Republicans & Conservatives Archives

C&J,

“My guess is that the supporters of the first issue would identify with the right, while those who think the second group was doing the Lord’s work would call themselves leftists.”

Both sets of supporters are morons.

Rocky

Rocky

Agree.

C&J,

Just curious, since clearly genetic modification is a natural process, expedited and guided by interested parties, do you think that someone should be able to patent genetic code?

While science is interesting, does anyone understand that our economy is failing!!! 18 months of a stimulus and nothing is working. Absolutely none of Obama’s economic team has ever run a business or met a payroll. Should they be fired, who cares, Obama will just put another socialist team in place. Obama’s answer, we need another stimulus and jobs bill, I don’t guess the first had enough pork in it. Does anyone on this sit actually know how much economic trouble the country is really in? 17 states with unemployment over 10%.

Berretta9, Interesting, isn’t it?
Sort of reminiscent of the band on the Titanic, playing their Last Song.
None of the gallant members of the band survived.

As for the science, when science, government, commerce, religion, blind partisan loyalists, and the other sectors comprising the majority of society begin to collude for their own nefarious purposes, then that society is in big trouble.

So, where is the band?
Perhaps we should enjoy the last song?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, until repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Beretta, this same old harping does get old. Too bad you can’t keep up with anything that isn’t Obama bashing.
Do you really go to sleep at night thinking that the entire rest of the populace is dumb? Quit poking with the sharp sticks and accept that there are issues outside of that narrow field.
We get it….economy sucks right now, and maybe if your right-aisled heros weren’t so intent on destroying Obama, we could have been a little farther along and better off with the program. You don’t really give a rats’ patoody about the people who are really hurting right now….you just need to keep the festering directed on Obama so nobody gets the idea that you have given up the hate patrol.

jane doe:

It has nothing to do with hate of anyone. And the economy is not just bad; it is terrible. America is about to go belly up! Every week we hear more bad news. Housing market down, as much as 50% loss in property values, job creation at a standstill, number of those signing up for unemployment is up every week, trillions spent to make things better and nothing has worked, 2 ½ trillion further in debt, pork money for all the failing dem states and cities, war scenario on our borders, and Obama and the dems are in control, who would you blame. The dems have been in control of both houses for 4 years and Obama has been in control almost 2 years. You accuse me of bashing Obama, and yet for 3 years all we have heard is Bush bashing from the president and even longer from the dems, and it is still going on. Did you protest the Bush bashing or did you contribute? At what point do we start to panic?

The economy is first and foremost on everyone’s mind. At 9 ½% unemployment nationwide, above 9% for the past 18 months, and like I said before, 17 states with unemployment above 10%: GW and stem cell research takes a back seat. For the past 2 plus years all we have heard from the left is the worst economy since the great depression, and now, all of a sudden, when we are looking at a mid-term election, we don’t want to talk about the economy.

Sorry, but Hillary had it right when she said Obama did not have the experience, and Biden had it right when he said, the time will come when the American people will say, “what have we done by electing this guy”. We have a president who is on a perpetual vacation, playing golf, or partying in the WH. He tells us, “we need to tighten our belts”, and at the same time we are pasting thousands for him, his family, and his dog to jet set around the world. And all this doesn’t matter.

Obama is out there taking credit for a victory in Iraq, with a surge that he voted against and he is a liar, but that doesn’t even matter. Obama is trying to do an end run around the congress and invoke “cap and trade” by executive order, but that doesn’t even matter.

The only thing that matters to American’s is the economy and it will show in November. Bill Clinton told the dem politicians, “vote for obamacare and the American people will love you”, but we now have the dem party telling politicians, “Don’t bring up obamacare and do NOT talk about supporting it”. If these dem programs were so great, why not run on them? But all these lies and trickery doesn’t matter: because it’s about the economy…

d.a.n.
The rhetorical question of “Where is the band?” is probably lost in the equation of it’s not over till the fat lady sings and like so many other Obama and big government corruption they can’t find a lady fat enouth to sing. I think Michelle with her obesity program has an outside shot at finding a candidate, though not the best one.

