Hildabeast Announces: "Death To America Tour-2016"

[CID1990]

I jumped all over it because that was Spanos-like bat **** craziness.

All I want to know is what do you mean by fairly regulated?

Regarding both Hilary and Walker as crony capitalist players is Spanosesque?

Man...you are truly confused.

No its not Spamdoesque

It's houmdawgish

You just spouted without substance

Unless you care to provide concrete examples from a source not in the bag for the left, we'll just leave it at more thoughtful "wisdom" from klamdawg

[Baldy]

Not really.

But you trying to compare the two is utterly asinine. We all know Hillary is a big government statist who can be bought and eagerly lines her pockets with Wall Street (and foreign government money). Walker is a governor in the midwest who broke the unions backs and has a pro business agenda.

I guess in klamland, being "pro business" automatically makes you a crony capitalist, so maybe he is one in your little coloring "book".

There's no way you guys can be this simplistically partisan is there?

Noam Kalmsky calling someone else simplistically partisan.

[Baldy]

Walker is a typical pompous self righteous congressional idiot...
He might be "pro Business" as long as it suits him - but he is also a certifiable dumb ass
That's great that he broke a union
or freed the slaves
or toppled ISIS

Blah Blah Blah

Good luck with that guy...
If you think Walker is any better for America than Hillary Clinton you have consumed WAY TOO MUCH Koolaid
The guy is going to completely blow up his own state to try to win favor and get elected
He is hell bent on fixing things to which he has no solution - full speed ahead, are the cameras rolling..?

Jill Stein.

[andy7171]

There's no way you guys can be this simplistically partisan is there?

Noam Kalmsky calling someone else simplistically partisan.

[travelinman67]

There's no way you guys can be this simplistically partisan is there?

Noam Kalmsky calling someone else simplistically partisan.

Noam Kalmsky....

[kalm]

There's no way you guys can be this simplistically partisan is there?

Noam Kalmsky calling someone else simplistically partisan.

Not bad, Baldy.

Speaking of Chomsky, his take is that crony capitalism is a redundancy as is corporate welfare. They're a natural part of the system:

CHOMSKY: Ever since the foundation of corporations themselves you've had corporate welfare. A corporation exists thanks to state intervention. How is a corporation different from a partnership? You and I could form a partnership or we could become incorporated and they're different. We form a partnership, the government doesn't have anything to do with it. We form a corporation, we get benefits from the government and there's a cost, we have to pay corporate taxes. But the benefits go back to the beginning. A corporation is based on limited liability. That means that if you and I form a corporation, and some crime is committed, we have limited liability. That means that corporate manslaughter, which is a huge phenomenon, doesn't get treated like manslaughter, in fact it rarely gets treated at all.

Beginning about a century ago, the courts started giving corporations much more benefits. The courts decided, not Congress, that corporations should have the rights of persons, like 1st amendment rights, 4th amendment rights, and so on. A fantastic gift to a collectivist legal entity. In fact, conservatives -- who used to exist in those days but really don't anymore -- bitterly condemned it. They said it's a return to feudalism or a form of Communism, which is sort of accurate.

Then, you go on, and there's further benefits. Skip to the present, the recent trade agreements -- they're called trade agreements, they're really only partially about trade -- give corporations rights that go way beyond persons. Like General Motors can sue Mexico, you can't. They can sue them for cutting into their profits. Let's suppose -- this actually happened -- Mexico wants to set aside some area for a nature reserve, a U.S. corporation can -- and in this case, did -- sue them under the takings provision, or the World Trade Organization's version of it, for cutting into their future profits. Could you do that? No. In many ways they get rights way beyond persons.

So, corporate welfare is redundant. Saying its corporations, of course it's corporate welfare.

The comment that you quoted, "crony capitalism," and so on -- what's capitalism supposed to be? Yeah, it's crony capitalism. That's capitalism, you do things for your friends, your associates, they do things for you, you try to influence the political system, obviously. You can read about this in Adam Smith. If people read Adam Smith instead of just worshipping him, they could learn a lot about how economies work. So, for example, he's concerned mostly with England, and he pointed out that in England, and I'm virtually quoting, he said the merchants and manufacturers are the principal architects of government policy and they make sure their own interests are well cared for, however grievous the effects on others, including the people of England.

