TIL, about economics (Beware of the whale boats)
-
That's because Texas is attracting liberals with its job offerings, which it earned with conservative economics.
Don't worry, once they destroy the job economy, they'll move out again.
I may view conservative and liberal social policies as incomplete because they both miss the point. But I definitely favor conservative economics, because it has a track record.
Liberal economic policy is entirely informed by liberal social policy.
Conservative economic policy has a track record for allowing obscene levels of corruption.
-
Any economic policy that has been implemented, has that track record.
-
Conservative economic policy has a track record for allowing obscene levels of corruption.
And liberal economic policy has a track record for pointing that out while dusting its own corruption under a rug.
Trust me, I've lived in Louisiana.
Conservatives don't have a monopoly on corruption.
The real situation is that both sides are laughing it all the way to the bank, while the idiots form sides and fight each other.
-
Any economic policy that has been implemented, has that track record.
Conservative economic policy has a track record for allowing obscene levels of corruption.
No, I can't think of a single instance in which "regulating irresponsible or immoral economic actions" has allowed obscene levels of corruption. Deregulating everything, on the other hand, always does that.
-
Nope, without regulation, there isn't anything to corrupt.
-
Deregulating everything, on the other hand, always does that.
No the fault is using the idea that we have to regulate, to implement all the wrong regulations, and threaten people with corruption if you are inclined to point that out.
"Never pass up a bad situation. It is an opportunity to do the wrong thing. When someone points out its wrong, then simply say that something had to be done."
-
Nope, without regulation, there isn't anything to corrupt.
"Without laws, everything is legal"
Total anarchy cannot function in a sufficiently large society.
-
Yeah so I am not sure why you think it's being suggested.
-
No the fault is using the idea that we have to regulate, to implement all the wrong regulations, and threaten people with corruption if you are inclined to point that out.
And we're back to the "problems are a way of life, so don't bother trying to fix them" mindset.
-
Yeah so I am not sure why you think it's being suggested.
Conservative economic policy is about as close to anarchy as you can get while still having a government at all.
-
Conservative economic policy has a track record for allowing obscene levels of corruption.
That's just a feature of government. It's not really dependent on the ideology.
-
No, I can't think of a single instance in which "regulating irresponsible or immoral economic actions" has allowed obscene levels of corruption. Deregulating everything, on the other hand, always does that.
Deregulation is the opposite of corruption. If the government isn't doing stuff, then what's to corrupt? It's when the government is doing stuff that you get most of the corruption. Either to do stuff to your competitors or don't do stuff to you or stuff for you.
You may now commence to straw man what I said for an anti-anarcho-capitalist screed.
-
@Gribnit said:
Yeah so I am not sure why you think it's being suggested.
Conservative economic policy is about as close to anarchy as you can get while still having a government at all.
Even if that were true (and it's clearly not), where's the corruption in that sort of situation? Are we redefining words again?
-
@Fox said:
No, I can't think of a single instance in which "regulating irresponsible or immoral economic actions" has allowed obscene levels of corruption. Deregulating everything, on the other hand, always does that.
Deregulation is the opposite of corruption. If the government isn't doing stuff, then what's to corrupt? It's when the government is doing stuff that you get most of the corruption. Either to do stuff to your competitors or don't do stuff to you or stuff for you.
You may now commence to straw man what I said for an anti-anarcho-capitalist screed.
The absence of political corruption is not the absence of all corruption. Prying every single cent out of every low-wage worker, forest, hillside, and ocean is hardly a sustainable plan of action, and it's definitely not what I would call good even if it were sustainable.
-
Also, I'd rather have a 0.000000001% chance of success than a 0% chance of success.
Then you don't understand risk.
Deregulation is the opposite of corruption. If the government isn't doing stuff, then what's to corrupt?
"Hey, this one company did something really bad"
"I agree, it was terrible. Let's make a committee and give them all the power needed to make sure it never happens again."
- How often did said bad thing happen? What's the risk level?
- What's the risk level of handing over enough power to ONE committee to make sure NO OTHER COMPANY does such a thing.
Which has more room for corruption?
A national committee with all powers?
Or one company?
The answer is:
I don't know.
That's why we do the risk analysis and find out.
But what I do know is that risk analysis is in the domain of business, and thus politicians do not have the capacity to understand it. They don't operate with an understand of opportunity cost and risk, they only operate under the capacity of law..
And by definition, law is always blindly doing something to solve the problem.
-
The absence of
politicalbusiness corruption is not the absence of all corruption.Same is true for the other side.
If we stopped viewing them as enemies and more as cooperatives, maybe we'd be more likely to find sustainable solutions that prevents corruption from both sides.
If the founding fathers thought that government was the solution to everything, they would not have made the system with checks and balances in place.
-
The absence of political corruption is not the absence of all corruption. Prying every single cent out of every low-wage worker, forest, hillside, and ocean is hardly a sustainable plan of action, and it's definitely not what I would call good even if it were sustainable.
But where is the corruption?
cor·rup·tion
kəˈrəpSH(ə)n/
noun
1.
dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.
"the journalist who wants to expose corruption in high places"
synonyms: dishonesty, unscrupulousness, double-dealing, fraud, fraudulence, misconduct, crime, criminality, wrongdoing; More
2.
the process by which something, typically a word or expression, is changed from its original use or meaning to one that is regarded as erroneous or debased.
synonyms: alteration, bastardization, debasement, adulteration
"these figures have been subject to corruption"
-
In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement.
