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.

 

Millions Dead And People Accept It As Perfectly Normal

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
So, completely negate personal responsibility, and place it on the person who builds the road?



The government negates personal responsibility when it fails to charge only users of roads rather than everyone.

Private owners of roads ARE personally responsible for their maintenance. Who is ultimately personally responsible for the maintenance of public roads? A body of politicians? Do they ever accept personal responsibility for anything?


edit on 18-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   
everything wrong with the universe as in this country is the fault of the state

dont like dont wanna beleive but

deal with it.

id rather have a libertarian than a big government pusher type who pushes all responsibilty onto the govenrment

where it does not and never has belonged.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Considering that private corporations could face civil suits if they don't, I tend to think the vast majority of private corporations act more far responsibly than government.


Unfortunately, mnemeth, you're doing something here which Capitalists often do. Thinking in terms of Capitalist theory, instead of what actually happens in practice, in the real world.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
everything wrong with the universe as in this country is the fault of the state
(...)
id rather have a libertarian than a big government pusher type who pushes all responsibilty onto the govenrment


As I sit in bemused silence.

You people really don't have a clue, do you?



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Considering that private corporations could face civil suits if they don't, I tend to think the vast majority of private corporations act more far responsibly than government.


Unfortunately, mnemeth, you're doing something here which Capitalists often do. Thinking in terms of Capitalist theory, instead of what actually happens in practice, in the real world.


There is nothing theoretical about a civil lawsuit.

However, often times government prevents those civil suits from taking place.

Consider the example of Shell Oil - government limited the civil liability of Shell and prevented citizens from bring suit against Shell for the massive oil spill.

If courts were privatized, Shell would have been run out of business for the disaster they caused.


edit on 18-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


the people who dont have a clue are the people who think government is the answer to all the problems that we have.

that is a fact of life.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 




I just happen to notice in the comparative photos, the Disney Road appears to be pedestrian, while the Detroit road seems to be in a mostly abandoned part of town. Two extremes.

Anyhoo. Certainly let private roads be built! Build away. I just don't think many people would use them.
(For reasons mentioned by myself and others above).



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
People seem to overlook the problem
of all these millions of
people that die..

People are starving and die everyday

I wish there was more we could do
to help.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 




I just happen to notice in the comparative photos, the Disney Road appears to be pedestrian, while the Detroit road seems to be in a mostly abandoned part of town. Two extremes.

Anyhoo. Certainly let private roads be built! Build away. I just don't think many people would use them.
(For reasons mentioned by myself and others above).


Doesn't matter.

Disney does not allow their trafficked roads to deteriorate either.

Why are you making excuses for the condition of the Detroit road instead of calling out the Detroit government for its poor performance in managing it?



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Don't you support "tort reform"? i.e., measures to make it vastly more difficult to file suits?

...Privatize the courts. Really. You really just said that. Wow.

And still waiting to hear who doesn't use roads, Mnmeth.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Because I have a grasp on reality. The only thing you've said that makes sense on this thread is "nothing is free."

So you compare the nation's poorest major city to a tiny resort that is funded as a whole by one of the world's wealthiest corporation.


edit on 18/8/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Don't you support "tort reform"? i.e., measures to make it vastly more difficult to file suits?

...Privatize the courts. Really. You really just said that. Wow.

And still waiting to hear who doesn't use roads, Mnmeth.


I support making courts "loser pays" private courts, whereby the loser of a court case pays the legal fees of the winner.

This would automatically limit frivolous lawsuits.


edit on 18-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I think a better idea is to have the state take complete control of building and maintaining roads instead of paying private corporations to do. Then every private road contractor can work for Disney.

Is it not a fact that private corporations build the majority of our public roads and highways? Is it not a fact that they make huge profits when they do so? Is it not a fact that the same roads that you complain are crap, were actually built by the same private corporations which you declare will do a better job going forward? Ridiculous.
.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Because I have a grasp on reality. The only thing you've said that makes sense on this thread is "nothing is free."

So you compare the nation's poorest major city to a tiny resort that is funded as a whole by one of the world's wealthiest corporation.


edit on 18/8/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)


Private corporations have filled your home with useful products and will fill the stores you shop at with all the products you will ever purchase in the future.

Government has brought you endless wars, millions needlessly dead, and roads that kill 40,000 people a year.




edit on 18-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



The government negates personal responsibility when it fails to charge only users of roads rather than everyone.


People who use the roads pay taxes on:
1. Their vehicles.
2. The individual license to drive it.
3. The vehicle license, renewable annually.
In addition to local, state, and federal taxes.

Are you suggesting that all roads require a toll in addition to the above? Because that is exactly what private ownership would do..........



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



The government negates personal responsibility when it fails to charge only users of roads rather than everyone.


People who use the roads pay taxes on:
1. Their vehicles.
2. The individual license to drive it.
3. The vehicle license, renewable annually.
In addition to local, state, and federal taxes.

