and to further comment on your notion that natural
economic flow is the best solution for policy
please don't forget the hundreds of economical
successes that went on for years and that are still
going on that basically undermine our general health
and well being as a human race.
no I'm sorry, basing governmental policy off of
economic flow is going to lead self destruction.
if you look around, we are already on that
path.....thankfully there have been those who have
risen above the "bottom line" and at least slowed down
the train somewhat....but unfortunately common sense
is no longer common these days.
--- Ryan Evans <southlandbooking@...
> you're absolutely right on all accounts
> it is all shouldered by the congress.......
> but who do you think the congress really works for
> I still say it circles back around to comsumerism.
> It is US who are keeping the big business in
> who in turn, grease the congessional gears, who in
> turn pass legislation that aids the big business,
> keeps them in control, which all comes back to us
> are funding the whole damn thing.
> Oh you're right...the united states congress and
> factions of our system have bugs in them....but it
> ultimately under OUR control...we are either "too
> busy" or apathetic to actually make the
> again because of human nature
> the almighty dollar is always going to win because
> self preservation is in our nature and in this
> age, what is the best means of self
> preservation?..having money,
> we have to have our cel phones, our tv's, our
> another disfunctional aspect of the situation that
> are all in......take a look at cities in
> europe...built centuries before the auto...now look
> most of the cities in the u.s.
> prime example Houston.
> what is the main difference you can see?....
> I shouldn't have to go into details there.
> I challenge you to take a day...not a day where you
> don't need to be anywhere in a hurry, or you just go
> to work and home.
> take a real day where you have a full schedule and
> places you've gotta go and do it without your
> car.....and then tell me how simple it is.
> it's anything but.
> that right there is at the heart of the whole
> predicament that we face as americans...lifestyle.
> we are the ones giving control to these corporations
> and government bodies.
> I for one do believe that there needs to be
> regulations on our lifestyles...habits...the way we
> treat our surroundings.
> because it's clearly evident that left to our own
> devices, we merely muck things up.
> you may think it starts with better representatives
> our govenment.....but it really starts with us.
> plain and simple
> --- Robert Johnston <junk1@...> wrote:
> > My point was not to eliminate government, but to
> > argue that government
> > action should be aligned with sound economic
> > principles rather than simply
> > using its power to manipulate the economy
> > to the dictates of
> > either do-gooders who don't know how the world
> > works, or the corporate
> > interests that you despise. If you re-read my
> > email, I didn't say anything
> > about congress not being able to legislate to
> > control emissions, fuel
> > economy, etc. I simply argued that they should
> > be micromanaging, but
> > rather setting policies that let economics and the
> > market natural find the
> > best solutions. Doing otherwise only makes things
> > worse in the long run.
> > Your examples clearly demonstrate my point. It
> > CONGRESS that:
> > 1. Propped up (and continues to) tobacco industry
> > through farm
> > subsidies and protection of tobacco trade
> > 2. Accelerated the rise of the pharmaceutical
> > industry through its
> > heavy subsidization of drug research, FDA
> > suppression of drug import/export,
> > FDA suppression of alternative health/supplement
> > industries. This will be
> > even further accelerated by the eventual
> > implementation of government funded
> > healthcare. Consumers will have no options then
> > except feeding the
> > medical-pharmaceutical industry.
> > 3. On topic, ethanol subsidies are doing the same
> > thing to energy that
> > these other policies did in their fields. Thus,
> > can see that the recent
> > congressional action that I was responding to
> > further perpetuates the fraud
> > by allowing fleet mileage credits for flexi-fuel
> > cars (ethanol consumers).
> > 4. In reference to your 2nd email, it was congress
> > that implemented
> > import quotas on fuel-efficient foreign cars,
> > thereby protecting Detroit so
> > they could resist changing their designs.
> > 5. It was congress that continues to protect
> > organized labor to the
> > extent that Detroit can't be competitive. Part of
> > this is due to high cost
> > of health care benefits, to which I refer you back
> > to #2.
> > You may think that industry is out to make a buck
> > and that is true. Isn't
> > everyone who provides a service or product? But I
> > find nothing wrong with
> > that. It is how I put food on the table. That
> > stands in stark contrast to
> > Congress whose mission is to spend.
> > There is a role for government, obviously. My
> > is that it needs to be
> > high level guidance through policy setting that
> > works WITH economic
> > principles. Unfortunately, power and money
> > that in many cases.
> > Robert
> > _____
> > From: email@example.com
> > [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Ryan
> > Evans
> > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 7:35 AM
> > To: email@example.com
> > Subject: RE: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to
> > new cars
> > Why not just get rid of the congress then?
> > Just keep the treasury department and get rid of
> > congress all together if our country is to be
> > completely run by capitalism.
> > I mean we're pretty much at that stage already
> > right?
> > So just let the "consumer" dictate the outcome of
> > life
> > and everything, because that has worked out so
> > for us so far.
> > You want to know the sole purpose of the as you so
> > put
> > it "corporate operations"?
> > It is to make money. That's it. That is it's
> > absolute
> > only purpose of existence.
> > It's not to improve quality of life. It's not to
> > create a better world or to have harmony amongst
> > species. Although sometimes these are
> > bi-products, 99.9% of the time, the main driving
> > force
> > behind a corporate operation is to sell the
> > thay have in their hand and make money.
> > And as we've all seen in the past and up to today,
> > corporate operations with little to no supervision
> > fueled by consumers has alwayshad great outcomes.
> > Let's think about some of the examples
> > Tobacco,
> > Pharmacuticals,
> > ....well I could write a list that goes on for
> > pages.
> > Thus leading me to the subject matter of
=== message truncated ===
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