-
>In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement.
Yes. Still waiting...
-
@Fox said:
>In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement.
Yes. Still waiting...
Prying every single cent out of every low-wage worker, forest, hillside, and ocean is hardly a sustainable plan of action, and it's definitely not what I would call good even if it were sustainable.
Right there ^
-
@boomzilla said:
@Fox said:
>In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement.
Yes. Still waiting...
Prying every single cent out of every low-wage worker, forest, hillside, and ocean is hardly a sustainable plan of action, and it's definitely not what I would call good even if it were sustainable.
Right there ^
What makes any of that corruption? It seems like you've defined the term to be, "Stuff that @fox thinks is bad."
-
What makes any of that corruption? It seems like you've defined the term to be, "Stuff that @fox thinks is bad."
@Fox said:Prying every single cent out ofAcquiring personal benefit through the abuse of power or position over every low-wage worker, forest, hillside, and ocean is hardly a sustainable plan of action, and it's definitely not what I would call good even if it were sustainable.
FTFY
-
@boomzilla said:
What makes any of that corruption? It seems like you've defined the term to be, "Stuff that @fox thinks is bad."
@Fox said:Prying every single cent out ofAcquiring personal benefit through the abuse of power or position over every low-wage worker, forest, hillside, and ocean is hardly a sustainable plan of action, and it's definitely not what I would call good even if it were sustainable.
FTFYWhat's that power that's being abused, now?
-
What's that power that's being abused, now?
Employment, land ownership, owning a boat, etc.
-
@boomzilla said:
What's that power that's being abused, now?
Employment, land ownership, owning a boat, etc.
@flabdablet, you might as well resume with the videos.
-
owning a boat
But yeah, boat owners are totally wrong to own boats, they're a huge waste of money that could be better spent educating the youth.
-
boat owners are totally wrong to own boats
What about amphicars? Or cars being turned into boats?
-
-
@boomzilla said:
owning a boat
But yeah, boat owners are totally wrong to own boats, they're a huge waste of money that could be better spent educating the youth.Owning a boat isn't a problem. Using that boat to abuse the environment, however, is.
-
That is entirely up to the conveyance in question, I suppose. It would be nice to have some sort of triage list to know when to start cutting and welding - but, sadly, that would deprive the conveyance of the right to immediate reengineering.
-
Owning a boat isn't a problem. Using that boat to abuse the environment, however, is.
You've enlarged the concept of corruption to be particularly meaningless. But I'm curious as to how one abuses the environment with a boat? And how "conservative economic policies" allow this sort of thing.
-
@Fox said:
Owning a boat isn't a problem. Using that boat to abuse the environment, however, is.
You've enlarged the concept of corruption to be particularly meaningless. But I'm curious as to how one abuses the environment with a boat? And how "conservative economic policies" allow this sort of thing.
-
Those poor slashed up manatees! And some people fish from boats, or transport yucky things using them.
-
-
http://bfy.tw/34XC
The page you were looking for doesn't exist.
You may have mistyped the address or the page may have moved.If you are the application owner check the logs for more information.
http://bfy.tw/10AG
And?
-
@boomzilla said:
@Fox said:
Owning a boat isn't a problem. Using that boat to abuse the environment, however, is.
You've enlarged the concept of corruption to be particularly meaningless. But I'm curious as to how one abuses the environment with a boat? And how "conservative economic policies" allow this sort of thing.
Hyeah, right. I'm not following a link that looks like that. Look, if you don't want to answer, just say so.
-
Go fuck yourself with your links without context, is what. If you can't take the time - neither should anyone else be expected to.
-
Those poor slashed up manatees! And some people fish from boats, or
fail to safely transport yucky things using them.
I mean, you're not wrong.
-
It's a "why are you asking me when you could just google it" button. When someone asks me a question as simple as "What sort of corruption happens when corporations aren't regulated by government", I'm not inclined to bother with any lengthy explanation when the answer is abundantly obvious, especially when the person asking has a history of responding to my lengthy explanations with "nice straw man fallacy" or "that's a non sequitur" without bothering to think about how it actually does make sense and is a valid argument.
-
http://bfy.tw/21JQ
Hey, I have friends who own boats. I never knew that all people who own boats hunt whales. I should go with them next time.
-
That doesn't mean you get to use LMGTFY to preempt assholing with assholing.
-
What sort of corruption happens when corporations aren't regulated by government
Bad things happen. None of them are corruption. It may have been a trick question.
-
When the fuck did I say that all people who own boats abuse their boat ownership for personal gain?
-
Use of a boat for personal gain is supposed to be corruption?
What do you have against boats and boat owners? Did a boat do something bad to you?
-
@Fox said:
What sort of corruption happens when corporations aren't regulated by government
Bad things happen. None of them are corruption. It may have been a trick question.ABUse of a boat for personal gain is supposed to be corruption?In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit.
-
You didn't, but you do have a pattern of using edge-cases to justify absurd solutions.
Mr. "I won't mention I'm trans to that guy that murders trans, so I can have the opportunity to fuck him instead."
-
In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit.
You still haven't supplied your cite source for that definition you've decided everyone accepts. Who gave them the boat? What if they stole the boat?
-
You didn't, but you do have a pattern of using edge-cases to justify absurd solutions.
How the fuck is "banning people from hunting whales" because "people hunt whales" an "edge-case to justify absurd solutions"
-
-