|
Anonymous targets...The FED? (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| enydo |
| Nou, just leave the ing country if you hate it so much. Can't your aunty cover your travel costs? |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Of course it is. People work a bajillion hours a day for the honour of their company. In japan CEOs commit suicide when their company does something wrong, in the US they get golden parachutes. |
I'd agree that suicide is better. You rape your company and your employees, I hope you feel like committing suicide.
Also, they work a bajillion hours a day because they feel the need to. Obviously it works for them. They have some of the highest levels of disposable income, they are a cash society and the idea of personal debt there is absurd.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Haha, I do know your minimum wage is a disgrace. |
So are any sort of social services, public transportation, police and fire, public health, schools, and even now the universities...
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Perhaps, but I think it is problematic to extrapolate broad economic truths between the two countries due to the vastly different cultural influences. Just because something works in japan doesn’t mean it would work anywhere else. |
I already mentioned in this thread that its a cultural problem. The Japanese have a better, healthier, more productive culture than the US, which actually has no culture beyond "one for all and all for one." A culture like that is a vicious self-sustaining cycle as well because it prevents even the attempt at betterment less it be a ploy to screw you over.
In the end the US is ed. There is no saving it because our culture lacks the ability to comprehend its own basic needs for survival. Its people like Kevin who are the scavengers and the vultures, waiting in the wings to pick at the corpse instead of aiding a country who has entered hospice and at least trying to ease the pain in its dying time. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by enydo
Nou, just leave the ing country if you hate it so much. Can't your aunty cover your travel costs? |
I love the physical beauty of the area I live in. Ultimately I'd love to culturally renovate and remove this area from the domain of the US. |
|
|
| enydo |
| Well it's just too bad you can't have everything you want in life you little twit. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Kevin, do you think that fire departments should be privatized because they can not turn a profit? How about police?
How about highways and other road systems? |
No, I do not. I don't think everything under the sun should be privatized. Do you think the Post Office should continue under the current model even though it racks up a constantly growing ocean of red ink? Do you think it's fiscally responsible to spend more money than you make? The reason government-run anything is so inefficient is because there is no accountability; the private sector can't print money or take from taxpayers, we actually succeed or fail based on merit.
There's no use arguing with you man, you are immune to facts. You're just a kid who doesn't really know much, other than military weapons and computer simulations. You are of the mind that politicians with no experience producing or manufacturing anything, or building sustainable business models that are beholden to the principles of the marketplace are better suited to make economic and business decisions than the actual experts.
On the other hand, I am of the mind that people should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own accord based on what a free market dictates. You work hard and produce, you earn success... good for you. And everybody has a chance to move up the ladder.
Celebrate success- even if it's not you're own. If you learn to do that, I promise you won't be so bitter your whole life. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
No, I do not. I don't think everything under the sun should be privatized. Do you think the Post Office should continue under the current model even though it racks up a constantly growing ocean of red ink? Do you think it's fiscally responsible to spend more money than you make? The reason government-run anything is so inefficient is because there is no accountability; the private sector can't print money or take from taxpayers, we actually succeed or fail based on merit.
There's no use arguing with you man, you are immune to facts. You're just a kid who doesn't really know much, other than military weapons and computer simulations. You are of the mind that politicians with no experience producing or manufacturing anything, or building sustainable business models that are beholden to the principles of the marketplace are better suited to make economic and business decisions than the actual experts.
On the other hand, I am of the mind that people should be allowed to succeed or fail on their own accord based on what a free market dictates. You work hard and produce, you earn success... good for you. And everybody has a chance to move up the ladder.
Celebrate success- even if it's not you're own. If you learn to do that, I promise you won't be so bitter your whole life. |
Thats the thing though Kevin, there is a dichotomy in this country on who fails and who succeeds, where we have allowed the creation of businesses so large that their failure could destroy the entire economy.
We prop up those businesses and we let the smaller ones fail, which is incredibly unfair.
I agree that markets should decide on what businesses succeed and fail, but I also believe that they are still members of a community, and that government works best when its working for the community, and the government needs to have money to invest in things that aren't profitable, things that private companies might never even think about investing in because they will lose money on it.
These are things like infrastructure and social services (which includes fire and police and health care). These are things that are important for a healthy society, one that fosters growth and increased competition in business. This is good for capitalism, its how it works, no matter if businesses like it or not, they need to allow these things to happen.
