Conservative Campaign Promises - How can you NOT vote for this guy?!

Kassz007 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Gabfly1:

That and The Fountainhead. Cover to cover. Tripe.

Good to know. What specifically did you find "tripeful"?

As I said to Ricter, I'll interpret your evasion of this question:

"What products or services do you think the government needs to provide that the private sector cannot? This is not a loaded question, I am genuinly interested in what you think. "

as your ignorance of the answer.

I am willing to admit that my ideology may have flaws, and I am certainly not 100% correct all of the time. But I like to debate the issue. Why don't you want to give an answer?

Kassz007 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Tsing Tao:

just would like to point out the lack of americans posting on this thread and taking a side, because it is not relevant to the country we live in.

see how it's done, gabby

Trying to have a serious discussion here. Please refrain from trolling. There are many other threads in this forum that would welcome you.

Gabfly1 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Kassz007:

I'll ask you the same question then:

What products or services do you think the government needs to provide that the private sector cannot? This is not a loaded question, I am genuinly interested in what you think...

All manner of legitimate social safety nets, including guaranteed medical care, which are the mark of First World countries. Financial and environmental regulation. Military and police and so on. Postal service, notably in areas of the country where it is not necessarily economically viable. Infrastructure. And so on...

Gabfly1 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Kassz007:

Good to know. What specifically did you find "tripeful"?

Taken from an earlier post under my Thunderdog user name:

Atlas Shrugged is one of the most overrated pieces of..."literature" that I have ever read. It is nothing more than a pseudo-intellectual diatribe which was a knee-jerk reaction to the growing fascination of a romanticized version of communism in mainstream society at the time it was written. The novel's characters have all the depth of cartoon characters and the writing is tediously repetitive, as though the author had been lecturing to a dim-witted audience. I even read Rand's The Fountainhead, and found more of the same. Here's a thought. Just because the far left is the wrong direction, let us not immediately assume that salvation can only be found in the extreme right. However, in Rand's novels, people only wear either black hats or white hats. Big ones. And all of her sentiments could have been conveyed in a pamphlet rather than a painful 1,074-page book.

Some more:

Quote from Thunderdog:

I agree with your criticism of Any Rand's philosophy. I think it is overrated and "underthought." However, I disagree with your comment that she is a good writer. I slugged through her Atlas Shrugged and her somewhat charitably shorter The Fountainhead some years ago to see what all the hoopla was about. I was disappointed. She could have conveyed her message in far shorter books had she not mired herself in gratuitous repetition. The dialogue was stilted. The content was preachy, with the subtlety and nuance of a sledgehammer. Everyone wore either a white hat (the good guys) or a black hat (the bad guys). You could see them coming from a distance. (Just like real life, eh?)

And so, as with her philosophy, I think her books are similarly overrated and "underthought."

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2084517&highlight=atlas+shrugged#post2084517

Some more:

Quote from Thunderdog:

Second hand smoke?

You do seem to know enough about her, whereas all I did was read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Her "philosophy" struck me as two-dimensional extremism best suited to cartoon situations. I suspect that her "philosophy" was something of a knee-jerk reaction to her repulsion towards communism. I think both extremes fall flat in the real world. The solution to one extreme is rarely the opposite extreme. Communism would never work in the real world because it blunts ambition and initiative. However, human achievement and economic progress are predicated on ambition and initiative. Similarly, laissez-faire capitalism cannot exist in a vacuum as she describes it, because of the way that the real world seems to work. If she really believed it could, then she should have packed her bags and moved to any number of Third World countries, where she would see for herself how the world works without any checks and balances. Unless a theory or "philosophy" reasonably accounts for real-world human behavior, it dies on the vine.

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2223423&highlight=atlas+shrugged#post2223423

Some more:

Quote from Thunderdog:

...And the dumbing down relentlessly continues...

Why trouble yourself with even an attempt at understanding when you can just pop a bite-sized portion of Randonomics and affect the requisite pose of righteous indignation, step up on the soapbox, and preach the all-or-nothing gospel?

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2253346&highlight=atlas+shrugged#post2253346

I could go on, but I think you get the point.

