User Tag List

First 61415161718 Last

Results 151 to 160 of 246

  1. #151
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    You're losing the point, so I'll help you find your way back to it.

    The difference between corporations and gubmints:

    Corporations don't have the right to start wars. And even if they could invest in AND conduct warfare,
    This is a moot point, just because a mafia boss hires a hitman to carry out a murder, it does not follow that only the hitman is culpable in the crime. If I pay the Administrators on this forum $50,000 to have you banned, it wouldn't make any sense to argue that I am not responsible for this injustice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    wars are too expensive and unprofitable.
    They are very profitable.

    Case in point 1: Guatemala of 1953, socialist president Jacobo Arbenz instituted agrarian reforms that undermine the business activities of the United Fruit Company. The company makes financial contributions to the U.S government to stage a coup d'etat that deposes Arbenz and replaces him with a leader who allows the corporations to operate coffee plantations with legal impunity. Clearly, the financial costs associated with the coup were overshadowed by the profits that the corporations gained in the end. America's leading coffee corporations still have hundreds of plantations based in Guatemala where enormous profits are gained by oppressing workers.

    Case in point 2: Chile of 1973, Salvador Allende implements land-reform programs that severely undermine the financial success of America's leading corporations including the IBM. The Corporations make a financial contribution to the U.S government that in turn provides the Chilean military with $10 million to subvert Allende. The corporations may have donated far more than $10 million, but by deposing Allende, they stood to make tens of millions.

    Case in point 3: U.S corporations that provide military technology profited a great deal from the War and it is possible that they made financial contributions to persuade the Bush Administration to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Gubmints have the right to start wars.
    Moderators have a right to ban you, but if I was paying for all of the expenses on this site and was paying each of the moderators an annual salary that quadruples what they make at their jobs, they'd be banning anyone I'd ask them to. Does this mean that we should conclude that I've had nothing to do with any of the objectionable actions they have engaged in?


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Gubmints start wars, gubmints drop bombs, gubmints killed hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century through violence and starvation.
    In part, because they needed to protect the business interests of their leading corporations. That is not what happened during the World Wars, but the institution of a transnational corporation was not as highly developed as it is now. As a general rule, modern international conflicts tend to be "Fortune 500" wars and that is the new trend.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Your argument that corporations profit from gubmint wars, and your argument that politicians are sometimes involved in "big business," don't wash because it evades my point.
    Your point is that only the party carrying out the dirty work is culpable for the crime and that's rather implausible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    If corporations could DECLARE wars on other countries,
    Irrelevant, see above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    if corporations could drop bombs,,
    Again, if I was paying every mod a six figure salary, I could have you banned despite that I wouldn't have the formal authority to ban you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    if corporations could kill hundreds of millions of people through violence and starvation,
    They've already done that at their Guatemala plantations and several southeast Asian sweatshops, but they've spared enough people to keep their facilities run. Most of the time, corporations kill through the proxy of government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    then your criticism of EEEEEEVILLL corporations would be on target.
    Yeah, Carlo Gambino's under-boss ordered many of the murders that took place in New York in the 50 and 60s, but Carlo just paid the under-boss's salary, he obviously had nothing to do with any of those crimes.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  2. #152
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    This is a moot point, just because a mafia boss hires a hitman to carry out a murder, it does not follow that only the hitman is culpable in the crime. If I pay the Administrators on this forum $50,000 to have you banned, it wouldn't make any sense to argue that I am not responsible for this injustice?



    They are very profitable.

    Case in point 1: Guatemala of 1953, socialist president Jacobo Arbenz instituted agrarian reforms that undermine the business activities of the United Fruit Company. The company makes financial contributions to the U.S government to stage a coup d'etat that deposes Arbenz and replaces him with a leader who allows the corporations to operate coffee plantations with legal impunity. Clearly, the financial costs associated with the coup were overshadowed by the profits that the corporations gained in the end. America's leading coffee corporations still have hundreds of plantations based in Guatemala where enormous profits are gained by oppressing workers.

    Case in point 2: Chile of 1973, Salvador Allende implements land-reform programs that severely undermine the financial success of America's leading corporations including the IBM. The Corporations make a financial contribution to the U.S government that in turn provides the Chilean military with $10 million to subvert Allende. The corporations may have donated far more than $10 million, but by deposing Allende, they stood to make tens of millions.