Are you suggesting that all roads require a toll in addition to the above? Because that is exactly what private ownership would do..........


If all roads were privatized, there would be no need to tax people for their usage or maintenance.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 




How do corporations increase profits? .....


I agree to a degree but there must be some mechanism for permitting real Free Market and for preventing Monopoly and Cartels.

Multiple small businesses is the best for every one. Unfortunately what we have now is Corporate Cartels running everything including government and more and more consolidation.

It scares the B...J.... out of me when I think that the worlds food supply is controlled by about
ten to twelve pivotal companies, assisted by another three dozen LINK

At the turn of the century, over 400 companies were producing cars in the USA, now it is reduced to just a couple.

Only if we can prevent this type of consolidation of money and power can we have a true free market where both customers, employees and business people meet on equal ground.

What we have now is a captive labor force and a captive market where the corporation is KING

As long as a huge spider web of regulations, permits and licenses coupled with harassment by enforcement officials suffocates any possibility of new competition we are in deep manure.

Moundsville Police Are Targeting People Holding Yard Sales wtrf.com...

Weymouth resident calls yard sale ordinance a witch hunt www.patriotledger.com...

Heck a kid can not even run a simple lemonade stand any more without having the cops show up close them down and fine them!

Des Moines: Police Continue Battle Against Kiddie Lemonade Stand Menace consumerist.com...

Cops Bust Lemonade Stand: Appleton, Wisconsin: www.huffingtonpost.com...

Georgia cops bust 10-year-old's lemonade stand www.rawstory.com...


For small business owners in the U.S., the cost of complying with government regulations is one of those ongoing problems that doesn't receive enough attention. ...t research commissioned by the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration reveals that the cost of complying with federal regulations is higher for small businesses than for midsize or large ones—45% higher on a per-employee basis, on average in 2004....

More Regulation, Fewer Startups
Regulatory compliance also deters business formation. The World Bank's analysis of its 2008 entrepreneurship survey showed that countries with easier and less expensive procedures for registering new businesses have higher rates of new business creation, after accounting for differences in per capita income across countries.

Simply put, countries that regulate business formation more heavily have fewer startups. Because policymakers believe that startups are beneficial for job creation, wealth generation, and a variety of other goals, their efforts to regulate the business creation process undermines the very objectives they seek to achieve.

High levels of regulation also deter entrepreneurial ambitions. Analysis of data from the research program Global Entrepreneurship Monitor shows that a country's score on the World Bank's 2007 red tape index is negatively related to the share of business owners who expect to employ at least 20 people in five years....the 2007 GEM report concludes that "all other things being equal, the more onerous a country's new business regulations, and the more local experts perceive these regulations to be onerous, the lower the level of ambition among a country's entrepreneurs."

.... Bruce Phillips and Holly Wade, writing in the lobbying group National Federation of Independent Business' publication Small Business Problems & Priorities, report that "unreasonable government regulations" ranked sixth among problems for small business owners in 2008, up from ninth in 2004, with 21% of respondents reporting this problem as critical.....

Phillips and Wade also found that the federal government proposes about 150 new rules annually, with each added rule costing small businesses $100 million in compliance.



Recently, there have been calls to help entrepreneurs navigate their way through the Great Recession. A host of different policy recommendations have been floated. But here's a simple one:

Instead of imposing 150 new federal rules on entrepreneurs annually, let's try eliminating 150.



www.businessweek.com...



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Perhaps so. I'm not strictly opposed to the idea, actually. Wouldn't mind seeing a mix. An autobahn type road would be right up my (speeding) ally. Wouldn't mind paying a toll to drive on one.

I just can't imagine that as a business it would be particularly lucrative. But, who knows? People might love them.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Consider the example of Shell Oil - government limited the civil liability of Shell and prevented citizens from bring suit against Shell for the massive oil spill.


I agree with you that things like this happen. The Microsoft antitrust suit was essentially dropped when George W. Bush got into office.

I'm not sure how well privatisation of courts would work, though. I admit that I've never really heard of that idea before.



posted on Aug, 18 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by ReluctantBlossom
You think things will get better under corporate rule? Their only goal is profit and they will do ANYTHING to increase that..
.


How do corporations increase profits?

1. Reduce prices so more people can afford their product.

2. Improve the quality of their product so more people will want to buy their product.

3. Improve the safety of their products, which increases the number of people willing to pay for their product.

4. Improve their production methods so that they can further reduce their operating costs to undermine their competition.

Are you suggesting that corporations seeking increased profits is bad for consumers?


It may not be bad for consumers, but it may be bad for the workers creating the products for the consumption. Relying on child labour in the 3rd world to cut your production costs is good for business, but not for the future of humanity.
This all relies on people consuming more and more with a limited amount of resources. Resources and commodities that are in the hands of fewer and fewer corporations , which makes it nearly impossible for competition and for others to under cut their competitors.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join