It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: greencmp
Awesome, you get it!
Of course I get it; what I'm responding to is how you think the evils of monopoly are solely attributed to the actions of Governmental interference!
To have your entire life decided by the people who think in memes?
Frankly, most people are stupid and don't give a damn about anyone unless they can identify with them somehow
They also depend on the US to play the world's police force so they don't need nearly as much military expenditures.
I never said that the beneficiaries of cartelization are blameless, just that they are entirely dependent upon regulatory constructs to restrict competition.
it seems thats the point of the UN countries agreeing to a one world government and they make sure countries trying to modernize other countries do so by humanitarian rules... and those resisting get called rebels and those paid to keep the conflict going terrorists etc. please note terrorist and rebel are interchangible depending on ones side.
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: greencmp
I never said that the beneficiaries of cartelization are blameless, just that they are entirely dependent upon regulatory constructs to restrict competition.
But by using the Von Mises quote you implied you were attributing the problems solely to Governmental interference, keep up man, you're starting to look silly
Having public works, Public transit, mail delivery, police, and fire department are not really part of socialism. Those are shared services done for everyone's balanced benefit in bulk, normally called public infrastructure. These services are basic to orderly society.
originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: ChuckNasty
All of those countries have single payer national health care, and many of the socialistic benefits USA currently has.. They're far more socialist than the USA. Thank you for proving my point, socialist=better quality of life.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: M5xaz
so·cial·ism (sō′shə-lĭz′əm)
n.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
Any of Various Theories, it says. Thats somewhat disingenuous. Large cities aren't theoretical, just about every country has them. People don't "collectively own them", either. Thats a ruse, people don't actually "own" the city sidewalks, just use them collectively and their combined tax pays for their upkeep. How is that different from a "collective" in a "communist" country? The difference is what we are taught. Our cities our collectives our social infrastructure is 'better' than theirs.
The big corporations own everything in the city and the people pay for it. Most people rent, pay tax and fees to do anything.
originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: ChuckNasty
Okay, for the record, I'm not talking about government ownership of land and business. I'm talking about democratic socialism and advocating for tighter restrictions on businesses, including government-owned monopolies for certain services. THESE ARE practices in nations you mentioned.
so even under a social program theres a chance for capitalist corruption looking to monopolize the services offered.