Free Market vs. the Nany State. voice yourselves in here

Basing this on what? What part/s of the constitution. This is a massive generalization which does not tell me anything. Did you vote for bush in 2000 and 2004? If so your complaining about the constitution being usurped his hypocritical.

[/QUOTE]Between ideologies sure, but now we're speaking of how you view man and how man should hold relationship with themselves and the government. I personally support freedom and believe that man is capable of governing his own and that the State has a better capability to govern and represent the People over who they have been elected to Serve.[/QUOTE]

No, you support freedom as you define it. As does everybody else. So why do states have the ability to govern those they serve, but the federal government does not? That is what I think you are suggesting?

The basic role of any government is to protect the People and sovereignty of the nation. I think we need to pull our forces back into the country...and place them along our borders and ports.[/QUOTE]

I agree with this. Still, it goes against In Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution.

So if a person does not support the above, that person is already violating the constitution. Not even Ron Paul agrees with this Article.

Republians/conservatives pay about as much attention to the U.S Constitution as they do the laws of the bible i.e pretty much none.

 

Patriot Act; NDAA; SOPA*; Operation Fast & Furious; many examples of judicial usurpation from all levels of the courts; many examples of Executive and Legislative corruption, usurpation, and misrepresentation by taxation; and many other crimes committed by the Federal government.

I define freedom and liberty as the American Founders did and how it should be.

Easy around that. Convert them to militias to repel the invading illegal immigrants.

I could probably walk circles around you in regards to the Constitution as well as the Bible.

 

Most constitutionalists and die-hard free market folks would tell you that roads, airports, satelites, NASA, and schools are not in the Constitution so the government should not support them. Most free market folks believe that they should all be controlled and created by private citizens.

 

You could do that too. I wouldn't be entirely against that.

 

Why complain about free market. We in the USA are living in the most free-est market there is. No regulations, corporate monopolies and banks can do what ever they want, and the dumbed down consumer is taking it bent over asking for more. What more freedome do we need.

Hell, Mitt th pitt romney is the master of medical insurance, and he has you all over the barrel and you all want to get screwed over more.

No regulation in enevery prices (electricity), for some states. they can jack you up as much as they want. That is great freedome of market.

FDA, who needs them, we need more sick fat lazy dumb americans so that investments can be more profitable off these idiots.

The government should not protect the dumb and stupid. that way human evolution will take it's course, and delete the dumb and vulnerable from society. Now that is a great form of socialism.

 

I wouldn't mind letting someone try to manipulate the economy, but there is no person or group on the planet capable of determining all of the consequences of such attempts. Since the consequences can be worse than the problem they are trying to fix, and that will prompt more and more attempts, it is safer just to not allow any government attempts at control.

 

Hm except for the fact that government banking regulations stopped ALL banking crises for 70 years. Then people like you removed those regulations and we immediately experienced the worst banking crisis ever to occur.
The short version being that you're a liar.

 

This poll basically proves how stupid people are when it comes to voting.

If most of these people are voting honestly they should be voting libertarian in a landslide.

This just shows how unaware people are of their own feelings.

 

free market nanny state looks better because government supervises the free market so that it does not rip anyone off like it did before

 

What a ridiculous thread.

First, free markets are about a economic system and nanny state are about a governmental system. They are not comparable.

Do you mean should the government system provide support for the weakest in society or should we only allow free markets to let the weakest suffer and die like a weak gazelle would on the african plains.

Because your rant about how only the strong survive and you had to work for success is odd. Do you think that someone who is under the poverty line and gets food stamps is a success?

The funny thing about this country is that it seems only the very poor and the very rich get help from the government. If you are very poor, you get handouts, like housing subsidies and food stamps. If you are very rich you get handouts in the form of reduced taxes on unearned income, mortgage deductions for 2nd homes and yachts or in the case of large corporations, loopholes written into law to reduce or eliminate your taxes.