    Case in point 3: U.S corporations that provide military technology profited a great deal from the War and it is possible that they made financial contributions to persuade the Bush Administration to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.




    Moderators have a right to ban you, but if I was paying for all of the expenses on this site and was paying each of the moderators an annual salary that quadruples what they make at their jobs, they'd be banning anyone I'd ask them to. Does this mean that we should conclude that I've had nothing to do with any of the objectionable actions they have engaged in?




    In part, because they needed to protect the business interests of their leading corporations. That is not what happened during the World Wars, but the institution of a transnational corporation was not as highly developed as it is now. As a general rule, modern international conflicts tend to be "Fortune 500" wars and that is the new trend.



    Your point is that only the party carrying out the dirty work is culpable for the crime and that's rather implausible.



    Irrelevant, see above.



    Again, if I was paying every mod a six figure salary, I could have you banned despite that I wouldn't have the formal authority to ban you.



    They've already done that at their Guatemala plantations and several southeast Asian sweatshops, but they've spared enough people to keep their facilities run. Most of the time, corporations kill through the proxy of government.



    Yeah, Carlo Gambino's under-boss ordered many of the murders that took place in New York in the 50 and 60s, but Carlo just paid the under-boss's salary, he obviously had nothing to do with any of those crimes.
    You only want to talk about your own point, so go ahead, but talk to the hand. Because nothing those sweatshops or Gambinos have done can equal the destructive power of gubmints. "As a general rule, modern international conflicts tend to be "Fortune 500" wars and that is the new trend." Not really, since wars have been started over international trading disputes.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  3. #153
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    You only want to talk about your own point, so go ahead, but talk to the hand..
    My point is a response to your claim that governments gave the official orders to carry out far more sinister crimes than corporations did is that the governments committed many of these crimes because of the corporations. For example, the U.S government was influenced by the corporations to stage a coup in Guatemala, Chile and Iran. The corporations have also influenced the government to invade Grenada, Panama, Iraq and Afghanistan.

    I am not ignoring your claim and starting a conversation about my own, I am responding directly to your statement: the governments committed the atrocities that you're talking about in large part because they were appeasing the corporations.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Not really, since wars have been started over international trading disputes.
    Give me one example of a war that was started over international trading disputes that corporations did not play a large role in starting?
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #154
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    My point is a response to your claim that governments gave the official orders to carry out far more sinister crimes than corporations did is that the governments committed many of these crimes because of the corporations. For example, the U.S government was influenced by the corporations to stage a coup in Guatemala, Chile and Iran. The corporations have also influenced the government to invade Grenada, Panama, Iraq and Afghanistan.

    I am not ignoring your claim and starting a conversation about my own, I am responding directly to your statement: the governments committed the atrocities that you're talking about in large part because they were appeasing the corporations.
    I know, but you're bypassing my point that gubmints started the wars and waged the wars that were influenced by corporations. And your point about guvmint "appeasing" corporations is strange. I can see how Obama is appeasing the Euro-libs with his Obamascare. It's been obvious that Obama is an appeaser since before he was first elected Pres. He's simply not a corporate appeaser. Do you mean Bush II?


    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Give me one example of a war that was started over international trading disputes that corporations did not play a large role in starting?
    Such wars were fought before corporations came into existence. Wars are no longer fought over trading commodities or control over trading routes - BECAUSE, corporations conduct business by contract and not by threat of violence.
    For example:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_War_of_1812
    "There were several immediate stated causes for the U.S. declaration of war: First, a series of trade restrictions introduced by Britain to impede American trade with France..."
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  5. #155
    Striving for balance Little Linguist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    xNFP
    Posts
    6,885

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cimarron View Post
    I will say I admire people who put their money where their mouth is.

    And remember, your ancestors were immigrants to America, who left from their home country in search of a better life. So it's traditionally American, in a way, to leave your country if your country has left you. How's that for patriotism?

    So, good luck, sir.
    Exactly!

  6. #156
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Yes Republicans push resources to their constituencies, but at least we don't get on the cross claiming that either you agree with us or you're a moral failure per se.
    You never heard Republicans talk about single mothers like they are a moral failure?
    And ask Republicans if they think churches should still be tax exempt. See if that gets you any moral indignation.
    And of course, my favorite one, when Mitt Romney claimed to be a self made man because he gave away his father's inheritance in 1995. I guess being a son of the president of American Motors Corporation AND a state governor didn't give him a leg up over anyone else in the state of Michigan. No, he got it all through the sweat of his brow -- not like those mooches who get canned due a crisis not of their making. Their unemployment benefits should be cut, because "boot straps".

