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.

 

Would you trust corporations to self-regulate?

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
You people act like their won't be any laws........

If anyone can name one regulation that wasn't written or influenced by a corporation or banker, I'll change my mind on govt regulation.


You nailed it right there. You can see their influence just by seeing that only mega corporations can survive the regulations. If somebody doesn't agree, I'd like to see them go out and try to start an organic farm or a local credit union.

Indeed, you can also look at the Taxi industry......


edit on 1-10-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverSleepingEyes
 


Exactly, but you must understand that this is the growth process of an animal on it's path to becoming a more "eternal" creature. We are the animal species which deals with "awareness" and growing in that IS a responsibility, the road IS narrow, and it IS often "hard." This makes me think of a seed pushing up in the dirt. Who would weep for the labor that the seed endures in pushing up in the dirt? Only those who lack understanding.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 



To deflate the power behind informed consumers is aggressively ignorant.


To assume that most consumers are informed is immensely ignorant. These are the same consumers that feed themselves at fast food joints and buy gas guzzling SUVs. Informed is not something I would call most people.


They cannot offend if they cannot monetize their offenses.


This is why they have "Marketing Departments" so that things like Olestra, can be put out, even though when eaten in excess (I.E. How Americans normally eat) it can cause diarrhea.

See, corporations spend a lot of money on Marketing so that they can convince the general population that stuff that is actually horrible for them is a great thing.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


All first world nations have regulated economies. No country has every succeeded without business regulations, which have existed since the beginning of the U.S..

When you buy a pound of hamburger, anywhere you go, you get the same amount of hamburger, because regulations make businesses followed the standards of weight and measurements. Without any regulations, businesses could sell 15 oz as a pound, 3 and a half quarts as a gallon of gasoline.

It is insanity to advocate eliminating government regulation of business.

It is a childish moronic belief bought by people who have no idea of what they are advocating, and how critical regulation of business actually is.

It is like thinking you can stroll up to a herd of elephants and wander among them without getting killed almost immediately.

The whole idea of a free market is pure drivel.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by subject x
 


I really appreciate that you see that I took your post very seriously and had/have the intention of answering very directly.

I understand your hesitation/fear regarding the "completeness" of free-market regulation. This is why not-for-profit NGOs should facilitate the spreading of information regarding issues like the one you presupposed. Through knowledge, and then, more importantly, understanding, we can then express understanding. If the owners of BofA were somewhat "tracked" (only in their business ventures as I do not advocate directed personal attacks unless there are direct criminal activities warranting criminal charge), then consumers could follow their immoral exploits and avoid their businesses. It certainly would require sacrifice and diligence, but raising up a good child requires the very same things. For us to "progress," whether individually, or together, we must follow the same cycles that are common to our bodies, families, and even the universe.

Lastly, yes, localized business, and government, by nature, are easier to deal with. That would be a first priority if I had any sort of power. And in the power that I do have to vote with the distribution of my wealth, I make a very concerted effort to only "supply blood" to the "organs" of society which make up a healthy body.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Did you read the whole post or stop right there?
I think I read it all. Sometimes my browser chops off posts that are longer than the poster's avater, so I might have missed some.

Without large/multi-national corporations, all businesses would again be "local". If a local business starts raping their customers, their customers would desert them and either go to other companies OR start their own competing company replacing the rapacious previous company. Kind of the opposite of what the big conglomerates do now. That cannot happen now because the government makes it too hard/expensive to start some types of businesses and/or they cannot compete with the cutthroat tactics employed by the wal-marts of the world. Then you have the evil synergy developed by the large corporations buying the politicians who then promulgate even more rules stifling the growth of real competitors.

Gotcha. I agree with that, and it makes sense.
Except for how we shut down the huge corps. so they don't just bury the small local ones.
'Cause we know it won't be voluntary.

I am, however, as I said in an above post, down with the smaller, local business idea.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


Um, just like communism, free market values look very moral on paper, but


but it is a very naive way to facilitate that which should come by volition.


What do the communists always say? People don't understand what true communism truly is, just like the people who support free market principles.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Corporations control the government.

So they need to be regulated by the government.

/WebsterTarpleylogic.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


I am sorry, but survival of the fittest is very healthy for a species. If a person is willfully ignorant and runs their body into the ground as a result, my family (who strives for spiritual and physical health and awareness) certainly deserves to rise up more than they.

This is also similar to how chemicals used for pest control will never work in the long term, and will eventually cause super-pests. This is also mirrored in the super-bugs within the medical realm. Our minds may be becoming more spiritual, but our bodies are still meat. We are still, physically, animals despite beginning to think with the minds of gods. So then, fighting physical death with the mindset of fear only serves to weaken our species instead of making it stronger as our culture foolishly assesses our conduct to be doing.


