Kieswetter is sitting with a massive problem

private ownership of government, private ownership of the markets itself

in othewords, nothing stops capitalism from morphing into monopolistic behaviour

ggwp
Oh gawd..... :sleep:

:barefoot:

Typical of someone who doesn't read anything that isn't handed to him with the State's stamp of approval.
 
Oh gawd..... :sleep:

:barefoot:

Typical of someone who doesn't read anything that isn't handed to him with the State's stamp of approval.

can you back up this claim with third party sources that are independent of your own opinion
 
@saturnz

Let me ask you something....

Let's imagine that we lived in a meritocracy, right? Private ownership of all the means of production including all the functions of the State.

You say capitalism will just morph into crony-capitalism, in this economic environment.

A good example of crony-capitalism in practice is bank-bailouts.

So, you're saying bank-bailouts would still be possible in a private law society, I'm saying they wouldn't... not unless you first broke the law to acquire the (privately-owned)money.... and then the victim could prosecute you.

So if you say they(bank bailouts) would still be possible, where is the money going to come from to give to the banks?
 
@saturnz

Let me ask you something....

Let's imagine that we lived in a meritocracy, right?

hypotheticals are not really something I entertain

As opposed to other people agreeing with me?

as opposed to third party citations from people who are experts in the field

if I want a medical opinion, I go to a doctor, if I want a legal opinion, I go to a lawyer

in this case I would expect something from someone who is an expert on the state
 
hypotheticals are not really something I entertain
Since it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it, I believe you.

But to me not being able to, is not the barrier you assume it to be. The bigger barrier is not being willing to.

That's not something I can do much about. It's beyond my pay grade.

At least we got there without too much effort :thumbsup: .

as opposed to third party citations from people who are experts in the field

if I want a medical opinion, I go to a doctor, if I want a legal opinion, I go to a lawyer

in this case I would expect something from someone who is an expert on the state
When you use the word 'expert', you assume a meritocracy, where the most able are free to rise to the top.

I don't believe that we live in a meritocracy. Not for a minute. I think the reality is that incentives to corruption are sufficiently overwhelming as to make an absolute pig-stye of that rose-tinted world view.

Whenever the State is involved in protecting you or offering you advice(or threatening you unless you take advice), there is a conflict of interest. That is to say it is heavily incentivized to behave criminally.

Politicians and the 'philanthropists' they enable and sustain, at the expenses of the unsuspecting dupe, may come and go, from election cycle to election cycle, and civilization to civilization, but that incentive remains ever-present.

If you want to know the size of that conflict of interest - which I'm only speaking through you, now, to others who are reading this(because of the aforementioned problem) - it seems we are not short of information. Even though the State and its cronies in media and academia like to omit it's crimes from it's editions of history.

1) $33 trillion in public debt, with no signs of abatement, and no known strategy of paying it back.

2) a pile of corpses, 200+ million high, of those murdered by their own governments in the 20th century alone. Excluding war-dead.
 
When you use the word 'expert', you assume a meritocracy, where the most able are free to rise to the top.

no I mean someone who studied the matter and is qualified to express an opinion
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X