Seems to me anyone that feels that the authors of this thread are doing the country a disservice by not addressing the economy should contact David and apply to be an author of their very own thread here at watchblog.

It appears easier for some to just sit in the peanut gallery and write reams of off-topic criticism.

Rocky

C&J,

One of the fears some scientists have is that we are losing crop diversity through genetic engineering. The scenerio is that a type of disease that may have damaged a particular strain of let’s say corn will now wipe out the entire genetically altered corn plants specifically engineered for that area and the strain of corn plant that may have resisted no longer exists outside of the doomsday silos
We want big strawberries, corn, apples but thay may not be the hardiest plants when it comes to resisting disease.

For Tom and Beretta:

I hate Obama, I hate Obama, He’s a communist, Muslim radical hell bent on the destruction of America.
Your welcome.

Rocky Marks

Since your post was immediately following mine, it appears that your comments were aimed at me.

I offer concise and precise writtings. There are times I feel more aserbic and sarcastic. Does either qualify me more or less to make comments on a given subject?

To start telling people they can’t talk here because they are not as American as I am is such ignorance and arrogance. In this country we are all at the same rank, and that is citizen. Nobody, but nobody is above that rank and to say that someone has to have a certain pedigree to speak at certain levels is just plain over the top un-Americanism. As far as I am concerned you or any other Progressive, liberal, leftist, socialist, communist, libertarian, tea party participant, republican, democrat, conservative, Mormon, Methodist, Baptist, Bhudaist (really sorry DRR if I mis-spelled that), Hindu, Islamist and so on they can all speak here. And why not? You answer that.

tom humes,

“To start telling people they can’t talk here because they are not as American as I am is such ignorance and arrogance. In this country we are all at the same rank, and that is citizen. Nobody, but nobody is above that rank and to say that someone has to have a certain pedigree to speak at certain levels is just plain over the top un-Americanism.”

Really?

Just where in my post did I actually write that?

All I did in my post was to invite those that felt the author of this thread (Oh, and BTW I wasn’t specific, the fact that your post came before mine was pure serendipity) wasn’t addressing the needs of this country by posting a thread on science, to apply to write their very own articles, so that in doing so, they might discuss anything their little hearts desire.

I think I was pretty succinct. The words I wrote are exactly the words I meant, please don’t ascribe any other meaning to them than what they are.

Rocky

RM:

“Seems to me anyone that feels that the authors of this thread are doing the country a disservice by not addressing the economy should contact David and apply to be an author of their very own thread here at watchblog.

It appears easier for some to just sit in the peanut gallery and write reams of off-topic criticism.”

Rocky, FYI, since I do not post articles on WB, but I have in times past asked or suggested C&J write on a certain subject and they have courteously done just that. If you don’t like what I write about, then you don’t have to respond. I’m sure C&J knows I am not trying to say they are doing the country a disservice. It almost appears as if you are trying to drive a wedge between conservatives on WB, as the left tries to drive a wedge between classes of Americans.

I am actually much more concerned about the economy, than I am about stem cell research or GW. But I do understand why liberals would not want to discuss the subject of the economy!!!

Beretta

“I am actually much more concerned about the economy, than I am about stem cell research or GW. But I do understand why liberals would not want to discuss the subject of the economy!!!”

There are no fewer than 6 articles dealing with the economy in the “conservative” column alone since August 6th.

I applaud C&J for their diversity of subjects, and seeing that they seem to be the only “conservatives” posting articles here in the last few months, I also applaud their stick-to-itiveness.

I am truly sorry the right feels so abused.

Rocky

1) I’m not an anti-GM sort. I’m all for testing for safety. If nothing comes up, we approve it.

2) The issue, and this comes up in regular genetic modification approaches as well (like Breeding) is that these new genetic products have not been fined tune the way the products of evolution has. When a GM species has cross-fertility with its non GM counterpart, this can create a bit of a problem, if the GM genes aren’t optimized for survival outside controlled environs.

3) Another issue is the way the GM production companies deal with farmers, forcing them to rebuy seed all the time, instead of socking some back. It’s a bit exploitative.

All in all, I’m in favor of taking a more scientific perspective on these things. I’m pretty sick of the sort of folk science/special interest science approach that some foist on the community, because at the end of the day, if that policy they try to force isn’t responding well to the real world, it doesn’t matter who benefited, most of us will suffer for it.

Government should pursue the public interest as paramount, and as established in reasonably objective and factual terms. No more government by Chicken running with its head cut off.

C&J, you did not mention one group. The group that swallows the the agribusiness GMO propaganda hook line and sinker and calls those who question the gloriousness of GMO’s, anti-science mush brains.

Cross pollination with other varieties could eventually insure that nothing but GMO varieties will be grown. Modifying the GMO varieties to insure that the seed they produce will not mature and germinate, could lead to total control of the food supply by corporations.

Food production and hunger are two separate issues. As far back as the 1940’s, the government and agribusiness predicted that together, they could produce enough food to feed the human population. They have done that but, people are still going hungry, and some are still starving.

jlw,

“The group that swallows the the agribusiness GMO propaganda hook line and sinker and calls those who question the gloriousness of GMO’s, anti-science mush brains.”

Farmers have been modifying crops for several millenia. Grapefruit, tangelos, Navel oranges, and grains are only some examples of how foodstuffs have been changed, and managed to match the environment, and needs of the people that cultivate them.

If GMOs can eliminate the need for chemicals, for instance, to fight blight, insects, and the need for massive fertilization, I’m all for it. In a previous thread C&J mentioned the “dead area” in the Gulf. It is possible theoretically, that this can be done away with by planting GMOs.
For the most part Genetically Modified Food has gone through enough testing to prove it’s worthiness to not only feed an ever enlarging world population, but to lower the costs of producing it as well.

Is this a bad thing?

Rocky

Gergle

We have to be very precise. I don’t think you should be able to patent an existing genetic code - one the occurs in nature - just because you found it or figured it out. You should be able to patent a particular modification of (say) a seed.

You recall that patents were designed as a way for us to SPREAD innovation and knowledge. The idea is actually included in our Constitution. The patent holder must reveal his innovations in return for protection for a limited amount of time. Others can improve on it and when the patent runs out copy it. I wouldn’t want to drive individuals and firms to become secretive in order to protect their intellectual property.

Beretta

I have written about the failed stimulus. IMO, the Obama team is focused on the wrong issues. They want to create greater equality and are willing to do it at the price of economic prosperity. But that is a different topic.

Jlw

Rocky explained better to you than I can.

What I can add is, please notice the contradiction in your statement – “Cross pollination with other varieties could eventually insure that nothing but GMO varieties will be grown. Modifying the GMO varieties to insure that the seed they produce will not mature and germinate, could lead to total control of the food supply by corporations.”

If the GMOs can’t produce mature seeds, they obviously cannot take over all varieties.

We can use GMOs wisely. We have. You ate GMOs today. We should not stop science from making life better.

Stephen

The GOOD thing about GMOs is that many will not survive outside the place they are developed to occupy and most will not be able to reproduce independently. That is one of the point.

You know that a mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey. It has some of the good characteristics of both, but cannot reproduce. It is a type of GMO. I don’t think horses and mules naturally would reproduce.

Andre
I understand the fear, but it is misguided. Using GM crops does not preclude using others or keeping reserves of biodiversity. You could indeed lose a crop to some sort of blight. That happens pretty all the time anyway someplace in the world. It is a manageable problem. GM crops actually put an additional management tool at our disposal.

We do have to manage problems of blight today anyway. Consider the apples you eat. They are all clones. Every delicious, Gala, Fuji or whatever you like is genetically identical to the others because they are actually the same plant, grafted millions of times. This has created significant challenges for agriculture and it has all been done w/o GM. GM may in fact help mitigate this problem.

In any case, there is no scientific reason to oppose GMOs outright. As with anything else, we need to be careful in their applications. But again, I will point out that this is nothing new. Invasive species have caused significant havoc w/o GM. In fact, GM may restore some things, such as the American chestnut, which once made up a big part of our Eastern forests but was almost wiped out by a foreign blight that came over in 1904.

Caution is recommended when messing around with mother nature?

• Soon the Starship Enterprise landing party starts to notice painful blue sores are forming on their bodies; Spock however remains immune. Miri informs them that these are the first sign of the disease, and they will soon become like the other adults. The team searches an abandoned hospital for clues to the mysterious condition. They discover the infects only those who have reached puberty. It is an accidental side-effect of an experiment to prolong life; the technique works on children, but when they reach puberty, they enter a short period of violent rage and then die. Shockingly, they learn that the children are over 300 years old, having aged only one month’s time every century.

• “Life prolongation. Didn’t have much luck, did they?” - McCoy, on the bioengineering experiment

: )

Andre

I understand the fear, but it is misguided.Using GM crops does not preclude using others or keeping reserves of biodiversity. You could indeed lose a crop to some sort of blight. That happens pretty all the time anyway someplace in the world. It is a manageable problem. GM crops actually put an additional management tool at our disposal.

We do have to manage problems of blight today anyway. Consider the apples you eat. They are all clones. Every delicious, Gala, Fuji or whatever you like is genetically identical to the others because they are actually the same plant, grafted millions of times. This has created significant challenges for agriculture and it has all been done w/o GM. GM may in fact help mitigate this problem.

In any case, there is no scientific reason to oppose GMOs outright. As with anything else, we need to be careful in their applications. But again, I will point out that this is nothing new. Invasive species have caused significant havoc w/o GM. In fact, GM may restore some things, such as the American Chestnut, which once made up a big part of our Eastern forests but was almost wiped out by a foreign blight that came over in 1904.

“What I can add is, please notice the contradiction in your statement”.

Jack is a third generation family farmer. He grows a standard variety of corn. Jacks neighbor, Mark grows Monsanto GMO corn. Pollen from Marks fields cross pollinated a portion of Jacks crop. Monsanto insisted on having Jack’s crop sampled and some of it was found to contain Monsanto modified genes. Now Jack is being sued by Monsanto, accused of stealing their patented genes.

The following spring, Jack also learned that his preserved seed has also been contaminated with GMO seed and he has patches throughout his fields where that seed failed to germinate.

On the other hand, Mark signed a long term contract with Monsanto. By contract he cannot use any herbicides or pesticides that are not Monsanto products and Monsanto has a right to search his farm and test his crop, any time they choose and without notification. In addition, Mark cannot sue Monsanto if they are at fault for any damage that may occur. Mark doesn’t bother with saving a portion of his crop for seed, he knows it will not germinate and that he has to buy his seed each year, from Monsanto. For the privilege of growing GMOs, Mark signed away a lot of his individual rights.

C&J, what contradiction? Haven’t you ever grown corn in your garden? If so, did you read the labeling about cross pollination.

“You should be able to patent a particular modification of (say) a seed”.

Care to guess where the gene that modifies the germination process to prevent it from happening is located? Monsanto can manipulate the genes to produce their seed stock so that the first generation seed they sell farmers will germinate, but the second generation wont.

Rocky, what have independent studies said about herbicide usage in GMO fields? Ditto, crop yields?

“Any scientist who tells you GMOs are safe and not to worry about it, is either ignorant of the history of science or is deliberately lying. Nobody knows what the long term effects will be”….Genetist, David Suzuki.

Of course, Monsanto would never lie or mislead just because billions in profits are at stake. The asbestos industry never lied about the harmful effects of asbestos. Those tobacco executives never lied under oath and of course, the petrochemical industry never lied about DDT or the other harmful chemicals they have introduced into the environment.

Dan, I remember that episode.

Jlw

I am surprised at your hypothetical situation. I don’t believe that Monsanto would have a case against “Jack” but Jack might have a case against Monsanto, if indeed he suffered the real damage you mention. Your friend might want to get better representation.

GMOs are as safe as any other form of crop. We hear lots of stories, but see little proof of the problems. On the other hand, we know that pesticide and herbicide use is way down on crops such as GMO cotton. We know that yields have improved, which is why “Mark” buys all his seeds. We know that GMOs are an important part of no-till farming, which is helping save our soils and mitigate dead zones off the coasts.

There is no life w/o risk and there never was nor will ever be a golden age. GMOs are making life and the environment generally better.

jlw,

“Monsanto would never lie or mislead just because billions in profits are at stake. The asbestos industry never lied about the harmful effects of asbestos. Those tobacco executives never lied under oath and of course, the petrochemical industry never lied about DDT or the other harmful chemicals they have introduced into the environment.”