    I know you picked a side and you're going balls to the wall with it, but even if you don't admit that to anyone else, at least admit it to yourself.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  7. #157
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    It's been obvious that Obama is an appeaser since before he was first elected Pres. He's simply not a corporate appeaser.

    Obama is in fact a corporate appeaser, if he wasn't, how would he have found a way to outspend McCain and Romney in his Presidential Campaigns?

    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    He's simply not a corporate appeaser. Do you mean Bush II?
    Both gained power by receiving munificent corporate contributions and those were granted with the understanding that the President would further their business endeavors.





    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Such wars were fought before corporations came into existence. Wars are no longer fought over trading commodities or control over trading routes - BECAUSE, corporations conduct business by contract and not by threat of violence.
    For example:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_War_of_1812
    "There were several immediate stated causes for the U.S. declaration of war: First, a series of trade restrictions introduced by Britain to impede American trade with France..."
    We already covered this, modern wars are Fortune 500 wars, but that's a very new trend. Modern corporations achieve success with the assistance of the U.S government that uses violence to ensure that foreign markets act favorably to the interests of American corporations. Are you going to try to argue that the fact that the U.S government intervened in over 72 different countries had nothing to do with corporate interests? Did the Argentine and Chilean juntas slaughter thousands of socialists because they simply thought this was a good idea? No, they did so because they thought that with the support of the U.S government and their corporate financiers, they could get away with any crime against humanity, regardless of how egregious.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  8. #158
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    .


    Obama is in fact a corporate appeaser, if he wasn't, how would he have found a way to outspend McCain and Romney in his Presidential Campaigns?

    . Both gained power by receiving munificent corporate contributions and those were granted with the understanding that the President would further their business endeavors.

    Do you think Obama's plan to provide electricity to Africa is a form of corporate appeasing?



    .

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    We already covered this, modern wars are Fortune 500 wars, but that's a very new trend. Modern corporations achieve success with the assistance of the U.S government that uses violence to ensure that foreign markets act favorably to the interests of American corporations. Are you going to try to argue that the fact that the U.S government intervened in over 72 different countries had nothing to do with corporate interests? Did the Argentine and Chilean juntas slaughter thousands of socialists because they simply thought this was a good idea? No, they did so because they thought that with the support of the U.S government and their corporate financiers, they could get away with any crime against humanity, regardless of how egregious.
    We haven't covered it at all, or else why did you ask me to name a single war started over trade? I have provided it, and moreover, I used it as evidence that corporations don't start wars over commodities and trade routes, gubmints do.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  9. #159
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Do you think Obama's plan to provide electricity to Africa is a form of corporate appeasing?.
    Not everything that he does is a form of corporate appeasing.



    .


    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    I have provided it, and moreover, I used it as evidence that corporations don't start wars over commodities and trade routes, gubmints do.
    Your position is that these governments would still start wars even if the corporations did not exist?
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  10. #160
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,991

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Not everything that he does is a form of corporate appeasing.
    Is everything a Republican does have to do with corporate appeasing?

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Your position is that these governments would still start wars even if the corporations did not exist?
    If that was my "position" I would have stated it a long time ago here. Why use guesswork, why read between the lines? My "position" is that gubmints are capable of more destruction, and have caused more destruction, than corporations.

    Perhaps you're not seeing the ultimate point, so here it is: given a choice between "big corporations" and "big gubmint," I choose the side that is less capable of destruction.

    And my point about Obamacare is also more mundane than you might believe: I don't want Obamacare because it is too expensive.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

Similar Threads

  1. Looks like we are going to Syria
    By The Great One in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 09-19-2013, 10:31 AM
  2. We are trying to send too many people to college
    By DiscoBiscuit in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-16-2013, 04:33 PM
  3. Are we all dittoheads to some ideology?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 06:24 PM
  4. Can we know only what we are prepared to know?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-01-2009, 06:22 AM
  5. Why are we so attracted to misfortune?
    By Geoff in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-16-2008, 11:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO