I saw this somewhere that will remain unnamed and thought I would see what A/N thinks. Was in response to a "libertar(d)ian's ranting and raving.
This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by SOCIALIST electricity
generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of
I then took a shower in the SOCIALIST clean water provided by the municipal water utility.
After that, I turned on the SOCIALIST radio to one of the FCC regulated channels to hear what the SOCIALIST National Weather
Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
determined the weather was going to be like using SOCIALIST satellites
designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space
I watched this while eating my breakfast of SOCIALIST US
Department of Agriculture inspected food and taking the SOCIALIST drugs
which have been determined as safe by the Food and Drug Administration.
At the appropriate time as kept accurate by the SOCIALIST National Institute
of Standards and Technology and the US Naval Observatory, I get into my
SOCIALIST National Highway Traffic Safety Administration approved automobile
and set out to work on the SOCIALIST roads build by the SOCIALIST local,
state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to
purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the SOCIALIST
Environmental Protection Agency, using SOCIALIST legal tender issued by the
Federal Reserve Bank.
On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to
be sent out via the SOCIALIST US Postal Service and drop the kids off at the
SOCIALIST public school.
If I get lost, I can use my SOCIALIST GPS
navigation technology developed by the United States Department of Defense
and made available to the public in 1996 by President Bill Clinton who
issued a policy directive declaring SOCIALIST GPS to be a dual-use
military/civilian system to be managed as a national SOCIALIST asset.
After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the
SOCIALIST workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, enjoying another two meals
which again do not kill me because of the SOCIALIST USDA, I drive my
SOCIALIST NHTSA car back home on the SOCIALIST DOT roads, to my house which
has not burned down in my absence because of the SOCIALIST state and local
building codes and SOCIALIST fire marshal's inspection, and which has not
been plundered of all it's valuables thanks to the SOCIALIST local police
I then get on my computer and use the SOCIALIST Internet which was developed
by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration and browse the
SOCIALIST World Wide Web using my graphical web browser, both made possible
by Al Gore's socialist High Performance Computing and Communication Act of
I then post on freerepublic.com and Fox News Forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything fucking right, because they're SOCIALIST bastards who want to ruin the country and take all my money away.
And bailing them out while not enforcing antitrust and monopoly laws did anything but further encourage their reckless behavior? It's the governments policy's that helped foster part of this mess. Fannie May and Freddy Mac were making home loans to broke people who they knew they couldn't afford houses. Borrowing money is not a right, and owning a home is not a right. All of the banks that were doing FRAUDULENT loans should have gone under and suffered the consequences. If we bailed them out because it would have taken down our economy, we should have enforced anti-trust and monopoly legislation. All the government did was solidify the monopolies on the back of the taxpayer. If you think this government in control of either the republicans or democrats is about helping the common American citizen, then I think you're not seeing the forest through the trees.
First, I'd ask that you all stop berating me personally, and if you have a problem argue my ideas and not call me a fucktard. I'm extending the same courtesy to you guys, even though I shouldn't be.
It's because I don't subscribe to either of the big parties and I'm not a republican, despite all of the ad hominems that are so carelessly being thrown around in here. Neither of them are for the people of this country. I am also new to the libertarian thing, but think it's one of the best ways to restore freedom and our government back to the people. I'd also think that the greed is good types are not really libertarians, but are neocons or religious right. I don't believe in the initiation of force unless there has been a crime against life, liberty, or property. That pretty much puts me in the libertarian camp I suppose.
The one thing I do know for sure though, is that if we keep voting for these two parties we have right now, we'll continue to get screwed over more and more over time.
"Well I am all for regulation enforcement but you can't do that when the congress guts the funding for the regulatory agencies and strips away the tools they have. Have you ever considered that there are certain industries too essential and important to be left on the hands of for profit international corporations. Industries like banking, healthcare, energy, transportation, military, law enforcement and corrections."
Like our government does a good job running anything?
"Private prison growth has led to things like judges taking bribes to send more people to jails. This had happened in the news."
All a result of statism continuing to grow and the criminalization of perfectly normal, non threatening behavior. Cops aren't there to protect anyone, they are there to put people in jail and use force. I think it's important to think long and hard what we want to use them for.