I was an economics major and realize regulation is required to utilize the benefits of free markets. But without regulation, totally free markets are distorted by external costs, like it is cheaper for a company to pollute. The cost of the pollution is not bourne by the company (external to the company). So a company that kills people with cancer from toxic pollution will win in the free market over a similar company that treats it's pollution. So to internalize the cost, you must regulate and say that you can't pollute, then the company has to deal with the true costs, which means either treating the pollution. Once the true costs are realized, maybe another process that does not create the pollution or another product that does the same thing becomes the best choice. most "free market" guys rant against regulation, but the regulation is actually creating the market that represents the true costs by internalizing the external costs.

Now maybe what you are saying is that the government collection of taxes and then redistribution of those taxes in the form of subsidies for the poor is a market distortion because those poor people would behave differently if they did not get handouts. They still might survive at soup kitchens and shelters supported by charity, digging in trash, commiting crimes or accepting work they don't now because they live comfortable enough on government subsidies. And I guess the benefit for you if the government did cut these subsides for the poor would be that you taxes would be a tiny bit lower and you could look at all those new homeless people on the street and feel that much better about yourself and how you are better than them in the economic competition of life.

 

The Good first point, patriotic ! (has taken much voices)

I'm for Free Markets . it's what made America strong in the first place.

Happiness of the people USA and other countries, in own wellfare, work, family, create, create good, help to people, beast (the brother smaller), keep the big house (the planet Land).

The Masonry this circle on interest, in which are found such mortal people, either as that people which do not consist in masonic brotherhood.

Passed 2000 years, came time to change the world government! change authorities as in 1300. Tampliery have changed the name on Mason.

- Europe weakling (in Europe no cheese, power military,) and is afraid Russia, masons USA is afraid to lose Europe.
- In Europe from cheese do bread, detail, instrument.
- In USA accomodation military power, power (the rockets, army, the fleet, machines, tanks), beside Europe of such power no as beside USA, poet masons Europe are afraid the wars with Russia, wars between mason Russia and mason USA.
- A Masons Europe have to keep the neutral sides !
- In the World of NO Crisis, no debts.
- There is lying, lying the rulers of the World, lying mason !
- A Masons World, do not want stand on one platform (the principle of the crossover pyramid) with usual people, be, masons equation in rights of the usual people !

 

What? I see little to no coherant thought in your post.

 

Did you read my post? I wasn't talking about the direct effect, I was talking about the unintended consequences. It is easy to create a policy with a desired direct effect if you have no care about consequences.

Considering banking regulations, banking protections encouraged banks to hold less money than before the regulation. They also encouraged banks to take riskier loans, while driving up interest rates. Banking protections encouraged individuals to put money in banks instead of bonds, forcing the bond rates up. The number of small, local banks changed quite a bit with regulation as well.

Those were unintended consequences of the regulations.

It is similar to government imposed safety regulations on vehicles. The desired effect was to reduce specific kinds of automobile deaths - and that has happened.

But it also drove up the cost of producing vehicles significantly, passing much of that cost to the customer. It made it impossible for a new company to pop up in the US - which is why we haven't seen a new mainstream US car manufacturer in years. It made foreign manufacturers more competitive, since they could start making a profit from overseas sales before they began the US safety clearance process.

Most regulations have unintended consequences. Until someone is able to determine what all of those will be ahead of time, I don't think anyone is qualified to make such regulations.

 

Not only safer, but the reason and purpose, States were given the authority (over the Federal) to regulate/legislate THEIR domestic issues (enumerated powers). If any State succeeds with an issue, others generally will follow and if it fails the total does not suffer. Hidden point, how many States have copied the Massachusetts Healthcare program?

