New Guy

[Hobbes' Choice]

Wrong. You have advocated a socialist system.
The only way to ensure that public money is spent on public projects is to make a strict division between those spending the money and those receiving it. The ethical instrument known as "conflict of interests" is a central plank in socialism , but seem currently absent from the US system as it stands which has obsessively privatised its services.
How many more times do I have to tell you that you view of "socialism" is utterly wrong.

"Conflic of interest" is a central plank in accountability and socialism does not have a monopoly on that.
You're view of capitalism is completely skewed.

Your idiotic claim was that such conflicts were more likely under socialism. This is palpably false. Services supplied by the local authority, can be scrutinised more effectively against corruption as the provision is "in-house". The salary structure is transparent and open to democratic sanction.

[BigWhit]

Your idiotic claim was that such conflicts were more likely under socialism. This is palpably false. Services supplied by the local authority, can be scrutinised more effectively against corruption as the provision is "in-house". The salary structure is transparent and open to democratic sanction.

My claim was that the further removed from accountability the decisions are made the more likely abuse of power. This is why I was advocating for a power structure resembling a pyramid, where local governments held a vast majority of power, because they are more easily held accountable by the populace.

You're calling me an idiot claiming that I'm saying something I'm not, then advocating for literally the exact same things I am.

[Obvious Leo]

BW. In a way you guys are saying the same thing and in a way I'm agreeing with both of you. The problem is not that there's too much government but in fact there's not enough because all the power of government is concentrated at the top where it can too easily be stolen from the people. Surely if the end result is the disenfranchisement of the people it makes no difference whether we call such a usurpation of power crony capitalism, state socialism, state capitalism or any other label of choice. Power is being taken from the hands of the many and placed into the hands of the few.

This is the point I was making about homo as a collection of tribes rather than a hive, which operates under a strictly top-down hierarchical structure. Tribes can operate together in their mutual collective interest but when one gains an unfair advantage over the other then such a system comes under stress. The anthropological record is replete with examples and I reckon it's time we woke up to what it truly means to be human. WE ARE A SOCIAL ANIMAL.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Your idiotic claim was that such conflicts were more likely under socialism. This is palpably false. Services supplied by the local authority, can be scrutinised more effectively against corruption as the provision is "in-house". The salary structure is transparent and open to democratic sanction.

My claim was that the further removed from accountability the decisions are made the more likely abuse of power. This is why I was advocating for a power structure resembling a pyramid, where local governments held a vast majority of power, because they are more easily held accountable by the populace.

You're calling me an idiot claiming that I'm saying something I'm not, then advocating for literally the exact same things I am.

I'm calling you an idiot because you are clueless about what socialism entails, and seem to think that outsourcing is better than local governments controlling the work they do.
When you outsource you loose accountability. Complaints about service directed at the government have to find their way bak to the private company. In practice they just change the company name and continue business as usual.
When the workers are the voters and tax payers their is less division of power. Socialism has always sought to put people in the process as stake-holders. ANd I do not mean financially, where their interests are alienable.

[BigWhit]

I'm calling you an idiot because you are clueless about what socialism entails, and seem to think that outsourcing is better than local governments controlling the work they do.

Outsourcing? What are you talking about?

When you outsource you loose accountability. Complaints about service directed at the government have to find their way bak to the private company. In practice they just change the company name and continue business as usual.

See above.

When the workers are the voters and tax payers their is less division of power. Socialism has always sought to put people in the process as stake-holders. ANd I do not mean financially, where their interests are alienable

And how does socialism plan on accomplishing that?

[Obvious Leo]

BW. Do you seriously not know what outsourcing means? It means paying some other bastard to do something for you which you can do far more cheaply and efficiently for yourself. The rationale behind it is that if the other bastard fucks it up then it's not your fault and you can keep your snout in the public trough indefinitely. Outsourcing is the wonder of the modern age.

[BigWhit]

BW. Do you seriously not know what outsourcing means? It means paying some other bastard to do something for you which you can do far more cheaply and efficiently for yourself. The rationale behind it is that if the other bastard fucks it up then it's not your fault and you can keep your snout in the public trough indefinitely. Outsourcing is the wonder of the modern age.

There are different types of outsourcing. Outsourcing jobs to a different country where the people with the job skills you need are cheaper, outsourcing risk and accountability like you mentioned, outsourcing payment so others pay for what you use (the premise behind "free" anythin you hear socialists talk about). I was asking for a clairification.

As for outsourcing risk, governments and government beurocracies are the biggest utilizers. In Seattle they have a project to build a fucking dumbass tunnel because they don't want another highway bridge. Cool, whatever. But Seattle officials and representatives of Seattle districts wrote up a plan where if anything went wrong the people who planned the project, the companies who perform the project, and the city wouldn't be held accountable for it. Instead, the risk is carried by the rest of the state. The project is already WELL OVER BUDGET AND BEHIND SCHEDULE but the people who put this together don't give a shit because it isn't their problem.

Hell look at Flint, MI. The water there was entirely dicked up by government and they've spent months dodging the issue without ever attepting to resolve it and now that it's a national issue all amyone can do is point fingers. Motherfuckers should be going to jail.

[Obvious Leo]

BW. Do you seriously not know what outsourcing means? It means paying some other bastard to do something for you which you can do far more cheaply and efficiently for yourself. The rationale behind it is that if the other bastard fucks it up then it's not your fault and you can keep your snout in the public trough indefinitely. Outsourcing is the wonder of the modern age.