Yes, it's their business. What else should they do? It's like when people talk about greedy capitalists, that's redundant. You have to be a greedy capitalist or you're out of business. In fact, it's a legal requirement that you be a greedy capitalist and that you don't pay attention to what happens to anyone else. You know, it's not just Ayn Rand, that's the law. So, these complaints don't make any sense.

Look, the biggest welfare that's given to corporations is never even discussed. Like, take this place where we're sitting, M.I.T., it's a mostly government-funded institution, though technically it's private.

Have you ever heard of the information revolution? Well, where'd that come from? Mostly here. You're using a computer. Yeah, it was designed here -- well not only here -- but it was under Pentagon contract. Back in the 1950s, I.B.M. was learning how to shift from punch cards to computers at the M.I.T.-Pentagon laboratory and the Harvard equivalent, all at public expense. They finally got to the point where they could build their own computer, the I.B.M. stretch computer in the early 60s, but no business could buy it, it was way too expensive, so it was used by the National Security Agency. It really wasn't until the 1980s that they could start making profit from this government, state-created technology. It's the same with the internet, it was in the public sector for around 30 years before it was handed over for private profit.

The whole economy is geared toward corporate welfare, same is true with pharmaceuticals and bio-engineering and everything else.

Even what's called trade. Oceanic trade is based on containers, OK, developed by the Navy, because it's too expensive for private corporations.

Commercial air travel is practically an off-shoot of the Air Force. In fact, just about every place you look -- there are some things that were developed within private industry, not a lot, but some, integrated circuits, Texas Instruments and so on, but they couldn't sell 'em, so the government was the main procurer, that's public funding.

Talking about corporate welfare is extremely misleading. The economy rests on the state sector to a substantial extent and a lot of it is designed to socialize cost and risk and privatize profit.

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20081114.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[kalm]

Regarding both Hilary and Walker as crony capitalist players is Spanosesque?

Man...you are truly confused.

No its not Spamdoesque

It's houmdawgish

You just spouted without substance

Unless you care to provide concrete examples from a source not in the bag for the left, we'll just leave it at more thoughtful "wisdom" from klamdawg

I know you're not this uninformed.

Hey, you like Walker and those who support him. You're cool with the influence that money has on elections and the policies driven by the winners. I disagree but understand. Just admit it.

7. He has endorsed crony-capitalism by way of providing $220 million in taxpayer money to finance an NBA stadium.

Calling his plan a “common-sense, fiscally conservative approach,” Gov. Scott Walker on Tuesday said new growth in income tax revenue from Milwaukee Bucks players, employees and visiting teams will generate enough money to cover debt payments on $220 million in state-issued bonds for a new arena.

Walker told members of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce and media at a news conference that he would put the plan in his state budget next week.

Walker called it a “Pay Their Way” proposal.

http://www.redstate.com/diary/freedomre ... tt-walker/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Baldy]

Noam Kalmsky calling someone else simplistically partisan.

Not bad, Baldy.

Speaking of Chomsky, his take is that crony capitalism is a redundancy as is corporate welfare. They're a natural part of the system:

CHOMSKY: Ever since the foundation of corporations themselves you've had corporate welfare. A corporation exists thanks to state intervention. How is a corporation different from a partnership? You and I could form a partnership or we could become incorporated and they're different. We form a partnership, the government doesn't have anything to do with it. We form a corporation, we get benefits from the government and there's a cost, we have to pay corporate taxes. But the benefits go back to the beginning. A corporation is based on limited liability. That means that if you and I form a corporation, and some crime is committed, we have limited liability. That means that corporate manslaughter, which is a huge phenomenon, doesn't get treated like manslaughter, in fact it rarely gets treated at all.

Beginning about a century ago, the courts started giving corporations much more benefits. The courts decided, not Congress, that corporations should have the rights of persons, like 1st amendment rights, 4th amendment rights, and so on. A fantastic gift to a collectivist legal entity. In fact, conservatives -- who used to exist in those days but really don't anymore -- bitterly condemned it. They said it's a return to feudalism or a form of Communism, which is sort of accurate.

Then, you go on, and there's further benefits. Skip to the present, the recent trade agreements -- they're called trade agreements, they're really only partially about trade -- give corporations rights that go way beyond persons. Like General Motors can sue Mexico, you can't. They can sue them for cutting into their profits. Let's suppose -- this actually happened -- Mexico wants to set aside some area for a nature reserve, a U.S. corporation can -- and in this case, did -- sue them under the takings provision, or the World Trade Organization's version of it, for cutting into their future profits. Could you do that? No. In many ways they get rights way beyond persons.

So, corporate welfare is redundant. Saying its corporations, of course it's corporate welfare.

The comment that you quoted, "crony capitalism," and so on -- what's capitalism supposed to be? Yeah, it's crony capitalism. That's capitalism, you do things for your friends, your associates, they do things for you, you try to influence the political system, obviously. You can read about this in Adam Smith. If people read Adam Smith instead of just worshipping him, they could learn a lot about how economies work. So, for example, he's concerned mostly with England, and he pointed out that in England, and I'm virtually quoting, he said the merchants and manufacturers are the principal architects of government policy and they make sure their own interests are well cared for, however grievous the effects on others, including the people of England.

Yes, it's their business. What else should they do? It's like when people talk about greedy capitalists, that's redundant. You have to be a greedy capitalist or you're out of business. In fact, it's a legal requirement that you be a greedy capitalist and that you don't pay attention to what happens to anyone else. You know, it's not just Ayn Rand, that's the law. So, these complaints don't make any sense.

Look, the biggest welfare that's given to corporations is never even discussed. Like, take this place where we're sitting, M.I.T., it's a mostly government-funded institution, though technically it's private.

Have you ever heard of the information revolution? Well, where'd that come from? Mostly here. You're using a computer. Yeah, it was designed here -- well not only here -- but it was under Pentagon contract. Back in the 1950s, I.B.M. was learning how to shift from punch cards to computers at the M.I.T.-Pentagon laboratory and the Harvard equivalent, all at public expense. They finally got to the point where they could build their own computer, the I.B.M. stretch computer in the early 60s, but no business could buy it, it was way too expensive, so it was used by the National Security Agency. It really wasn't until the 1980s that they could start making profit from this government, state-created technology. It's the same with the internet, it was in the public sector for around 30 years before it was handed over for private profit.

The whole economy is geared toward corporate welfare, same is true with pharmaceuticals and bio-engineering and everything else.

Even what's called trade. Oceanic trade is based on containers, OK, developed by the Navy, because it's too expensive for private corporations.

Commercial air travel is practically an off-shoot of the Air Force. In fact, just about every place you look -- there are some things that were developed within private industry, not a lot, but some, integrated circuits, Texas Instruments and so on, but they couldn't sell 'em, so the government was the main procurer, that's public funding.

Talking about corporate welfare is extremely misleading. The economy rests on the state sector to a substantial extent and a lot of it is designed to socialize cost and risk and privatize profit.

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20081114.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chomsky's take on Capitalism. As about as useful as a Yankee's fan take on the Red Sox.

[kalm]

Not bad, Baldy.

Speaking of Chomsky, his take is that crony capitalism is a redundancy as is corporate welfare. They're a natural part of the system:



http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20081114.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chomsky's take on Capitalism. As about as useful as a Yankee's fan take on the Red Sox.

You didn't read it did you?

[Baldy]

Chomsky's take on Capitalism. As about as useful as a Yankee's fan take on the Red Sox.

You didn't read it did you?

Yes. I got a good chuckle out of it. Actually written from a Yankee/Red Sox perspective.

[kalm]

You didn't read it did you?

