[PublicAnimalNo9]

Gunnair Gunnair:

For the US, we'll see next year. For us, the CPC minority did the bailouts and spending spree before the election and won a majority

I had and still have mixed feelings about the bailouts in Canada. On the one hand, I think any business should have to thrive or fail based on it's practices and it's own merits. However, considering the global meltdown was caused primarily by one particular sector, it seemed to be a little hearltess to watch a company fail as a result of something utterly and completely manufactured by Wall St. Even if their current(at the time) business models sucked ass. Was the number of jobs saved worth the cost? I really can't answer that question.

[Gunnair]

eureka eureka:

First, P.A. the "underclass" does have ownership of their part of the problem but they are powerless to do anything about it.

Then, the "propaganda machine" is the one I wrote of earlier. And it is nothing but a propaganda machine. In the USA it is those six "Think Tanks" that were set up by six wealthy American families in the 1970s for the sole purpose of developing propaganda to bring about a Conservative counter revolution.

And they have been immensely successful. Look at your own perceptions. You have swallowed their message hook, line and sinker.

I have to wonder how you come to the conclusion that some people boycotting some corporations is going to change the economic dynamic. You boycott Tim's. I will boycott Starbucks. Some one else might not like Country Time.

So where are we?

Free Market Capitalism is a favourite emotive of those Tanks. There was never Free Market Capitalism: not even in the very bad old days of the early Industrial Revolution. The successful version of Capitalism that we grew up with is "welfare Capitalism." That is what is being ewroded and that is the why there is now such suffering under a kind of Capitalism that was discarded two generations ago.

The Criminal Justice system is quite another issue but one that is falling to the same type of ideology. We could debate that one in an appropriate place but not mix it up with this unless you want to discuss the number of criminals that are being created out of economic necessity.

That quote button up in the right hand corner allows you to quote the post you wish to agree or disagree with, saving you either throwing out the name of the poster from several posts back or from people thinking you are just arguing with yourself.

[Gunnair]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Gunnair Gunnair:

For the US, we'll see next year. For us, the CPC minority did the bailouts and spending spree before the election and won a majority

I had and still have mixed feelings about the bailouts in Canada. On the one hand, I think any business should have to thrive or fail based on it's practices and it's own merits. However, considering the global meltdown was caused primarily by one particular sector, it seemed to be a little hearltess to watch a company fail as a result of something utterly and completely manufactured by Wall St. Even if their current(at the time) business models sucked ass. Was the number of jobs saved worth the cost? I really can't answer that question.

I agree as well. Dodge and Chevy were two that I had a big issue with - Ford managed to sort themselves out as did other manufacturers, not so those two. Shitty products put them in that position and they were rewarded by loans from the government. That being said, for those two to go under and the tens of thousands of direct and indirect jobs that might have been effected, that would have been a hard pill to swallow.

[Gunnair]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I think we should debate this stuff forever. The 100 or so pages from various threads on this sure have changed mine and andy's viewpoints.

Maybe andy and eureka could start a new thread on the same topic. It's so awesome.

... that's pretty good for a paddy!