 

This ultra nanny capitalism/state lead to instability and disaster (oil spills, nuclear waste/accidents, ecologic destruction, empire/war), free market and small independent banks that cannot be used as fundament for empire, as monopoly are needed. This capitalistic system is based on monopolies (to enforce the power of imperialists/imperium), bigger bigger and more and more (power hunger), means instablility. Free market (and alternative energies and technologies, the energies and technologies that are boycotted and suppressed by this system) means sustainability and durability, stability.
Very important to have strong independent local economies/industries, and very important not have a strong nanny state that boss the show.
The power must stay at the local level not in the top of the pyramid as currently (look what they can do with that trillion wealth), sell out industry, let capitalistic cities rise (waste of materials, energy and destruction of ecology), spend billions on elections and the debates show and mass media propaganda, they have taken over the entire system since 1913. The only power they still not have is the power of the people (they are after that last big power, votes, 6 november 2012 they are going to gain power again, because people watch system television/youtube and bellieve the words of politicians)

 

Yet another person who needs to learn how to structure a sentence. Sentences, coherant thought, and proper structure makes it easier to understand what you are trying to say. I could care less about small spelling and grammar mistakes but at least try to make the post something that a person can read properly.

 

A good reader can still read with comprehension regardless of poor sentence structure or not.

 

But what about when the Government becomes the ripper and the citizens become the ripped off?

 

I was under the poverty line for 17yrs. starting from age 3(earliest I can remember) . I'm a walking success story.

I can't speak for the rich but the handouts I got along with my siblings, were not much. not much at all. 1 cinder block of cheese, 2 boxes of corn flakes and 2 cartons of evaporated milk. for the month. that's what I remember. any food that came in the house besides that, came in by alternative methods. I hated it. still hate. never plan to go back to living like that, ever.

When Government does what it's suppose to do and stay out of ever single aspect of our lives, they can work. it's when they lobby and position themselves to be our dictators and not our servers, is when the problem occurs. Governments should be small, not huge. they don't need ALL the powewr. because that belongs to the people.

I say Governments provbide the necessary resrouces and get the hell out of way. tbh.. it's when they handicap the poor with Welfare and the various subsidies that hurt the masses.

for example, Welfare should have term limits. that way, people are not squattting on welfare for 25 years. make it a term of 3-4 tops. It's when people know they can squat is when they get lazy.

American government has created the ultimate couch potato by being Nanny.

 

In my opinion, we already live in a nanny-state.

There is so much fraud in the welfare systems it isn't even funny. The system discourages people working. It babies people along and actually REWARDS people for making poor decisions.

It's socialism and communism ALWAYS fail. People don't appreciate things when they don't work for them.

 

You are correct. I remember the last year we was on welfare and mom getting upset because as she was finally transitioning off of welfare by getting a decent job and the welfare office stop sending checks and giving that nasty cheese almost overnight. But we wasn't ready to stop getting help yet. my mom had just got the job and no money was comig in yet and they just cut the assistance, and we had to wing it for about 2 months with nothing but some slatine crackers by the case since my older brother worked at the corner store and tuna out the can. no mayo, no pickle, no salt, just tuna..lol...and I used to eat nothing but a big bag 5cent candy's at the corner store every single day. the sugar kept me going..lol

but those years taught me a valuable lesson about money. How to spend it. and how to save it.

 

And if you had received NOTHING for YEARS?

You seem to be asserting as if your mom was in that miserable situation JUST because she got a little help!

And of course, once the well to do have made it, they want to throw everyone ELSE under the bus for THEIR OWN comfort, even as they have the LOWEST tax rates they have had in 80 years!

 

It isn't the job of me and others who work to take care of you and people who don't.

I don't need to work harder to provide for 2 people. You liberals are so ridiculous.

 

Well on one hand capitalism avoids the problems of a command economy.

On the other hand, if a private company tries to deny me of a resource that I think I have the right to have, I'll join a group of people and kill them for it. That's what you call "survival of the strongest"

 

Well, you are in the medical field which is ultimately funded by things such as medicare and medicaid and other government funding I believe. So this is quite humorous yet sad at the same time