It seems to me that the answer to everyone’s political problems, is that government is essentially controlling our economy. The left says they believe corporations are buying and corrupting politicians, the right says they believe the government is forcing the corporations to buy politicians in order to survive extreme regulations and taxes. The left doesn’t like that the government influences wor...ld policies in order to secure oil. The right doesn’t like it that we are forced to look in other countries for oil because Environmental lobbyists have bought politicians. The left doesn’t like it that American jobs are going overseas, the right doesn’t like it that companies feel they have no choice but to go overseas. The left doesn’t think the rich give enough the right doesn’t think anyone should be forced to “give” and so on and so on. So what’s the answer…?Make it illegal for government to be involved in our economy and that has to include the inability to FORCE people to pay taxes as well as the inability to borrow. The only way (I can see) to stop corruption is to make it illegal for government to regulate, subsidize, borrow, bail out and tax. The only way for the people to control corporations is if we as consumers have the last say (by way of how we spend our money). For example right now, if we want to boycott a company (they poison children, don’t pay their employees well, destroy the environment, whatever) the government will just come in and bail them out. Corporations have no accountability to consumers when that happens they owe their success to politicians and not because they do the right thing, provide a desired product or manage their company correctly, which is how they are suppose to find success. If we give the power to the government to “fix” everything then we also give them the opportunity, and essentially permission, to be corrupted.
What is the difference between the modernRepublican ideology and the Libertarian Ideology?
Im thinking of becoming a libertairian but I really dont see to much differense between the fundemental Republican ideology and the Libratarian. Im not sure if I should change my party permanetly or, when election time comes, if I should change it in accordance with the candidate I most like. What do you guys think? Is there a big enough difference, what are they. What are the pros and cons of changing my party affiliations possibly every election?
Call me ignorant if you want, I just watched a documentary about Ayn Rand and her book Atlas Shrugged. I new basically nothing about her before I watched it and now Im very interested in her and her ideas. I seem to agree with evrything she says (I told my facebook friends the I am possitive Im Ayn Rand reencarnated). What do you think about her and why?
Why arnt feminists outraged by Bloombergs ban on sugary drinks?
If the feminist argument for abortion is "We have the right to choose what to do with our bodies," why are they not speaking out against the new york city mayors ban on large sugary drinks? He is effectively telling women (and men) that they cant have that choice. Is it because the law will effect women and men equally, that they find no problem in it, or is it because they (feminist) think large sodas are bad for people and there for the phrase "we have the right to choose" dosent apply.
Sometimes I think (most) Liberals think that only oil companies, banks (credit card companies) and pestiside companies are corporations. Are these companies evil too?
Pacific Natual foods
Should people receiving or trying to receive government assistance be required to take a drug test? I think they should and this guy said it pretty well plus he made me laugh.
Many of the positions in the preceding study are supported by a 2002 study by Jim A. Kuypers: Press Bias and Politics: How the Media Frame Controversial Issues. In this study of 116 mainstream US papers (including The New York Times, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle), Kuypers found that the mainstream print press in America operate within a narrow range of li...beral beliefs. Those who expressed points of view further to the left were generally ignored, whereas those who expressed moderate or conservative points of view were often actively denigrated or labeled as holding a minority point of view. In short, if a political leader, regardless of party, spoke within the press-supported range of acceptable discourse, he or she would receive positive press coverage. If a politician, again regardless of party, were to speak outside of this range, he or she would receive negative press or be ignored. Kuypers also found that the liberal points of view expressed in editorial and opinion pages were found in hard news coverage of the same issues. Although focusing primarily on the issues of race and homosexuality, Kuypers found that the press injected opinion into its news coverage of other issues such as welfare reform, environmental protection, and gun control; in all cases favoring a liberal point of view.
This was found on wikapedia under media bias.
I have heard from a number of people the argument that these people (terrorists, prisoners of war, suspected terrorist, terrorist suportors exetera) deserve their day in our court system and I find it hard to believe that the majority of Americans believe this. I think its an absolutly ridiculous idea that couldn't possibly work, but if you dont agree then lets debate it.
A magazine that makes its money off ripping into capitalizm, decides to orchestrate a "revolution" to promote subcriptions and their new shoe.
I have heard north korea called the most repressed country in the world. It is filled with prison camps for its own people, forced labor, wide spred poverty and starvation and public exicutions for people who try to escape North Korea itself or believe in a god other then "the supreme ruler".