Home  ›  News  ›

Industry Reacts to White House Net Neutrality Push

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 18 replies

You poor confused capitalists

Zpike

Nov 12, 2014, 12:08 PM
You're all on here asking for the right solution to the wrong problem. Yes, government regulation is bad. Yes government regulation ruins the market. But I have news for you. Today's market is NOT free. Today's market is heavily regulated and mostly socialist.

If a man is in decent health and wants to stay healthy, you recommend that he run for three miles every day and eat certain foods. But if that same man sits on his ass getting fat every day and then gets the flu, you don't recommend that he run three miles every day and eat the same foods. Instead, you recommend that he stay in the bed, drink lots of fluids, and take flu medication.

And this is where we are with telecom companies. We are past the point of saying to the government...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 12, 2014, 2:22 PM
1st. Markets will prevail regardless. It is the 1st rule of economics.
2nd Free Markets are off the table? Most definitely not. Try as they might, socialists will never be able to kill a free market. They may manipulate it. They may try to control it, but all they do is create bubbles and those bubbles pop.
3rd. No capitalist gives a rat's hiney if government 'gives us the option'. It is government that does not have the option. Free markets always win. Always.
That is the great thing about the market. It will correct. It will make the manipulators look like fools and crooks. Capitalists dont even have to do anything.
...
Zpike

Nov 12, 2014, 2:51 PM
>>1st. Markets will prevail regardless. It is the 1st rule of economics.

I agree completely.

>>2nd Free Markets are off the table? Most definitely not.

In this case, we can either have regulations that make sense or regulations that don't.

>>Try as they might, socialists will never be able to kill a free market. They may manipulate it. They may try to control it,

It is the attempt to manipulate and control the market that makes life miserable for the rest of us.

>> but all they do is create bubbles and those bubbles pop.

Yes, but some of those bubbles may not pop in my life time, and I would rather reduce them if possible, as opposed to continuing the miserable status quo.

>> No capitalist gives a rat's hiney if go...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 13, 2014, 11:27 AM
You are preaching to the choir. However, I dont follow the notion that capitalism is dead or not usable because socialists are in power. As far as bubbles, we have already seen several pop in the last few years. More are coming. You know things are changing when Greenspan finally admits that gold is the best currency option.
...
Zpike

Nov 13, 2014, 12:20 PM
>> However, I dont follow the notion that capitalism is dead or not usable because socialists are in power.

I feel more like it has become ineffective for anyone but the lucky and the economically elite.

>>As far as bubbles, we have already seen several pop in the last few years. More are coming.

I might be looking forward to that if I hadn't seen what happened with the last bubble. But instead of allowing the economic correction that was long overdue to happen, the Federal Government bailed out the banks and auto industries and bankrupted the middle class. Instead of the crooks finally having to pay their dues, they got to walk away with even more of my money. I lost the equity in my house while my mortgage company took a bailout...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 13, 2014, 1:20 PM
'Its only effective for the lucky and economically elite'

That doesnt describe capitalism. You are describing fascism and socialism.

Bubbles.
Yeah. Agreed. The response was a joke...by everyone except one man. Ron Paul. Its a good thing too. Look around. His Presidential runs were probably the most informative and most educational events in modern history. Because of him, we literally have 10s of millions of people educated in the ways of economics and the proper role of government. I dont expect the public to let the government get away with more socialistic bubble responses.

The US Dollar.
As you and I both know, the US dollar is not the US dollar. Never has been. Never will be. The Dollar is only good as the WRC if it is backed...
(continues)
...
Zpike

Nov 14, 2014, 1:02 PM
>>That doesnt describe capitalism. You are describing fascism and socialism.

Exactly.

>>Ron Paul. Its a good thing too. Look around. His Presidential runs were probably the most informative and most educational events in modern history.

His campaign didn't go far enough. And in this case it was a blatant abuse of the political system by the parties involved. I don't know when I'll be as excited about another candidate. Rand isn't exactly his dad.

>>Because of him, we literally have 10s of millions of people educated in the ways of economics and the proper role of government.

But are they enough? Until people refuse to vote for a Republican or Democrat and demand something else not much will change.

>>The Dollar is only goo...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 12, 2014, 2:41 PM
Basically, you are promoting the classic 'Problem, Reaction, Solution' lie given to us by government.
Gov creates the problem, propagandizes a reaction, and gives us a solution...always at the cost of freedom.
Sorry. It doesnt matter how big the problem is that government created, government cannot be the solution.
...
Zpike

Nov 12, 2014, 2:55 PM
>>Basically, you are promoting the classic 'Problem, Reaction, Solution' lie given to us by government.

