the myth of the free market

We'll just have to disagree here.

Just because a person can't change a tire on a car doesn't mean the service providers needs a governmental approved mechanic's four year qualification and licence to open a shop that repairs tires that's regularly inspected by government agents to ensure tires are being changed correctly. The free-market will do this and do it cheaper and better. Just as it will for everything. And by everything, I mean, everything. All things.


Think of it like this, do you want to live as we do in the USA (if I remember you're Canadian?)? Suppose we change the gun laws around where you live to be like they are in Florida - where you must, by law, own a gun. Suppose we force you pay for income tax to support American adventurism? Wouldn't it be odd? But, lets say the 'New Rule' is, we'll take a majority vote of ALL the people living in "North America" and, regardless of what nationality you are, the 'majority' vote would rule - and the majority says Canadians have to own guns like Floridians. Would you think that's good? Bad? Immoral? Moral? Why? Just because you're not a US Citizen? Why should that matter?

But it does matter doesn't it?


I'm sure you'd intuitively know these things, being forced upon you, are not moral. They'd feel wrong because Nationalism is a superstition. AND thus a Super-Nationalism (we'll call it North-Americanism - is just as a superstition). BUT, maybe, once you were convinced (brainwashed) to think you're a "US Citizen" or a "North American National" then you may think, oh, I'm in the in-group. It's now OK. Or at least it's legal now. And, we do have to follow the majority - right? I mean, we do live in a 'democracy' - right?

It's not OK. It's not fine. It's wrong.

Nationalism is a superstition and 200 years ago "Americans" understood this quite well. Many ignored the Federal Government. I personally think one of the reasons we started out with a small Federal Government is they damn well knew they didn't have the fire-power to use force against "Americans". The country was too big. The money was limited. Personal liberty was too deeply engraved in the local psyche. They just couldn't do it. Of course, some people always wanted a small non-intrusive government. Why? Because we all know that Government's have a monopoly on legal use of force. Government Bureaucrates are the VERY LAST PEOPLE you want with ANY amount of control over your life. Think about that. The legal ability to initiate force against other humans. A Criminal's dream! Which is why criminals are drawn to politics like flies to shit. When you see Obama or Mittens - you should think: these people ARE the criminals of society. They'd stab you in the guts just for the fun of it. They're the worse sycophants in the world. Not to mention hooked on their own dopamine like crack whores - and are only to happy to turn tricks for their pimps on Wall Street to get more of it.


It's all around a lose-lose.

This becomes very clear when you look at the sad state of Communist North Korea or how poor the civil liberties are for people in Iran or KSA. There, the government won. The people are 100% subject to the whims of these sociopaths.

Think about Bush or Cheney. I mean, these psychopaths started two major wars, killed thousands of women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan. They literally LIED baldfaced and did you see how quickly Americans, Canadians, Australians lined up like ducks and Jack-boot marched their children off to die in distance lands. It's literally like we're living in Crazy-World. Literally, CRAZY WORLD.

Even somewhat intelligent people seem to put their brain on hold when their in-group is threatened. Be it a Religious or Secular Institution.

I just find it mindbogglingly.




I have a question: What do you think about public education and teachers unions? Why is, do you suppose, the average pay of teachers in Chicago is $73,000 while the average pay of a person living and working in Chicago is $35,000? That's not even including the 4 months holiday, life time employment, health benefits, etc... Why is it, do you think, >40% of public school teachers send their children to private school? Why is it, do you think, >80% of politicians (including Democrats who demagogue this issue in support of the Public Unions) send their children to Private School for their education?

I mean, doesn't this smell of rot? The very same people who spew this crap about 'Supporting the Education of 'THE' Children' are the sending THEIR children to private schools and home tutoring. I mean, come on. When almost half of PUBLIC school teachers send their own children to PRIVATE schools.

You don't think maybe they know a thing or two?
Actions don't speak louder than words?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The current generation under 30 is far less trusting of state authority than any previous generation. Have you ever seen a WWII propaganda film? Do you think the state could get away with something like that now???

People now have too much freedom and not enough 'meaning' in their lives...which perhaps explains all the prozac and suicide rates.

Meaning requires a sense of belonging, purpose and continuity.

The state and the community used to provide that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have duel citizenship...born in the US but grew up in Canada. I wouldnt call it 'American adventurism' because that denotes independence and free will. The US government is essentially a rabble of puppets.

They are dependant on the Israeli lobby and their fanatical evangelical minions.
They are dependant on private interests in the financial sector and military industrial complex.
They are dependant on foreign energy reserves.
They are dependant on China's productive capacity and endless money lending.

Sound like a sovereign swashbuckling adventurous nation to you???

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The federal government is easy to ignore when life is local and there is no income tax...but the people still rallied to war when the government called, and force was sometimes used against US citizens.

One example would be the whiskey rebellion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

 

Pretty crazy isn't it? I mean, no sooner we were 'free' than the new Tyrants wanted their pound of flesh.
As I understand it, the government pulled back and George Washington greatly regretted it and it was mainly at the behest of Hamilton - who of course was a socialist. Which is the classical MO for socialism TTYTT. You can see it here in the USA. Pay your income tax 'for the good of society' or we toss you in prison - YOU use the roads! The Communist Chinese killed off WAY MORE Chinese than the Imperialist Japanese - who were actually there conquering them!

And those were just a few honest Americans trying to make an honest living.

 

What's community like in CA? In AU it's gone. I mean, totally nonexistent. Think of those cold winter winds that howl through the forest - that's warming than community in 'socialist' Australia. All the Australians I know complain about how they don't know any of their neighbors any longer. Maybe in the country country side - but that has it's own problems. Gone are the days of weekend BBQs. Gone are the days of Community.

Really sad if you ask me.

 

To true.

When you mentioned the WWII propaganda films.... well, think about 9/11 and how quick Americans were to line up and jackboot their children off to Iraq... which had NOTHING to do with 9/11. People still fall for the same ole bullshit. At least in WWII the Japanese actually did attack us (or I should say attacked out warships on a day they knew most people would not be in them - unlike us, we actually bomb god damn wedding parties and funerals using predator drones.... *sigh*)

 

Sure...revolutions cost money, Hamilton had to tax something and what could be better than turning something as stupid and unhealthy as WHISKEY into the founding of a nation?

Hamilton was a Federalist...socialism wasnt even an idea at the time.

The Federalist party was really the founding ideology of America and managed to stay in power until 1800.

Interestingly, George Washington himself was never a member of any political party and warned against their tendency to divide nations.

 

Too much mobility fractures community...all the people I grew up with in school are now scattered all over the globe.

 

Well at least nobody was drafted...had that been the case we'd have war protests that make the Vietnam era look like a girl scout picnic!

President Lyndon Johnson even wanted to conscript married men with children!!!

 

Think about what you're saying. Revolutions cost money, and so we'll just tax these few people over here making Whiskey.

That is not fair.

Let's just replace the word tax with steal. Let's steal some money from these guys and pay these other guys.

That's not right.

Who lent the money? What was put up for collateral? What was promised to whom and by whom? Why wouldn't the entire nation pay a 'tax' right at the start? Why target a few people making a singular product. And just who gets this money? Whiskey's not even a natural resource.

 

Not yet.... I wouldn't be one bit surprised if the government doesn't cut off the 'free' money (aka social services) and as a carrot (maybe a literal carrot!) simply ask for the first born son .....of fighting age.... gotta protect the boarders and all that jazzz....... see, we sold off and spent your kid's labor - now we need to feed off the blood that's left over.

 

This is why I say the money should change in value instead. As it is, the people are expected to move to where the work is. The work is where the labor is cheapest. When you're trained to be a cheap cog - that's pretty much your only choice if you don't want to end up trapped in welfare.

 

If you want to call taxation stealing...we could just as easily say that poor people who pay no tax are stealing when they use public services provided by taxation.

We could just as easily say that a whiskey tax is a free gift to people who need food...because lower whiskey consumption leads to lower food prices, as whiskey production requires grain.

Theres no way to make this subject smell like a summer rose Michael. There will always be inequalities inherent in any taxation system.

The point is, the government needs money...ok?

And theres nothing better than transferring money from something stupid to something of real value.

 

America doesnt seem to have any borders anymore...notice how 'supporting our troops' is fluffed with statements about 'defending our freedoms'?

Was America's involvement in WWII an example of 'defending our freedoms'???

 

This is an excellent point...absolutely right! Currency manipulation is the driving wheel of Asian mercantilism...the whole western world is its hapless victim.

 

That is not generally true. There are instances in which capital moves to places with lower labor costs, but that situation doesn't persist - the presence of jobs steadily drives up labor costs there. Likewise there are plenty of instances in which capital cannot so move, or where the labor force considerations are more about talent than cost. Silicon Valley has tons of jobs - they can't fill them fast enough - and also one of the highest labor costs on the continent. Moving your tech company out to Mississippi where people will work for peanuts wouldn't help: you'd be unable to find workers with the skills to perform the work, at any wage.

If you are talking strictly about unskilled labor, then there is something to your statement. In that case, all an employer cares about is labor costs, and not skill level. But unskilled workers have a bigger problem than capital mobility: technology. The next step after shifting operations to arbitrage labor costs, is to replace unskilled labor entirely with robotics.

What workers need to do is invest in their own skills, and so value. Chasing capital around in the hopes of staying ahead of automation is a mug's game.

 

They pay when they purchase gasoline as the tax is in the gas and you volunteer to pay it when you buy the gas. Income tax on the other hand taxes the owner for selling his labor.


As for the Whiskey Tax - how is this different from Tea Tax?

 

Then I'd say we should have both. Both a free market in labor and free market in money.

As it is now, the it's the labor that is expected to change value and in the process migrate. This is touted as one of the wonderful things about America's economy. The Cogs can easily move to where the machines are - Yea us!

 

Income tax is a tax on being alive. If you dont earn an income you are dead.

Whiskey and tea are almost opposites. The caffeine in tea gets you going in the morning, and the L-theanine calms you down. All positive life-enhancing qualities.

Alcoholic drinks on the other hand, are perhaps the greatest chemical provocation to crime and accidents in human history.