Yes. I got a good chuckle out of it. Actually written from a Yankee/Red Sox perspective.

Just curious then, which part(s) did you disagree with?

[Baldy]

Yes. I got a good chuckle out of it. Actually written from a Yankee/Red Sox perspective.

Just curious then, which part(s) did you disagree with?

His entire perspective. The Warren, Stein, Obama "you didn't build that" collectivist point of view.

[kalm]

Just curious then, which part(s) did you disagree with?

His entire perspective. The Warren, Stein, Obama "you didn't build that" collectivist point of view.

You didn't read it did you?

[Baldy]

His entire perspective. The Warren, Stein, Obama "you didn't build that" collectivist point of view.

You didn't read it did you?

Obviously you didn't.

[CID1990]

His entire perspective. The Warren, Stein, Obama "you didn't build that" collectivist point of view.

You didn't read it did you?

I read your poor example of crony capitalism in the form of the stadium project.

So just one example of something that may or may not be crony capitalism is all you have?

Did he give the stadium project to family or business partners?

Seriously- you should start your own Chairman Mao Thought Struggle Group- maybe you can convince some more soft headed teens and hard core lefties

[andy7171]

softed headed teens ---> WTAG

[travelinman67]

Holy shit...CID sums up Kalm with a few sentences.

Kalm, you have just been owned by Baldy and CID, and I'll bet you're unable to see how.

Simply put, you allow yourself to submit to the social witchdoctor demagogues...Mao was a champion...Chomsky a budding poser.

This is a moment in your life where you can evolve and grow...

...or not.

Don't waste it.

[kalm]

You didn't read it did you?

I read your poor example of crony capitalism in the form of the stadium project.

So just one example of something that may or may not be crony capitalism is all you have?

Did he give the stadium project to family or business partners?

Seriously- you should start your own Chairman Mao Thought Struggle Group- maybe you can convince some more soft headed teens and hard core lefties

Here, I'm going to help you guys out a little:

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of state interventionism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An economy that is nominally free-market, but allows for preferential regulation and other favorable government intervention based on personal relationships. In such a system, the false appearance of "pure" capitalism is publicly maintained to preserve the exclusive influence of well-connected individuals.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/defin ... z3Y3TEQkDp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pretty much jives with what Chomsky said in the quote Baldy never read.

But yeah, let's pretend certain politicians rise above this. Especially those on the Republican side.

[Grizalltheway]

softed headed teens ---> WTAG

Ha! Good one.

[andy7171]

softed headed teens ---> WTAG

Ha! Good one.

[Chizzang]

There's no such thing as crony capitalism
and
I've got a bridge to nowhere I can sell you guys...

[kalm]

There's no such thing as crony capitalism
and
I've got a bridge to nowhere I can sell you guys...

Ssshhh, quiet, don't dash their hopes. They've gone all Chomsky-Mao-Nanny state-Hilary supporter. They're pulling out all the stops and they think they're winning. All we need is Soros, Alinsky, and Marx and my day is complete!

[CID1990]

There's no such thing as crony capitalism
and
I've got a bridge to nowhere I can sell you guys...

I never said there was no such thing- if course there is

But klam's assertion that hillary and Walker are the same in that category is just hyperbole

Hopefully he is off somewhere furiously searching the internets for something stronger than his stadium example, for which he has yet to connect the "crony capitalism" dots

[kalm]

There's no such thing as crony capitalism
and
I've got a bridge to nowhere I can sell you guys...

I never said there was no such thing- if course there is

But klam's assertion that hillary and Walker are the same in that category is just hyperbole

Hopefully he is off somewhere furiously searching the internets for something stronger than his stadium example, for which he has yet to connect the "crony capitalism" dots

You're right, Justice Roberts. Donations to Walker are pure as the driven Wisconsin snow. No access and influence peddling going on at all. That's only a liberal thang.

You've either dug yourself too deep to bail out or have taken a long ride on the struggle bus today.

[dbackjon]

it is funny to see how deranged T-man, Baldy, et all at the thought of Hillary being President.