I do not think that the US will ever reach a standard of living in comparison to Japan or the Scandinavian countries, I do not think our attitude allows for these sorts of things. We do not place emphasis on education or intelligence, nor do we have any sort of importance placed on hard work or respect, or honor. We have bred a society of cut throat capitalism, where there is no higher goal than ones own immediate needs.
I'll give you a good example.
Japan National Railways was a government run organization in Japan, they built over 11,000 miles of track after the war till the 1980s, using public funds and often running at a loss. This was a huge initial investment, something no private company could ever manage on its own, billions and billions of dollars worth of investment with often little return. The investment was not futile though, its a very effective transportation system, one of the best in the world, ridership on the Shinkansen (bullet train) lines alone is over 7 billion since 1964, with ridership of the standard commuter trains much more than that.
In 1988 though the system had run out of steam and it was divided up into multiple private companies, that now run them for profit as the JR group (JR East, West, Kyushu, North, etc). They were given this investment of time and money and they ran with it, and its still one of the best transportation systems in the world. You can travel hundreds of miles for a very cheap price very quickly, and millions of riders use it every day across the entire country.
Government investment can spur private industry and it can work out very well. If you can not understand that then you are just pigheaded. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
I agree that markets should decide on what businesses succeed and fail, but I also believe that they are still members of a community, and that government works best when its working for the community, and the government needs to have money to invest in things that aren't profitable, things that private companies might never even think about investing in because they will lose money on it.
These are things like infrastructure and social services (which includes fire and police and health care). These are things that are important for a healthy society, one that fosters growth and increased competition in business. This is good for capitalism, its how it works, no matter if businesses like it or not, they need to allow these things to happen. |
Government works best when it's doing what it was originally intended to do... working in a limited capacity. I don't care how hard they try, they'll never be able to create equal outcomes. Equal opportunity is necessary, yes. But when government starts picking winners and losers based on their non-expert criteria, we're done.
Infrastructure, social services, police, fire, etc... yes of course that is all necessary. But when you're bankrupting municipalities across the country because fireman and police city workers have ridiculous pensions that don't mirror reality, it's too much. When our government's time is consumed more by cutting social welfare related checks than any other service/activity it provides (which just happened this year for the first time), we are creating too much of a welfare state. I'm not against the safety net provided by taxpayers, but let's be real- it has reached extreme and unsustainable levels that need to change.
| quote: | | I do not think that the US will ever reach a standard of living in comparison to Japan or the Scandinavian countries, I do not think our attitude allows for these sorts of things. We do not place emphasis on education or intelligence, nor do we have any sort of importance placed on hard work or respect, or honor. We have bred a society of cut throat capitalism, where there is no higher goal than ones own immediate needs. |
I never understand statements like this. Have you ever been to Russia? Any of the countries in Central Asia? Eastern Europe? Mexico? If there is a true "higher standard of living" in Japan and Scandinavia compared to the US, it's by a fraction of a degree. You talk as though we live in deplorable conditions.
As for your Japan railway example... sure it works there. That doesn't mean it would work here. Look- they can do like that because they have 130 million people living in a country the size of California. California has about 35 million people. There is so much population density that it is possible. Our country isn't like that at all man. Maybe from the Philadelphia-New York-Boston corridor it could work, but that's about all. You have to understand man... if it made financial sense, and if there was a true demand, private industry already would have built all these fantasy high speed trains the Utopians dream of. Why is government pushing so hard for them? Follow the money- the vast majority of those contracts would go to public sector unions, who's leadership contributes 98% of their donations to Democrats. Simple. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
No, I do not. I don't think everything under the sun should be privatized. |
You ing communist! :mad:
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
The reason government-run anything is so inefficient is because there is no accountability; |
This is only half-right. There’s definitely a lack of personal accountability, but at the same time there’s a huge level of accountability (ie everything done in triplicate) to ensure an adequate audit trail for what we lazy government s do with your money. So in an effort to be more accountable and responsible, governments are obliged to be less efficient, everything done at committee and the law followed to the letter. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| i think the word you're looking for is bureaucracy |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
As for your Japan railway example... sure it works there. That doesn't mean it would work here. Look- they can do like that because they have 130 million people living in a country the size of California. California has about 35 million people. There is so much population density that it is possible. Our country isn't like that at all man. Maybe from the Philadelphia-New York-Boston corridor it could work, but that's about all. You have to understand man... if it made financial sense, and if there was a true demand, private industry already would have built all these fantasy high speed trains the Utopians dream of. Why is government pushing so hard for them? Follow the money- the vast majority of those contracts would go to public sector unions, who's leadership contributes 98% of their donations to Democrats. Simple. |
I can take your paranoia and reverse it quite easily... not only can I reverse it but I can show substantial proof that its not paranoia but a pretty sound theory...
The reason that rail in this country is not as good as it should (read that SHOULD) be is because of general motors, ford and the big oil companies (SO being the main one) during the first half of the 20th century.
If you look at areas like Everett-Seattle-Tacoma, including the east side of the lakes in Bellingham, we had a HUUUUUGE commuter rail system. It was massive, hundreds and hundreds of miles of track connecting all areas of the region, dozens and dozens of trains running per hour. It was really quite amazing when you go back and look at the pictures. Commuter rail ran all day from Tacoma and Seattle and north from Everett to Seattle and along the east side of Lake Washington. Thousands of people rode these lines daily. Not only that but the individual cities had their own large street car networks that carried additional thousands of people. These lines were 100% electric as well, powered by clean, renewable hydropower produced right here in the Pacific Northwest.
Then around the late 1920s through the 30s, companies like GM began to sell buses at a loss, very cheap, drastically undercutting the price of rail services. They lobbied state legislatures for increasing funding to roads and highways. Soon the rail roads became unprofitable due to low ridership from cheaper bus lines, bus lines built by companies invading and destroying other sectors by undercutting their own profits for a time to make their options more desirable.
By the 1950s the hundreds of miles of commuter lines were all gone, replaced by gasoline powered buses (though Seattle still retains some overhead electric buses). Commuter rail took 50 years to regain a place in the PNW and by then it was too expensive to make it as efficient as it could have been had it developed naturally with out foreign intervention. Seattle has two trolley lines, both of which are practically useless, they have a light rail line from downtown to the airport, but ridership remains fairly low. Tacoma has a piddly 1.5 mile line in down town (which I actually used all the time). The only intercity commuter system is a 6 times a day train run from Tacoma and Everett to Seattle, and it only runs on weekdays and in the morning and afternoon.
Even the bus lines now are having their budgets cut and schedules shortened... Its a travesty for the public, even in this country it is expensive to drive, and cutting that part out of ones budget if they can frees up a lot of their money for other things... It is very sad.
So if you want to aimlessly blame unions, go ahead, but show me some proof like I just did. My reason is the real reason that commuter rail is in this country, because it was snuffed out violently by the automotive industry. This happened in dozens of other cities across the country, and it could have been a much better situation. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
So if you want to aimlessly blame unions, go ahead, but show me some proof like I just did. My reason is the real reason that commuter rail is in this country, because it was snuffed out violently by the automotive industry. This happened in dozens of other cities across the country, and it could have been a much better situation. |
Coulda woulda shoulda. Violently snuffed out? LOL! Dude it's called progress. Technology got better, cars started to be made at affordable costs (thanks to demand), and people started wanting the freedom of a car to add convenience to their lives. They didn't want to be beholden to some train schedule if they didn't have to anymore! And since then, there have been hundreds of millions of people all over the world- hell, BILLIONS, who have benefited from that automobile production. A hell of a lot more than have been "screwed over" (as you make it sound) by the loss of the electric commuter train.
Sorry, that's where the demand was at the time, and several car companies grew to meet the demand by producing what customers want. Should we still subsidize the makers of 8-tracks and cassette tapes because CDs and MP3's came along and made them irrelevant? Should I feel bad for the typewriter company "Brother" because computers came along? Part of success in business is knowing how to evolve with the times. There's a life span with all companies man. Some stick around longer, some don't. It's just the way it goes. You can't change that with your irrational dreams of a perfect society.
And, do you seriously need me to provide evidence of the destructive nature of public sector unions in every industry they're involved in? |
|
|
| Zharen |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
And, do you seriously need me to provide evidence of the destructive nature of public sector unions in every industry they're involved in? |
Yeah, those damn evil unions. They're the reason the housing prices keep falling. ******s. :whip: |
|
|
|
|
