there needs to be separation of the corps and state.

[B-Dub]

its funny, that California tried to pass a law that banned unions and corps from donating to campaigns, and it was voted down. i wonder why...