(March 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Pippy Wrote: If America is not Fascist, what is it? A Democracy? Hardly. A Republic? Not anymore.

Provide evidence for this.

(March 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Pippy Wrote: "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

It is an old, over used quote, but we think that Benito understood the concept.

What a political leader thinks fascism should be called is irrelevant, as it has nothing to do with this issue and doesn't portray the actual definition of fascism, which is:

a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism

(March 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Pippy Wrote: We bailed out the banks that were "too big to fail" after they got greedy and made a ton of speculative trades. So we were worried that the banks might not have the money we put into them, so we had to guarantee that money (that we gave to them) with more of our own money.

It really isn't as cut and dry as that. A LOT of people fucked up, not only the banks, just like choice individuals cashed out and left before the market tanked. The bailout had a rate of success, as its primary function was to retain jobs and try to cut unemployment. the giant fuck up, in my opinion, was the transparency used in the distribution of funds.

(March 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Pippy Wrote: Think about the duplicity of that. With the bailout, in the best case, we were paying ourselves our bank balances out of our tax revenue. But that is not what happened, since the banksters instead made more speculative trades, and gave away record breaking bonuses, since the year was so financially successful.

Again, not so cut and dry. It wasn't very well implemented, I do agree with that, but how would this make America a fascist state?

(March 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Pippy Wrote: Tricked, coerced, and threatened into guaranteeing your own bank balance. Paying them to make sure they still have the money you already paid them and they lost.

Not so fast there. One of the main reasons for the bailout and stimulus packages was to retain the unemployment rate and prevent it from increasing, in addition to paying for toxic loans that mortgage companies took in as the housing bubble grew, and eventually burst. They lost money not because people paid them, but because people couldn't pay them. Th fault, although largely on the banks in my opinion, was not solely on the banks.

This still doesn't illustrate how America is a fascist state.

(March 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm)Pippy Wrote: Show me where the American Feds begin and WalMart and Wall Street end.

You do realize the Federal Reserve is privately owned, right? So is Wal-Mart and "Wall Street"?

How does this make your point for you?

The part where the Corporations run the country makes it Fascist, working with the famous quote I already posited.

Quote:You do realize the Federal Reserve is privately owned, right? So is Wal-Mart and "Wall Street"?
How does this make your point for you?

Because the Gummint should be kind of, a little bit, public? If Private interests are allowed to print the world exchange currency, and leading petro-dollar, out of thin air, that is not public. If the economic system of an entire country is not run to benefit that country, but as a private enterprise for profit, that may affect the quality of life of the citizens of said country.

That makes my point because that, again working with one definition, is fascist. It is a clear corportocracy.

If they had wanted to retain job, and keep unemployment low, like you suggest, they would not have brought in globalization and Free Trade. If their real interest is keeping jobs in America, they fucked that up long before the Bailout.

Thanks,
-Pip

(March 31, 2010 at 9:23 pm)Pippy Wrote: The part where the Corporations run the country makes it Fascist, working with the famous quote I already posited.

Can you provide one piece of credible evidence for anything? Quotes from political leaders are irrelevant to the topic. Even if Mussolini said "America is a fascist state" it STILL would be irrelevant, as the fact that he asserted it does not necessarily make it true.

(March 31, 2010 at 9:23 pm)Pippy Wrote: Because the Gummint should be kind of, a little bit, public? If Private interests are allowed to print the world exchange currency, and leading petro-dollar, out of thin air, that is not public. If the economic system of an entire country is not run to benefit that country, but as a private enterprise for profit, that may affect the quality of life of the citizens of said country.

Wow. You really have no idea how the Federal Reserve actually works. I'd refer you to a site, but it's easier if you just took an Intro to Macroeconomics class.

Fascism is the direct OPPOSITE of what you state America to be. Fascism does not condone or endorse private enterprise and frowns upon individualism.

(March 31, 2010 at 9:23 pm)Pippy Wrote: That makes my point because that, again working with one definition, is fascist. It is a clear corportocracy.

Evidence? I'll assume you know what that word means.

(March 31, 2010 at 9:23 pm)Pippy Wrote: If they had wanted to retain job, and keep unemployment low, like you suggest, they would not have brought in globalization and Free Trade. If their real interest is keeping jobs in America, they fucked that up long before the Bailout.

Thanks,
-Pip

Now I'm absolutely certain you've never taken an economics course and understood the material. Globalization is a natural function of the market's technological advancements and a direct result of comparative and competitive advantage between countries with similar resources. It has numerous upsides, not to mention the enormous opportunities available to those that explore new markets in different regions.

This is fucking rich. America is a fascist state because of globalization and free trade.

Ho-lee shit.

(April 1, 2010 at 1:57 am)tavarish Wrote: Evidence? I'll assume you know what that word means.

Don't count on it. You'll just get a load of links to 9/11 truth and Alex Jones' sites.

Please allow me to provide the obligatory ex claimer Tav requires.

I think, in my opinion, that a good symbol to describe America is the symbol of the word of fascism. This is an opinion of mine, I can't provide "evidence" that it is true or untrue.

You're like a broken record. You seem to be able to have grown up conversations with most everyone else here, but I get your best side. Every sentence I write you demand evidence, even though I have refused to provide it so far. Keep asking for "evidence" of my opinions, and then when I refuse, strutting around the room. It is getting old fast. If you disagree, you disagree, but stop with this whole "evidence" charade.

Quote:Wow. You really have no idea how the Federal Reserve actually works. I'd refer you to a site, but it's easier if you just took an Intro to Macroeconomics class.

I have studies Economics for many, many years. It is important to me to understand the systems in control of my life. I would never take a course though, are you kidding? Take a course on MacroEconomics. I had a biddy who took Eco at UofO a few years ago. It was great. He would come into my work and I would ask him if they had brought up Fractional Reserve Policy, and he looked dumbfounded. This was during the bailout, and so called financial collapse, so I asked if that changed any of his teachers lesson plans, that the system seemed to be collapsing as he was learning about it. Still dumbfounded. Tobin Tax, they never mentioned it. He would come in with these stupid ideas about 'creating markets for the resources of the third world' and shit, obviously spouting whatever bullshit his prof taught him from the Austrian school. And now we have Barky, a student of Chicago's Friedman School of Economics. I know plenty about economics, thank you, and not taking a course on it was how I learned so much.

Please share your opinion with me if you will. Is the Federal Reserve not private? Do they not literally "print money out of air"? Since they stopped counting M3, certainly it is very, very unrestricted. Is not the America Greenback one of the leading foreign owned currencies in the world? Is not the American dollar the default currency when dealing in oil and hockey players? Is not Iraq threatening to switch to the Euro not one of the REAL causes for the invasion? Oh, yeah, Saddam was in on 9/11. I forgot. Please, if you feel that I am incorrect enlighten me. You seem to know everything for certain so far.

Quote:Fascism is the direct OPPOSITE of what you state America to be. Fascism does not condone or endorse private enterprise and frowns upon individualism.

If you think modern America endorses private enterprise and individualism, I think you might be living in some other country by accident. The same America where they invented the great economic stimuli that is paying farmers not to grow shit? How much money is spent on stupid subsidies every year? I think all those subsidies may actually not be in the Free Market model. And individualism? Everyone eats at the exact same McDonalds, coast to coast. You guys gave Citigroup $415 Billion, and got back $8.8 Billion. And the headlines call it a profit...

I am saying that America is fascist precisely because I know that means it is neither free nor individual. Again, if you disagree, that is welcome, but I know what the fuck I am saying.

Quote:Evidence?

That America is a Corporate Entity? How many people on the FDA are ex-(or current) Monsanto employees? How many of the Treasury offices are held by Federal Reserve employees? Haliburton gets a no-bid contract that only says 'for every dollar you waste on anything, we will give you a dollar and a bit back of tax money'. It was called Cost Plus Contract. So the vice president is allowed to coerce his country into going to war so that he and his friends make a ton of money bombing a place, and then make a ton more fixing it back up. In both instances it is just robbing tax funds, with a few extra steps for posterity. Is any of that evidence?

Quote:Globalization is a natural function of the market's technological advancements and a direct result of comparative and competitive advantage between countries with similar resources.

Ummm. First of all economic systems do not have Natural functions, they are not alive. The doublespeak and through the teeth bullshit of this point you made shows that you picked it up from some deceptive fucks, and I wonder why you are motivated to support their ideas that don't serve you or I. And the globalism is not a function (natural or not) that is inevitable and all positive and rainbows and shit. Globalism and Free Trade was the big promise that if we tried out this new model, that was thought up, not evolved, we would all have more wealth. And most of us were doubtful of this. So now it's been about 15 years, and so far the rich have gotten a ton richer, and the poor a ton poorer, and the middle class is now the lower class. So all in all, it's been a great success. If it's inception was about making millionaires billionaires. And then try to explain away the people on the Niger Delta people hanging themselves from the Shell plants for stealing their water. Explain the Zapatistas rising up and reclaiming their land in conjunction with the passing of NAFTA. Those people don't get it. Or the over 100,000 farmers in India that have killed themselves over Monsanto's game of two card monte they pulled on them. They are just stupid and don't understand economics.

Keep defending a system that makes it literally and mathematically true that it is cheaper to grow peaches in Indonesia and ship them to North America. That fact alone means that the economic system is stupid, is unrealistic. It can not be cheaper on resources to grow the food in Indonesia and ship it here. But it is. So there is some serious manipulation of the markets to acheive this phenomenon. And they promised us that those savings would be passed onto the consumer. But they are not.

We were s'posed to be free form work, and have flying cars. Robots taking our jobs was supposed to be a positive.

I know more than enough about modern economics and it's flaws. It's all carrots and sticks, but the stick is incredibly long and the carrot is ethereal. And when you figure it out they just hit you with the stick.

Fucking economics.
-Pip

(April 1, 2010 at 7:39 am)Pippy Wrote: If you disagree, you disagree, but stop with this whole "evidence" charade.

Yeah, isn't it annoying when you make outrageous claims and then people expect you to provide evidence that supports what you're saying? I mean, I keep telling people that I have an invisible troll living in a tree behind my house, but no one will believe me! They expect me to prove the troll is actually there! What morons...

Why don't they just look at you funny and move on?

I certainly don't demand proof of everything I hear here. I just nod. Then usually disagree.

(April 1, 2010 at 11:24 am)Pippy Wrote: Why don't they just look at you funny and move on?

I certainly don't demand proof of everything I hear here. I just nod. Then usually disagree.

Trololololololol

Quote:I know plenty about economics, thank you, and not taking a course on it was how I learned so much.

*facepalm*

Why did I spend so much money on my Computer Science degree? Had I known now that I could learn plenty about Computer Science without actually taking a course in it, I wouldn't have bothered...

Quote:Every sentence I write you demand evidence, even though I have refused to provide it so far. Keep asking for "evidence" of my opinions, and then when I refuse, strutting around the room. It is getting old fast. If you disagree, you disagree, but stop with this whole "evidence" charade.

You see Pippy, even opinions have evidence, reasoning, etc that they are based on. By denying to present the evidence (reasoning) behind your opinions, you have left yourself in a trap. Either:

(a) You do not have any evidence for your opinions (meaning you pulled them out of mid-air and they are therefore baseless and meaningless.
or (b) You have evidence for your opinions, but by denying to discuss the evidence, you make a mockery of the discussion. Of course people will disagree with you if you haven't presented them with any evidence for agreeing with your opinion.

You can go on and on all day about "it's only my opinion" but it doesn't count for squat if your opinion is based on faulty assumptions and bad reasoning. I've said this before, and I'll say it again. Either discussion your opinions (including the reasoning behind them if requested) or shut up and leave. We discuss things on this site; we aren't a place dedicated to the hosting of frivolous opinions without comment or debate.

Leo van Miert
"Evolution: Putting the "win"in "Darwin"since 3,500,000,000 BC"
when what exactly happened? oh you dont know, well shut the fuck up then you quoteashous twat