Surely this some vast conspiracy to dupe the poor farmers into selling their souls to the devil, in this case Monsanto.

I agree that seeds should not be patented. The process that created the seeds, yes, the seeds themselves, no.

And while I find Monsanto’s tactics deplorable, I am not willing to throw the baby out with the bath water. That a few farmers are overdosing their crops with herbicide reflects more on the farmers than it does on Monsanto.

David Suzuki himself, in an article at Vista Magazine online stated;
“A new meta-analysis of the effects of Bt cotton and Bt maize on non-target insects in the field has since found that these types of crops appear, at least on the surface, to be less harmful to insects than farming methods that use insecticides.
This report, recently published in the journal Science, looked at 42 field experiments and found that fields of Bt cotton and maize contained more non-pest insects than did those that used insecticides to control pests.”

Obviously Monsanto is at least doing a few things right, or the farmers wouldn’t be buying their product.

Rocky

C&J, no appreciable difference between regular varieties and GMO herbicide resistant varieties, 3 to 4% increase in yields in insect resistant strains.

Monsanto had the upper hand with their vast resources and help from government and courts. Farmers are learning how to fight back and are winning a few.

“GMOs are as safe as any other form of crop”. According to the agcorps and the government. Real science is both optimistic and cautious because no one knows the long term effects, positive or negative.

According to you, the government is incapable of doing much of anything well except facilitate and enable multinational corporations.

Rocky, I am not nearly as dismissive of conspiracy theories as you seem to be, especially ones involving the government and some of these large multinational corporations. We have just had a healthy dose of how these corporations can and do manipulate our elected officials and our regulatory agencies with the BP incident. Is it possible that Monsanto and other agcorps are capable of doing the same? I not only think it possible but probable.

I am not ready to throw the baby out with the bath water either, nor am I ready to bend over for the multinationals and the governments and courts as some seem to be doing.

jlw,

“I am not nearly as dismissive of conspiracy theories as you seem to be, especially ones involving the government and some of these large multinational corporations.”

Yeah, I know , and it’s entertaining to watch how some folks get all heated up over things they have absolutely no control over.
I never praised Monsanto, I merely noted that farmers apparently liked their products, and are also apparently willing to make their pact with the devil in order to have them.

Back to the original subject;

I find it incrediblely ironic that the Italian farmer in the article, in his fight against what he felt was tyranny, was vandalized by some folks that, in their own Quixotic fight against yet another perceived form of tyranny, committed an act of tyranny themselves on the farmer by destroying his crops.

What strange beings these humans are…

Rocky

jlw

If there is no appreciable difference in yields or performance, nobody will buy the GMOs and you can not worry about it.

The fact that people want to ban them indicates that they think they will be popular. They didn’t try prohibition against liquor because they thought nobody wanted to drink.

Rocky

I sent an email to your old address. If you didn’t get it, please send me an email.

Rocky, you see no possible negative effects if independent farmers become employees, voluntarilly or otherwise? You see no possible negative effects in a few corporations owning the seed supply for every food crop grown by humans?

David vs Monsanto: Link TV.

jlw,

“Rocky, you see no possible negative effects if independent farmers become employees, voluntarilly or otherwise? You see no possible negative effects in a few corporations owning the seed supply for every food crop grown by humans?”

Please show me exactly where I made these statements.

And just what do you suggest we do?

Rocky

C&J said “The fact that people want to ban them indicates that they think they will be popular”.

Farmers get gifts from Monsanto for dropping a dime on their neighbors. Many farmers signed agreements with Monsanto out of fear. Farmers are beginning to mistrust one another. Farmers are guilty until proven innocent and it costs hundreds of thousands to defend themselves. That is beginning to change.

Polychlorinated Biphenyls: PCBs, East St. Louis Illinois. Water supplies worldwide.

Dioxin: Agent Orange, our troops, the Vietnamese, Times Beach Mo., Nitro WVA., Reagan Administration cover up.

