bobevenson wrote:The real world is a world of free-market capitalism, where you can fire somebody if you don't like the way he combs his fucking hair. ...
Yeah! So give me your wife and daughters or you're on the breadline.
What do you do for a living bob? As apparently you've never had to work for someone.
Norway is a make-believe world of hard-core socialism, where you can be sued for farting.
bobevenson wrote:The real world is a world of free-market capitalism, where you can fire somebody if you don't like the way he combs his fucking hair. ...
Yeah! So give me your wife and daughters or you're on the breadline.
What do you do for a living bob? As apparently you've never had to work for someone.
Norway is a make-believe world of hard-core socialism, where you can be sued for farting.
Oh, the irony! This from the Land of Litigation.
Under Evensonomics, you can't sue anybody for anything.
bobevenson wrote:Under Evensonomics, you can't sue anybody for anything.
Great! Then I'll sell you adulterated bread and salmonella eggs.
No, since the only proper function of government is social integration, the government will take the necessary action to neutralize your anti-social tendencies, which are obviously quite extensive.
bobevenson wrote:No, since the only proper function of government is social integration, the government will take the necessary action to neutralize your anti-social tendencies, which are obviously quite extensive.
'm not being anti-social! I'm a good free-market capitalist and maximising my profits by cutting back on the flour proportion and the over-burden of hygiene checks foisted upon me by a nanny state.
I've asked you a few times but I'm a sucker for perseverance, what do you mean by "social integration"? What does this describe?
bobevenson wrote:No, since the only proper function of government is social integration, the government will take the necessary action to neutralize your anti-social tendencies, which are obviously quite extensive.
'm not being anti-social! I'm a good free-market capitalist and maximising my profits by cutting back on the flour proportion and the over-burden of hygiene checks foisted upon me by a nanny state.
I've asked you a few times but I'm a sucker for perseverance, what do you mean by "social integration"? What does this describe?
As I have said many times before, the only proper function of government is social integration, like a traffic cop keeping people from running over each other. If you can't generalize from this simple statement, thank you for not boring me with any stupid questions.
bobevenson wrote:As I have said many times before, the only proper function of government is social integration, like a traffic cop keeping people from running over each other. If you can't generalize from this simple statement, thank you for not boring me with any stupid questions.
So things like paying for an independent judiciary to ensure equality under the law and that business contracts are honoured, running a tax office to ensure revenue for all the social functions that would not be provided under a free-market free-for all, running a health and hygiene system to mitigate the rightful actions of the free-marketeer to make profits however they can. Things like that?
If you're going to sell this idea to the public bob its time you started fleshing out the details as just saying 'social integration' is to vague.
Under a free market, it is the government's responsibility to see that people aren't subjected to things like fraud, violence, and unseen dangers, but it is not government's responsibility to take people like you by the hand and lead them thru life.
bobevenson wrote:Under a free market, it is the government's responsibility to see that people aren't subjected to things like fraud, violence, and unseen dangers, but it is not government's responsibility to take people like you by the hand and lead them thru life.
Never said it was bob, just that your idea that a govt can fulfil its functions without having employees and turning it all over to private companies in a free-market is a nonsense, which is exactly why we don't do it. That there are many functions that could benefit from such an approach I don't disagree with but your blanket assertion is just too problematic. Its why i say you'll have to start fleshing-out your ideas if you ever wish them to become implemented.
bobevenson wrote:Under a free market, it is the government's responsibility to see that people aren't subjected to things like fraud, violence, and unseen dangers, but it is not government's responsibility to take people like you by the hand and lead them thru life.
Never said it was bob, just that your idea that a govt can fulfil its functions without having employees and turning it all over to private companies in a free-market is a nonsense, which is exactly why we don't do it. That there are many functions that could benefit from such an approach I don't disagree with but your blanket assertion is just too problematic. Its why i say you'll have to start fleshing-out your ideas if you ever wish them to become implemented.
You understand neither the political nor the economic, so I'll let your vacuous comments slide.
bobevenson wrote:You understand neither the political nor the economic, so I'll let your vacuous comments slide.
Your usual get-out clause when faced with having to think of a reply to your thoughts.
Its why your dreams will stay safely in your head.
All government workers, from the president on down, should be on a private company's payroll. You speak of nonsense, which, of course, you have a virtual monopoly, so don't waste it on me.
Arising_uk wrote:Then there is no government is there boob. Just employees to the capitalist concern.
Ultimately, the government is responsible for the results. But remember, any meaningful work can only done by profit-making companies facing the discipline of a free market.
bobevenson wrote:Ultimately, the government is responsible for the results. But remember, any meaningful work can only done by profit-making companies facing the discipline of a free market.
Actually I think Marx was essentially right here and any meaningful work can only be done by those who labour. The rest of us freeload upon their backs and then look down upon them. But then you'd have to say what you mean by "meaningful" in this "meaningful work"? What is it you do for a living?