Watch the movie "Idiocracy" as it perfectly embodies what you are referring to, and it does a fantastic job of exposing the twilight zone-ishness of our culture.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


Survival of the fittest is fine if it's nature that's doing the natural selection, when it's corporations, natural selection has nothing to do with it.

When they slam down some sort of drilling operation near your home where your water can now catch fire, maybe it's not natural selection that's killing off your family but the fraking operation going on. When they spill millions of gallons of oil into the water destroying the environment and killing off other industry, maybe it's not natural selection.

See the difference?



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


The US did initially. It is odd that you do not understand that. And the reason why, historically, free-market thinking is not normal, is because fascist Empires are always determining the course of our development. And, honestly, in most cases, it has been a boon to our species to be under such control. But just as Christians are supposed to have grown up in the understanding of the law and move away from stoning adulterers and homosexuals (which was intend to help preserve a more animal-minded society), and move towards a more simple and judgment based law of "Give to God and give to your neighbor as yourself," our society is under the same pressure. I would agree that most Christians do not follow such a practice, but this is because many have still hung on to the immaturity of older days. Likewise, if we are not asked or even allowed to regulate the market as individuals, expectations for the common man will remain low. We should be raising the bar regarding what we expect is the average intellect, duty, etc.

Your mentality certainly voices zero compassion for the weak, only contempt. It also voices zero acceptance of responsibility, which is common in the average person of our time. I do not accept, nor is it rational to believe, that our species does not have the ability to emotionally, spiritually, and intellectually evolve. Are we simply monkeys who make computers? Can our cool tricks of technology not be replicated in the realm of spirituality (law, philosophy, economics, politics, etc.)? If history is any indication, and IT IS, then we will cycle through certain growing pains and we will grow. How that process manifest, though, is beyond my speculation. However, it is only a matter of when, not if.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


The politicians who wrote regulations that attack small businesses, and concentrate on going after small businesses are also the very same politicians who advocate free market principles.

The whole free market speak is just a big con job, and the people who preach this are only interested in establishing corporate control of the world, and a new corporate aristocracy. They seek to undermine the U.S. government, so that its only purpose is to serve its corporate masters.

The answer is to stop voting for free market advocating politicians, and support the federal government going after white collar crime, and reigning in the banks, who exist on government charters due to the special arrangement they have in expanding our money system.

Just like communism, free market concepts only lead to us all becoming slaves to the corporate elites, manipulating things behind the curtain.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


My point remains. You do not understand free-market principles. Communism is an attempt to regulate what is perceived to be injustice by means of "hard" rules. Free-market principles are "soft" rule ideas. Meaning; One area may allow prostitution. Another area doesn't support that sort of business and therefore no businesses are started offering those services. Communism is a simple yes or no for all. Please understand that you have been missing this idea entirely and I hope you will reconsider your thoughts in this light. It should make more things obvious if you understand logic/philosophy, etc. I do understand that most people do not understand those things.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dasher
I really appreciate that you see that I took your post very seriously and had/have the intention of answering very directly.

I appreciate that you actually tried to directly answer my question.
Something you don't see too much of around here.

I understand your hesitation/fear regarding the "completeness" of free-market regulation. This is why not-for-profit NGOs should facilitate the spreading of information regarding issues like the one you presupposed. Through knowledge, and then, more importantly, understanding, we can then express understanding.

True, but that assumes that people will actually read/listen to/understand that info.
We all know how well the general public does that...

Lastly, yes, localized business, and government, by nature, are easier to deal with. That would be a first priority if I had any sort of power. And in the power that I do have to vote with the distribution of my wealth, I make a very concerted effort to only "supply blood" to the "organs" of society which make up a healthy body.

The trouble there is that we already have a centralized system in play, and those who profit from it won't give it up easily. I don't think de-centralization will happen until disaster shows why it's a bad idea.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by HauntWok
 


Generally, I do see what you are saying. However, in a locally run society, what local government or culture would ever stand for such conduct? Who would sell their land to an operation like that? Who would not send the local law enforcement to shut them down if they somehow succeeded in acquiring land?

As it lies now, these corporations get away with their conduct because acts of regulation can regulate your safety, and it can regulate their rights to destroy the land. When there is no local sovereignty, your argument is truly wise. However, the issue in this matter is that the current system is that which is allowing the offenses you call terrible and I am advocating a system which would help to neutralize those offenses. So your argument, while understandable under our current system, is not very strong.