Glyphosate Herbicides: Roundup. Toxic to humans, fish, wildlife, earthworms, bees, soil bacteria and beneficial fungi.

Bovine Growth Hormone

NutraSweet and Equal

Cytotec.

Currently, buying as many seed producers here and around the world as possible.

Currently, one of the new Green Corporations.

A long history of lies, deceit, mislabeling and government cover ups is apparently a ridiculous reason to question Monsanto’s integrity.

No one should doubt that biotech humans are on the way. What government would not want bioengineered soldiers in their militaries. When that becomes possible, and it will, we will have no choice but the rent them from the corporations that own them because others will. How can normal humans compete against bioengineered doctors, managers, lawyers, ball players?

What is the best way to feed the human race?

Reduce populations.

What is the best way to reduce population?

A middle class lifestyle.

That does not compute, it doesn’t fit the capitalist model.

jlw,

“No one should doubt that biotech humans are on the way. What government would not want bioengineered soldiers in their militaries. When that becomes possible, and it will, we will have no choice but the rent them from the corporations that own them because others will. How can normal humans compete against bioengineered doctors, managers, lawyers, ball players?”

YIKES!!!
No really, YIKES!!!

Dude, I read a lot of Science Fiction, and oh, BTW, Blade Runner is one of my favorite films ever, but holy crap.

If, and this is a BIG if, any of this were even remotely possible, it would be decades, even centuries away, and the Christians wouldn’t stand for it.
What you’re intimating here is that Monsanto is the anti-Christ.

Rocky

jlw

I don’t understand how farmers can “drop a dime” on their neighbors if they are not using the Monsanto product. The case you mention of Monsanto suing a farmer whose crop was inadvertently cross pollinated would not hold up in court. If you have contrary information I am very surprised and please link for me. I would be against that.

Rocky, there was a time, in the past, when a very large majority of humans thought that taming fire was an impossible dream.

I read a lot of Science Fiction to and I think it will be possible someday, decades, possibly a century or so into the future, but not centuries. If it can be done in a profitable manner, it will be and negative consequences are dealt with or not afterwards. How many times have we seen this already? Great claims of products that are safe and will better our lives, made in the name of profits, that have turned out to have major complications attached to them.

The Christians can be brought around. Many of them are staunchly supportive of defending freedom. Our strategy for that is to stay ahead of the competition, Anything that we consider remotely possible for our enemies to do, we are going to spend the money, do the research, in an attempt to achieve it first. The military is doing some research in this area already.

Bioengineered Christian soldiers defending God and freedom?

Christians are screaming to high heaven about government funded embryonic stem cell research. Does that mean that it is not happening?

Are Christians complaining in large numbers about the systemic patenting of the human genome? Are they up in arms about Monsanto and other companies manipulating and changing Gods other creations? The fact is that Christians are selective as a uniform whole and that selectivity can be manipulated.

If the Christians are right about the anti-Christ, a powerful demigod who deceives the humans into waging war against God and his creations wouldn’t it be natural for him to use capitalism to achieve his goals. Would he insist that we not get sidetracked by listening to the grand claims of socialism and communism.

J of C&J likes to say that capitalism is not immoral or moral but rather amoral. I have a problem with that because I find little distinction between amoral and immoral. Many psychopath serial killers are amoral.

A few years back, Bolivia was desperate for funds to rebuild its public water works. They applied for money from the World Bank. They were told they would get the funds if they privatized the water systems. Bechtel got ownership. In addition, the Bolivian government was bribed into passing legislation making use mandatory by all citizens. They even passed a law making the collection of rain water a crime. Socialists became very popular in Bolivia.

I am not opposed to corporations or their research. I am opposed to their power to buy politicians and judges and their ability to make decisions that are the right of the people to make. In the current paradigm, people who oppose what Monsanto and other corporations are doing, are, of course, anti-science mush brains.

jlw

I included those who oppose stem cell research in the mush category. If you want to try to change the subject to include them, it won’t work.

Capitalism is a system or a tool and as such is indeed amoral. Just like your hammer or your car, it is used to achieve the goals of those running it. It works better than any other system to create wealth, and so tends to provide many more options.

Socialism is also amoral. It is also a tool. It just tends to work less well at creating prosperity.

Capitalism tends to disperse power. That is why many rich people dislike it. They try to gain control of government to enforce monopoly through coercion. This dispersal of power tends to favor democracy and choice, which makes capitalism a better tool for happiness than socialism.

The term capitalism tends to be defined by people who didn’t like the system or those like Marx who never understood the mechanisms. I prefer the term “free market” or “market democracies”. The free market requires decent government and the rule of law and market democracies are the best systems yet implemented by man. I suppose in that sense they are morally superior to the alternatives.

Re “buying politicians” we are all opposed to that. It is illegal in the U.S. When politicians are involved to favor one firms for political purposes, you no longer have a free market and have taken steps in the direction of government control and socialism.

BTW - Bolivia generally - what is the technical word? - sucks. It has never been a very prosperous place and the current socialist government will probably make it worse.

jlw,

“Rocky, there was a time, in the past, when a very large majority of humans thought that taming fire was an impossible dream.”

Yeah, but that was nearly half a million years ago. Hopefully we have progressed a bit since then.

“In the current paradigm, people who oppose what Monsanto and other corporations are doing, are, of course, anti-science mush brains.”

Perhaps for others, however I reserve the “anti-science mush brains” designation for those opposed to saving human life through the use of stem cell technology, and those that would take their hatred of science and technology to the next level by destroying other people’s property and/or work.

Like Jack I believe that corporations are amoral. Corporations are just things, like a rock or a car bumper.
People can be good or evil, things are just things.

Rocky

Yes, capitalism, socialism and their corporations are just tools. As such, they are amoral, but they do not run themselves. Therefore, their morality or immorality is determined by the people who control their use. Morality can be a big deterrent to profit.

“Capitalism tends to disperse power. That is why many rich people dislike it”.

I would like to believe that but, the truth is that for most of American history, capitalism has been used as an instrument to concentrate wealth and power.

That is why they don’t like regulations and why they are using their wealth to control governments. That is why many so called capitalist dictators are popular with them and why our taxpayers are forced to support those that are approved, at least militarily. That is why they want a very powerful military and preemptive wars. That is why they want the size of the government, but not the size of the military reduced. That is why they want their corporations to be citizens out of court and companies in court when they face criminal charges. That is why they promote hedonism rather than morality. That is why they promote demagoguery to divide the people and why they staunchly promote and defend money as free speech.

That, IMO, is the current paradigm. That is why a few rich people don’t like it.

“Government control and socialism”….? Try government CONTROLLED and fascism that is willing to use some progressive aspects to keep the hoi polloi in line.

Hitler was very popular with many of the rich, in Germany, Britain and the U.S. He was popular with the socialists until he gained power and began making sure that his power was secure.

The quality of the citizenry is far more important than the size of government. Unfortunately, a large segment of the citizenry is not impressed by democracy. They are still hooked on the good king paradigm and can only complain when they think the king is not so good. Even really bad kings and presidents are usually supported by some of the citizenry.

jlw

A free market firm cannot compel you to do anything. If firms do not have the tools of government, they cannot maintain their concentrations. That is why you cannot let government get too powerful, because the sharp tools of the state will fall into the hands of the powerful.

Established capitalists like regulations. It raises the cost for new entrants. They just don’t like specific regulations on them.

Big government, big labor and big business form a massive feedback loop. They are sometimes antagonistic, but they can all benefit from control.

Re Hitler - it always come to Hitler. He was popular with SOME rich people, in the sense of the big businesses referred to previously. But he was by no means a proponent of markets. Nazism was no more favorable to free markets than its cousin communism.

We do not have a free market and we are not working towards a free market.

What the government does is solely with in the realm of the people, if they don’t like what their government is doing, they have no one to blame but themselves.

Government, large or small has nothing to do with it. A weak government means that the corporations won’t have to waste money on buying permission, they can just do it.

jlw

Just about the only thing corporations can do w/o government collusion is to offer you a product or service, which you can buy or not. Government possesses all the tools of legitimate coercion. If government fails to enforce the rule of law or protect property rights, it is a government failure.

Government, business and society exist in relation to each other. In a good system, they are mostly symbiotic. They also balance each other.