"Private militaries like blackwater allow the government to fight wars with congressional approval and could one day be used against us"
I think you meant to say "without" instead of "with?" I'm not well versed on this, but I don't think because it's a "private" army we are any less responsible as a nation for their actions.
"Healthcare is unaffordable for many people because everyone is trying to squeeze money out ofour health instead of trying to help people get better without an anterior motive. You have pharmaceutical companies bribing doctors, you have insurers denying claims and people with "pre existing conditions " etc"
Because they are government backed monopolies.
"Energy is another essential. Gas in Mexico I have heard is like over a dollar cheaper than across the border in texas. Maybe because the gas companies are nationalized and not concerned about gouging people for their money."
Don't think that there aren't ancillary costs to that. I'm sure subsidies are in place to keep it artificially low. The cost is just pushed to a different area of society.
"Why shouldn't banks be nationalized. They get these sweetheart loans from the fed and then jack up the rates on anyone else. Why not cut out the middle man. Thru don't add any value to the economy. They produce nothing of value. All of that tarp money could have gone to 6 brand spanning new public banks to replace the big wall st firms after they went bankrupt."
I joined a credit union that is a nonprofit and is member owned. They have some of the best rates and have all the same services as a big bank. I don't need government to run them, they seem to be doing a good job on their own.
"This isn't to say all property should be public instead of private. I think there is a happy medium. But essential industries to public health and well being shouldn't be controlled by greedy international companies whose only concern is their profits and bonuses."
Property rights are not granted by government, they are natural.
It really didn't happen the way you think it did. The community reinvestment act, in the 90's, merely changed to eliminate discrimination, by banks, against consumers based on where they lived. What regulators saw was that loans were only being made to affluent communities, even though people in lower income communities (or minority communities) had the qualifications for smaller loans~ they were being discriminated against because they were being grouped, and not judged individually. What the regulation said was that if the banks wanted to retain their rating, they needed to start loaning to lower income communities as well~ although there was little way to track this, and no way to enforce it in reality.
Where the problem really stems from is in deregulating the savings and loans market~ Around that time the gov't also changed the qualifications an institution needed to make a loan, allowing for the first time small, "untested" companies to start making loans at much higher rates without providing any other community services. This action, the introduction of unequal opportunity in competition, forced traditional banks to also start offering comparable (albeit riskier) loans to maintain that portion of the market.
Fanny and freddie entered the picture because for a long time, Fanny has been closely intertwined with the gov't~ the lobbyists they had were pushing legislation that was intended to help small families and "poorer" people to get into houses, their motto was something like "a home for everyone." Because legislation was being introduced that specifically backed the interest and charter of that institution (along with several higher ups going to and coming from the gov't) they started to develop that attitude that the US would back them up unilaterally, and started (in private) advertising to their investors that their loans were government backed in a way that they really weren't. Because of Fanny's charter, it also started buying up mortgages to short sell as securities.
What we really had was a perfect storm of deregulation and business that was supposed to be private getting to close to government. You had the deregulation of the banking industry creating a new breed of incredibly risky lending, which forced the traditional market to adapt as well; and on top of that, you had a growing giant buying up all of those loans to turn a profit, with the notion that the gov't would bail them out if anything ever happened. Thats why when the mortgages defaulted, Fanny was hit so hard~ it was sucking them up in years previous to advance their charter and make money (If I remember correctly, the more they held low income mortgages, the more they benefitted).
That's not socialism, that's just financial mismanagement, a trademark of many right wing governments like your overspending bush and Reagan administration. Privatising profits and socialising risk is what the right do in my county and is far from Statism. And Statism is the answer in some situations. Since you're talking about debt and the economy in general, assume you want rid of statism that changes the economy, which is every type. Clearly this is not the case if your aren't calling for privatisation of the police or army say. Everyone except anarchist think statism is sometimes the answer, we just differ over the degree and type: I want my government to deliver healthcare and run the planning office, if you were a republican you may want them to run the planning office and also spy on you.
Also, analogies between individual households and governments don't necessarily work, because they're obviously different, how would you even begin to describe public work schemes, inflation and taxation in that sort of language? The point is stop acting like they're the same.
@Daniel Sun. Hell yeah! Socialism! Love it.
Roy Zimmerman has an entertaining perspective on this: