Trump

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Trump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoXGV4Vw-VA

[Ken MacDonald]

Re: Trump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoXGV4Vw-VA

Lest some miss the point of this posted YOUTUBE item, the last few words are very important to hear CNN's true beliefs!!

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

Under the heading There's Nothing New Under The Sun:

"...many newspapers North and South lying to their readers and pandering to party and special interests..."

- Carl Sandburg, 'Abraham Lincoln - The War Years 1861 to 1865'

It seems it doesn't matter whether we're in the 21st century CE or BCE, we can always count on human nature to lead us down the low road.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Trump

Lest some miss the point of this posted YOUTUBE item, the last few words are very important to hear CNN's true beliefs!!

Ken, I don't follow. Isn't this an MSNBC video ?

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

Ken, I don't follow. Isn't this an MSNBC video ?

No doubt Ken meant to say MSNBC but, regardless, those last few words were very interesting. My guess is that the reporter made a poor choice of words during an ad libbed conversation but, still, kind of makes you wonder what really goes on 'at the top'.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

Bob, thought you might enjoy this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...siness/514358/

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Trump

Bob, thought you might enjoy this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...siness/514358/

Thanks Peter. That is a great article. :) Couldn't put it down!

Here is an interview for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeNQXihJJXw

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Trump

Bob, thought you might enjoy this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...siness/514358/

"... Monopoly provides much of the funds the wealthy use to distort American politics. ..."

I trust people reading and agreeing to this will be voting Libertarian. Making government larger will not crush monopolies. It will embolden them to buy off more government.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

"... Monopoly provides much of the funds the wealthy use to distort American politics. ..."

I trust people reading and agreeing to this will be voting Libertarian. Making government larger will not crush monopolies. It will embolden them to buy off more government.

Whereas making government much smaller (which means making government regulation also much smaller) will.... what? Crush monopolies? Dream on.

If neither larger nor smaller governments can curb monopolies, and if unfettered monopolies grow faster than the rate of population growth, eventually we must all become consumed by the monopolies that win the Darwinian survival of the fittest struggle -- all of them.

But it could be that when that process is actually underway in a particular society, that society is already in serious decline and is fated to implode.... and be replaced by another society in which the growth of monopolies is at a much earlier, perhaps even embryonic, stage. This could explain in a macro sense the unceasing (albeit slow, by human lifetime measure) rise and fall of great civilizations.

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Trump

Whereas making government much smaller (which means making government regulation also much smaller) will.... what? Crush monopolies? Dream on.

If neither larger nor smaller governments can curb monopolies, and if unfettered monopolies grow faster than the rate of population growth, eventually we must all become consumed by the monopolies that win the Darwinian survival of the fittest struggle -- all of them.

But it could be that when that process is actually underway in a particular society, that society is already in serious decline and is fated to implode.... and be replaced by another society in which the growth of monopolies is at a much earlier, perhaps even embryonic, stage. This could explain in a macro sense the unceasing (albeit slow, by human lifetime measure) rise and fall of great civilizations.

https://news.ontario.ca/mohltc/en/20...nuary-1st.html

"... Starting January 1, Ontario will be the first province in Canada to require food service providers with 20 or more locations in the province -- such as restaurants, coffee shops, convenience stores, grocery stores and movie theatres -- to include the number of calories for each food and beverage item on their menus, labels or tags. ..."

Ask yourself why it only applies to providers with 20 or more locations. I will speculate that probably because it is relatively inexpensive for say McDonald's to provide this information per location than it is for the local diner to provide it. But this is just one regulation. What about the other regulations that have nothing to do with human safety that food service providers must adhere to? They are also relatively inexpensive per location for big players but crippling for smaller ones.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

https://news.ontario.ca/mohltc/en/20...nuary-1st.html

"... Starting January 1, Ontario will be the first province in Canada to require food service providers with 20 or more locations in the province -- such as restaurants, coffee shops, convenience stores, grocery stores and movie theatres -- to include the number of calories for each food and beverage item on their menus, labels or tags. ..."

Ask yourself why it only applies to providers with 20 or more locations. I will speculate that probably because it is relatively inexpensive for say McDonald's to provide this information per location than it is for the local diner to provide it. But this is just one regulation. What about the other regulations that have nothing to do with human safety that food service providers must adhere to? They are also relatively inexpensive per location for big players but crippling for smaller ones.

I bolded the part that seems to be the crux of your point.

Firstly, let's agree that "the government" is not perfect in coming up with regulations. And this is true going back centuries; in fact, there are still outdated regulations from the 1800's that remain in effect for certain municipalities and even provinces / states and even the federal government.

But it seems overreaching in the extreme to conclude from this that government should be minimized as much as possible as a means of regulation of the economy. For every bad regulation, there may be 10 good ones. That is, good in the sense that it protects things like the environment or the less fortunate members of society or one segment of the economy versus another or even the overall working of the economy itself... against the monopolies that would run asunder over all these things in the pursuit of profit.

Tom, I'd like to get your thoughts on the last recession in the U.S. from 2008 to 2012 roughly.... because that recession was such proof positive of the nefarious effect of unhindered corporation activity hurting -- in fact, almost killing -- the overall economy of the U.S. I'm referring, of course, to the unregulated buying and selling of mortgage-backed securities that brought too-big-to-fail enterprises such as AIG, JP Morgan, General Motors etc. to their knees. After all that, how is it even possible to be Libertarian? In a simpler day without all the interconnectedness that we know of in this century, Libertarianism has its appeal, but it seems now to be completely anachronistic. Didn't that recession prove that deregulation of the economy poses GREAT risk to the smooth operation of the economy? That unhindered pursuit of greed by corporations can bring everything down in a hurry?

And as further proofs of what corporations will do when unchecked by regulation, or to get around such regulation: the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.... the massive and perverse Volkswagon scandal regarding falsification of EPA emissions tests.... the Japanese nuclear disaster in Fukushima (hey, let's build a flimsy nuclear power plant on a very active earthquake fault line!).... the multi-billion $ Wells Fargo scandal in which millions of customers were deliberately and perversely overcharged for account services they had no need of... the use of lead and asbestos and formaldehyde in construction projects, paints, municipal water pipes, all in the name of cost savings.... need I go on?

Come on, Tom, do you not care one iota about your fellow humanity? About the (thin veneer of) civilization we have managed to create to advance ourselves? About our scientific progress? If anything, you should be in FAVOR of government regulation. Imperfect, to be sure. But perhaps the only chance we have to make it through these difficult times.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Trump

And as further proofs of what corporations will do when unchecked by regulation, or to get around such regulation: the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.... the massive and perverse Volkswagon scandal regarding falsification of EPA emissions tests.... the Japanese nuclear disaster in Fukushima (hey, let's build a flimsy nuclear power plant on a very active earthquake fault line!).... the multi-billion $ Wells Fargo scandal in which millions of customers were deliberately and perversely overcharged for account services they had no need of... the use of lead and asbestos and formaldehyde in construction projects, paints, municipal water pipes, all in the name of cost savings.... need I go on?

Come on, Tom, do you not care one iota about your fellow humanity?

Great post Paul. I was thinking along the same lines. I get tired of all this complaining about over regulation. Government and regulation is the necessary counter balance against corporate greed.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

Great post Paul. I was thinking along the same lines. I get tired of all this complaining about over regulation. Government and regulation is the necessary counter balance against corporate greed.

I agree wholeheartedly. And thanks for your post with the link to the video with an interview with David Frum. I had never heard of him before, and will have to find out more about him. He seems a fantastic intellect and very articulate as well, really understanding what is going on in U.S. politics.

[Dilip Panjwani]

What Libertarianism is, and what it isn't

Libertarianism is not a system (or lack thereof) which simply allows laissez-faire capitalism.
It is governance which both the Left and the Right can cherish as a panacea:
1. It is devoted to ensuring that anyone who harms / deceives / exploits any other is called to justice by having to fully and urgently compensate the victim.
2. It eliminates crony capitalism and ensures that both the rich and the poor have equal access to capital; this is the key to 'market forces' being able to achieve what they have been professed to.
3. It gives free rein (with no imposition whatsoever) to individuals indulging in positive human activities like co-operation / innovation / charity, alongside the healthy competition of the market.

A few years ago I wrote a book on 'Meritocracy' outlining the logistics of how such a system would function in human society (the economics, the sociology, the science, the evolution of it all); did not publish it as I thought it was way ahead of its time...

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: What Libertarianism is, and what it isn't

A few years ago I wrote a book on 'Meritocracy' outlining the logistics of how such a system would function in human society (the economics, the sociology, the science, the evolution of it all); did not publish it as I thought it was way ahead of its time...

Thanks for your kind consideration towards us dumb people.