There are different types of outsourcing. Outsourcing jobs to a different country where the people with the job skills you need are cheaper, outsourcing risk and accountability like you mentioned, outsourcing payment so others pay for what you use (the premise behind "free" anythin you hear socialists talk about). I was asking for a clairification.

As for outsourcing risk, governments and government beurocracies are the biggest utilizers. In Seattle they have a project to build a fucking dumbass tunnel because they don't want another highway bridge. Cool, whatever. But Seattle officials and representatives of Seattle districts wrote up a plan where if anything went wrong the people who planned the project, the companies who perform the project, and the city wouldn't be held accountable for it. Instead, the risk is carried by the rest of the state. The project is already WELL OVER BUDGET AND BEHIND SCHEDULE but the people who put this together don't give a shit because it isn't their problem.

Hell look at Flint, MI. The water there was entirely dicked up by government and they've spent months dodging the issue without ever attepting to resolve it and now that it's a national issue all amyone can do is point fingers. Motherfuckers should be going to jail.

Such problems are not unique to your country although they're probably a lot more severe in the US. Can you not see that the cause of all these problems is the "greed is good" mentality which underscores capitalism? You live in a dog eat dog world where it's every man for himself and tough shit for anybody who falls by the wayside. You're merely reaping what you've sown.

[BigWhit]

Such problems are not unique to your country although they're probably a lot more severe in the US. Can you not see that the cause of all these problems is the "greed is good" mentality which underscores capitalism? You live in a dog eat dog world where it's every man for himself and tough shit for anybody who falls by the wayside. You're merely reaping what you've sown.

I actually "lol'd" at that one. You have just as laughably false a definition of capitalism as HC.

In a capitalist system big businesses must make their money by selling a product. That product must be desired and affordable. The less people that want to buy their product the less they sell and the less profit. Same with affordability. So the influence on the economy is for lower prices and higher quality. Furthering this is market competition. In order to convince a potential customer to buy their product they either need to provide better quality or lower cost, or some combination thereof which adds up to a better cost to quality. Increased are invested back into production and prices fall even further, until price equilibrium is reached. Even after equilibrium is reached there is still upward pressure on quality from competition.

The dog eat dog world your talking about is businesses eating businesses. When certain businesses fail, others buy up the capitol they had at cheap rates and put them to use for themselves. But this benefits the entire society as that capitol is still utilized to produce and the people who are needed to run it are hired as well.

It is excessive tax and mandatory wage rates which force companies to outsource labor to cut costs so they can continue to stay competetive in the market. If the US wishes to bring jobs back here from China they have to make it cheaper to produce here than it is to ship raw materials all the way to China, have them make it, and then ship those products all the way back across the Pacific ocean (at a pretty big cost to fuel) to sell here.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Such problems are not unique to your country although they're probably a lot more severe in the US. Can you not see that the cause of all these problems is the "greed is good" mentality which underscores capitalism? You live in a dog eat dog world where it's every man for himself and tough shit for anybody who falls by the wayside. You're merely reaping what you've sown.

I actually "lol'd" at that one. You have just as laughably false a definition of capitalism as HC.

In a capitalist system big businesses must make their money by selling a product. That product must be desired and affordable. The less people that want to buy their product the less they sell and the less profit. Same with affordability. So the influence on the economy is for lower prices and higher quality. Furthering this is market competition. In order to convince a potential customer to buy their product they either need to provide better quality or lower cost, or some combination thereof which adds up to a better cost to quality. Increased are invested back into production and prices fall even further, until price equilibrium is reached. Even after equilibrium is reached there is still upward pressure on quality from competition.

The dog eat dog world your talking about is businesses eating businesses. When certain businesses fail, others buy up the capitol they had at cheap rates and put them to use for themselves. But this benefits the entire society as that capitol is still utilized to produce and the people who are needed to run it are hired as well.

It is excessive tax and mandatory wage rates which force companies to outsource labor to cut costs so they can continue to stay competetive in the market. If the US wishes to bring jobs back here from China they have to make it cheaper to produce here than it is to ship raw materials all the way to China, have them make it, and then ship those products all the way back across the Pacific ocean (at a pretty big cost to fuel) to sell here.

You are completely fucked here. Up shit creek without a paddle. Capitalism is constructed in such a way that as long and the powerful are enriching themselves the rest of society can go fuck itself. This is the trend. Equilibrium os a myth. I'm puzzled why you can't see this. The end game is one man holding all the cards with the rest of the world enslaved. Though it will never reach that, without some mitigating forces, that is the trend. Democracy is a countering force. Maybe you'd rather live without that?

[BigWhit]

If anything could possibly make me believe any more that socialism is nothing more than a religion it's talking with you, HC. Please keep dodging my questions and calling the the equivalent of a devil worshipper...

[Hobbes' Choice]

If anything could possibly make me believe any more that socialism is nothing more than a religion it's talking with you, HC. Please keep dodging my questions and calling the the equivalent of a devil worshipper...

I've obviously touched a nerve here. Capitalism has not moderating force, except socialism.
You know I'm talking sense and you have no where to turn except a cheap insult.
Tut tut.

[BigWhit]

Still no answer to the question I've posted repeatedly.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Still no answer to the question I've posted repeatedly.

Which is what?

[BigWhit]

Still no answer to the question I've posted repeatedly.

Which is what?

Seriously, are there any socialists or communists who would like to explain the finer details of their economic model?

How do you expect to keep the wealthy from using government itself from tipping the scales in their own favor?