My whole point is to say that regulations would not be entirely done away with. The regulations would be facilitated by individuals like you and I who would not stand for that sort of conduct. More so, in our current system, we are nearly entirely disarmed in that fight. So please, stop advocating the very system which manifests the nightmare you fear.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


Um, most of your response has nothing to do with the points I have made.

Market systems work best when they are established and maintained by an evenly enforced, fair set of rules. Only then can competition exist, and things become more efficient. Then we are able to concentrate on advancement. When things are ran with a dog eat dog system, everyone is too busy concentrating on survival, to concentrate on advancement. There is a reason civilization works.

You are not advocating a way forward by joining those who think greed is a virtue, you are buying into a unrealistic idealism akin to communism.

I understand very well what free market ideology does, and I am trying to point out the facts to anyone I can wake up by pointing out the foolishness of the whole free market concept.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


No, you do not understand free market concepts.

Free market rules are not soft, they are harsh, brutal, you just don't see it because you live in a first world nation that still has a great many regulations in place to keep things civil.

As free market concepts have been enacted, the economy of the U.S., Iceland, and Ireland, were all destroyed.

In third world nations where corporations do not have to follow any regulations, there is nothing soft about the way people are treated. It is slavery. People live in horrible conditions, surrounded by toxic pollution, working in dirty poisonous environments long hours a day, until they are literally crippled by the labor they are forced to do in order to survive.

You think you can walk around in a herd of wild elephants without being killed, but you can't.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Dasher
 


Um, local officials are much more easily and cheaply bribed than federal officials, which is why free market advocates always cheer for state rights. The states are the ones who come down the hardest on small businesses, and dance like monkeys for the big corporations.

You are being naive.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
The whole free market speak is just a big con job, and the people who preach this are only interested in establishing corporate control of the world, and a new corporate aristocracy.

That right there is the thing that gives me pause. With no regulation, I can see a frenzied scrambling by the big corps to see who would control the biggest piece of the pie. Outright corporate war, with the winner essentially having global economic control.

Maybe Dr. Paul has a higher opinion of human nature than I do, but I see the greed factor (for money and/or power) cutting the legs out from under a "fair free market" system before ever got out of the gate. Maybe the same can be said for any possible system, I dunno.

I could see it working in a perfect world, but in reality, not so much.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by subject x
I appreciate that you actually tried to directly answer my question.
Something you don't see too much of around here.

Ironic for the site slogan, huh?


Originally posted by subject x
True, but that assumes that people will actually read/listen to/understand that info.
We all know how well the general public does that...

No one can deny your thought here, except that it would not apply to a free-market. Poorly educated people is a result of our current regulated system. Low expectations for consumers is also a result of our current regulated system. If you have to be informed or suffer consequences, then the diligent are rewarded. It certainly requires sacrifice and diligence to move forward in life. The longer we pretend that is not the case, the bigger our problems will become before, yes, a disaster forces that understanding.



Originally posted by subject x
The trouble there is that we already have a centralized system in play, and those who profit from it won't give it up easily. I don't think de-centralization will happen until disaster shows why it's a bad idea.

That's the nice thing about the free-market idea. It is the default regardless of whether someone likes it or not. The system will eventually fail under it's own weight. Study the biblical story of "the city and the tower." It is also incorrectly referred to as the tower of Babel. It is a good way to conceptualize Imperial conduct and it's inherent incompleteness.

Moving our culture back into the free-market (and moving other cultures into the free-market for the first time) should be done with wisdom. Many market should remain regulated. I do not have the wisdom to determine specifics, but I am sure it is appropriate as a principle. However, once appropriate, why would it not be our primary goal in society to strengthen the individual so that the common men and women function at very high levels?

Just as slavery was dying of natural causes, societal slavery is dying of natural causes now. The government corrected this in the civil war by removing education for the blacks (which was being provided by most slave owners and was the true source of slavery's demise pre civil war), and exchanged what would have ended up being true freedom (you cannot enslave an educated person for long), for false freedom. 40 acres and a mule should have been name "your master is now the feds." What was even worse, the plan succeeded more than they had hoped since most newly free slaves sold their land on the cheap to rich white people and now the blacks had even less.

Education is helping to free the slaves now, and it is strange to see people not recognize the battle that many in government make against this process. They did it in the civil war, and even to this day, blacks are not properly educated on average. Now this process has infected all races. It is right to move towards a true freedom, but we must do so with wisdom or we will end up more of a slave than before. I do not envy the blacks of the American ghettos. They are forgotten, forgotten, forgotten. I'd rather be a slave working daily in a field if I could know my children are getting a little food and education before I'd want to be stuck in a modern ghetto with nearly zero hope at all. One process was leading to it's own death through education, the other is steeped in dumbed down thinking and greedy bureaucracy.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join