Paul M Foster wrote:
>>>The Democrat economic model is socialism (no business). The Republican
>>>economic model is facism (government controlled business).
>>
>>In my opinion, you've got that backwards: it's business controlling
>>government. Those with billions of dollars also control the media,
>>and they pretty much decide who runs, and how successful they are.
>
>
> I'll agree in part to the former, but not the latter. The press is all
> in favor of any democrat who comes down the pike, and uses every
> opportunity they can to push them.
I think you've got a very simplistic view of things. You're basically
saying that the PRESS are pushing toward one candidate instead of
another. Yes, that's true, perhaps because journalists tend to be
liberals and haven't had much experience in business--who knows. But
the press vs candidate dynamics is only the miniscule tip of the iceberg.
First of all, I said that the people who push the billions of dollars
around will control the politicians. One way, is via the media. They
happen to control the MEDIA, among other things, and the MEDIA isn't
just the print press, nor just the "news" types of shows. It's MTV
and late night Leno et al.
But, be that as it may, I believe that by the time you're voting for
Bush vs Kerry, 90 percent of the work is already done. They have made
sure that the candidates who run are ones they can "work with". These
people probably care very little who wins.
If you think that mega-biz/banker elites don't pull strings in dozens
of ways to narrow the field of choices, just think about this: of all
the tens of thousands of smart, polished, maybe even honest, people
that one might put forth as candidates, are Bush and Kerry really the
best?
> I think we've had this discussion before; your position (roughly) was
> that the only thing of value in trade was manufactured goods, and that
> "services" were only really of value on paper. Something like that. As
> before, I disagree. And I'm not at all sure a trade deficit is entirely
> a bad thing.
Wow. No comment.
> Moreover, I'm certain that trade deficits stay unbalanced
> ad infinitum. Like everything else, there are cycles.
So we'll just wait, and it will swing the other way? Wow. No comment.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:56:32 EDT