No, I'm proposing that we do what we can while refusing to cave on the truth. If you have read anything I've had to say on the topic of telecom monopolies you know that I am in favor of undoing all of the government regulation that created this mess. But realistically, no one in government is talking about that. Given the option of either keeping things as they are or classifying ISP's as utilities, I like the second option.

That doesn't mean I've backed off my stance that we should undo all the harmful regulations. It just means I'm not insane.
...
planethulk

Nov 13, 2014, 11:34 AM
Not to diminish your love of free markets, but as stated, expecting government to fix a problem it created is, by definition, insane.
The only way government can do the industry any good is to deregulate and get out of the way. If you are proposing laws that would ensure that, then by all means, go for it.
...
Zpike

Nov 13, 2014, 12:07 PM
>>expecting government to fix a problem it created is, by definition, insane.

I think the definition of insane you're referencing is the cliche one. And by that definition, I am expecting the government to do something different to get a different result. So, it's perfectly rational.

I'm no anarchist. I have a healthy respect for the role of government in our lives when it isn't trampling all over our freedoms and is doing what it's supposed to do.

So, no, I don't live under the delusional pretense that government will cease to exist. Naturally then, I expect the government to do what is right as opposed to what is wrong. If it defies my expectations, I can try to vote for a better government and advocate my beliefs publicly. If no...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 13, 2014, 1:22 PM
When has government ever given us anything without being forced to do so? You are thinking wrong if you expect government to give up power willingly.
...
Zpike

Nov 14, 2014, 1:05 PM
>>When has government ever given us anything without being forced to do so?

When it bought us our freedom for starters. But I agree with you government does need a little coercion from the people.
Which is why we had a system of checks and balances in the first place. When we lost States Rights the people lost their voice and the system of checks and balances hasn't worked since then.
...
planethulk

Nov 13, 2014, 1:44 PM
I am actually a libertarian with strong anarchocapitalist leanings. Anarchy doesnt mean what most people think it does. You can refer to the writings of Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard for more in depth definitions if you so choose.
As far as not being able to do anything? That line of thinking is the result of years of statist propaganda. You can always do something. Heck, even the founders proclaimed we would have to resort to killing those in power in order to keep liberty alive. Do I think we are there? Not quite. Do I think those in power will push the limits until we are there? When have they not?
...
Zpike

Nov 14, 2014, 1:16 PM
>>I am actually a libertarian with strong anarchocapitalist leanings.

I'm a libertarian with strong conservative (just not the republican brand) leanings.

>>Anarchy doesnt mean what most people think it does.

Words typically mean what most people think they mean, whether we want them to or not. But I understand your meaning that when you advocate for anarchy you're not advocating for what comes to mind for most people.

>> You can refer to the writings of Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard for more in depth definitions if you so choose.

I'm a naturally curious person. But I doubt I'm curious enough about anarchy to read them. But thanks for the reference anyway.

>>As far as not being able to do anything? That line of thinking...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 14, 2014, 5:12 PM
It only takes 3%.
And I suspect that you don't want to read them simply based on the misconception you have of anarchy.
Lew Rockwell was Ron Paul's congressional aide for years and Murray Rothbard is responsible for Ron Paul being Ron Paul. Ron Paul became a libertarian because of the writings of Rothbard and Mises. As far as Ron getting shafted. It was expected. He expected it. He said as much many times. He also said his runs were not to win but to educate. Thanks to him and people like him there are more libertarians running around than ever before. There are 18 year old kids who can hand people their own asses in economic debates because of Ron Paul. Sounds like you are jaded. That is fine. I will be the 3%. You be the 97% who does not...
(continues)
...
Zpike

Nov 14, 2014, 5:39 PM
>>It only takes 3%.

I'm sorry, I missed the context of that reference.

>>And I suspect that you don't want to read them simply based on the misconception you have of anarchy.

I've known a plenty of anarchists. I'm certain that you're of an entirely different sort, and am willing to have an open mind about that. But I read what I'm interested in, and right now anarchy doesn't interest me. I already stated as much.

>>Lew Rockwell was Ron Paul's congressional aide for years and Murray Rothbard is responsible for Ron Paul being Ron Paul. Ron Paul became a libertarian because of the writings of Rothbard and Mises.

Just because I agree with Ron Paul doesn't mean I need to read the people who inspired him. Heck, there's a plenty of ...
(continues)
...
planethulk

Nov 14, 2014, 5:47 PM
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/robert-wenzel/net ... »

To say you are interested in economics and don't have any desire to read Mises or Lew Rockwell is exactly my point about you.
Literally two of the leading minds on economic sciences.
...
Zpike

Nov 14, 2014, 6:05 PM
So would I be reading about economics or anarchy, or both? I'm skeptical that this will turn into little more than a way to make anarchy look viable through the eyes of capitalism. After all, you are the one who suggested them as sources on anarchy, not economics.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.