OPTIONAL777 · Apr 8, 2011

"What products or services do you think the government needs to provide that the private sector cannot? This is not a loaded question, I am genuinly interested in what you think."

The government has an ethical mandate to protect the citizens from the production of goods and services in the private sector which threaten the well being of the people.

Part of the common defense principle, providing a common defense for all citizens from threats foreign and domestic, is defending citizens from companies who will ignore safety and reasonable well being of the workers.

It is a fact that corporations treat workers like a commodity, labor for them is just a price they have to pay for corporate profits, and the corporations will nearly always do whatever they can get away with to increase profit, even if it means reduces safety and quality of life of the workers, or the people who purchase the goods and services from the corporations.

Watchdog and regulation on industry, which does not provide watchdog and regulation on themselves.

The free market goons will argue that the market itself will regulate itself, but facts paint the real picture.

Without regulation, you have nothing but greed run amok, trampling the well being of those who are not in a position to change the way business is done.

Quote from Kassz007:

Good to know. What specifically did you find "tripeful"?

As I said to Ricter, I'll interpret your evasion of this question:

"What products or services do you think the government needs to provide that the private sector cannot? This is not a loaded question, I am genuinly interested in what you think. "

as your ignorance of the answer.

I am willing to admit that my ideology may have flaws, and I am certainly not 100% correct all of the time. But I like to debate the issue. Why don't you want to give an answer?

Hello · Apr 8, 2011

Canada is running the best economy in the G7 along with the lowest deficit as a percentage of GDP. Clearly Harper is 100% responsible for this!!! Vote Harper!!!

Grandluxe · Apr 8, 2011

talking abt Canadian politics is like talking abt NZ politics.

Who cares.

Kassz007 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Gabfly1:

All manner of legitimate social safety nets, including guaranteed medical care, which are the mark of First World countries. Financial and environmental regulation. Military and police and so on. Postal service, notably in areas of the country where it is not necessarily economically viable. Infrastructure. And so on...

What is a legitimate social safety net in your eyes? Healthcare is HIGHLY debatable at best, but that is another topic altogether. Personally, I believe the best option would be a hybrid public/private combination.

Military, check. Police, check. Postal service in rural areas, check. Infrastructure I would largely agree with, although not in all circumstances.

So lets relate this back to the topic of corporate tax rates and their effect on the economy. Assuming the best option is to have government provide the products/services above, what need is there for further taxation beyond the need to cover the cost of these products/services?

It seems to me that Canada already provides these services, and more. Considering the budget is projected to be balanced in a couple of years, does it not make sense that the government can afford to lay off the extortion a little?

Kassz007 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Gabfly1:

Taken from an earlier post under my Thunderdog user name:

Atlas Shrugged is one of the most overrated pieces of..."literature" that I have ever read. It is nothing more than a pseudo-intellectual diatribe which was a knee-jerk reaction to the growing fascination of a romanticized version of communism in mainstream society at the time it was written. The novel's characters have all the depth of cartoon characters and the writing is tediously repetitive, as though the author had been lecturing to a dim-witted audience. I even read Rand's The Fountainhead, and found more of the same. Here's a thought. Just because the far left is the wrong direction, let us not immediately assume that salvation can only be found in the extreme right. However, in Rand's novels, people only wear either black hats or white hats. Big ones. And all of her sentiments could have been conveyed in a pamphlet rather than a painful 1,074-page book.

Some more:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2084517&highlight=atlas+shrugged#post2084517

Some more:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2223423&highlight=atlas+shrugged#post2223423

Some more:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2253346&highlight=atlas+shrugged#post2253346

I could go on, but I think you get the point.

You need not go on. I disagree, but I respect your opinion, and realize that the book is not for everyone.

Gabfly1 · Apr 8, 2011

Quote from Kassz007:

...So lets relate this back to the topic of corporate tax rates and their effect on the economy. Assuming the best option is to have government provide the products/services above, what need is there for further taxation beyond the need to cover the cost of these products/services?

To balance the budget and to pay off the national debt, which was exacerbated by unnecessary corporate tax cuts that DEMONSTRABLY DID NOT PAY FOR THEMSELVES.