Greg F Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 Bernie is far from a perfect candidate. However, I believe that getting big money out of politics is a MAJOR issue. The only way to get "big money" out of politics is to get 'big power' out of Washington. The government is running a protection racket not unlike the mafia. It is, to be blunt, extortion. The famous antitrust case against Microsoft in 1998 is an example of how it works. Back then Microsoft was apolitical, political donations were pretty sparse from the software giant. Since then Microsoft has been diligent in paying their sizable protection money. The message from the government was "that is awful nice business you got there, it would be awful if something bad happened to it". What happens next is what economist call 'regulatory capture'. The regulators start letting the regulated write the regulations which just so happen to be to the regulated companies advantage. The regulated companies can now promote regulations that set barriers to competition giving them an effective monopoly. You don't think Walmart endorsed raising the minimum wage out of the goodness of their heart do you? The regulators are happy because they don't have to do any work with no incentive to look out for the little guy. The politicians are happy because there is a constant flow of money into their accounts. The regulated companies are happy the risk of competition is greatly reduced. What we end up with is a symbiotic relationship between the government and the companies with the little guys left out in the cold. Thinking that instilling more power in the regulatory state is going to change this dynamic is pure fantasy.
Tiberius Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 The only way to get "big money" out of politics is to get 'big power' out of Washington. The government is running a protection racket not unlike the mafia. It is, to be blunt, extortion. The famous antitrust case against Microsoft in 1998 is an example of how it works. Back then Microsoft was apolitical, political donations were pretty sparse from the software giant. Since then Microsoft has been diligent in paying their sizable protection money. The message from the government was "that is awful nice business you got there, it would be awful if something bad happened to it". What happens next is what economist call 'regulatory capture'. The regulators start letting the regulated write the regulations which just so happen to be to the regulated companies advantage. The regulated companies can now promote regulations that set barriers to competition giving them an effective monopoly. You don't think Walmart endorsed raising the minimum wage out of the goodness of their heart do you? The regulators are happy because they don't have to do any work with no incentive to look out for the little guy. The politicians are happy because there is a constant flow of money into their accounts. The regulated companies are happy the risk of competition is greatly reduced. What we end up with is a symbiotic relationship between the government and the companies with the little guys left out in the cold. Thinking that instilling more power in the regulatory state is going to change this dynamic is pure fantasy. Microsoft has a monopoly? On what? I agree that getting big money out of politics is silly. Heck, I think its just stupid. Many lobbyists are good, they know their business. But arguing its a protection racquet sounds silly. Where was Apple ten years ago? Not that big. Google? Wasn't microsoft the big dog on the block? Not anymore. Why couldn't the Big Three automakers keep their threesome-monopoly on cars? You are right about not having too big of a regulatory state, but I totally disagree its as corrupt as you say.
B-Man Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 It’s on, Wisconsin: Cruz, Trump in virtual tie Dogs and cats, living together: Jeb Bush endorses Ted Cruz .
Azalin Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 Microsoft has a monopoly? On what? Read what he said. He was referring to the case brought against Microsoft in the late 90's, when Microsoft was charged with monopolistic practices by including internet explorer for free with their windows operating system, nudging Netscape's Navigator out of the home PC browser market in doing so.
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 Read what he said. He was referring to the case brought against Microsoft in the late 90's, when Microsoft was charged with monopolistic practices by including internet explorer for free with their windows operating system, nudging Netscape's Navigator out of the home PC browser market in doing so. The "punishment" was hilarious. Microsoft was made to provide Windows to a huge swath of public schools free of charge, giving them an even larger market share, and dealing a huge blow to Apple in the process.
Azalin Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 The "punishment" was hilarious. Microsoft was made to provide Windows to a huge swath of public schools free of charge, giving them an even larger market share, and dealing a huge blow to Apple in the process. Because if there's one thing our government knows, it's how to operate a business.
Greg F Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 Read what he said. He was referring to the case brought against Microsoft in the late 90's, when Microsoft was charged with monopolistic practices by including internet explorer for free with their windows operating system, nudging Netscape's Navigator out of the home PC browser market in doing so. Your wasting your breath ... gator lives in an alternate reality. If gator wants to be the village idiot who am I to argue. Because if there's one thing our government knows, it's how to operate a business. They are very good at running the extortion game and pretty good at getting the gators of the world to go along.
3rdnlng Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 Your wasting your breath ... gator lives in an alternate reality. If gator wants to be the village idiot who am I to argue. They are very good at running the extortion game and pretty good at getting the gators of the world to go along. He has no choice in the matter.
Azalin Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 Your wasting your breath ... gator lives in an alternate reality. If gator wants to be the village idiot who am I to argue. You're correct, of course. Still, it's hard to resist the temptation to pluck such low-hanging fruit.
Greg F Posted March 24, 2016 Posted March 24, 2016 You're correct, of course. Still, it's hard to resist the temptation to pluck such low-hanging fruit. Fruit ... how appropriate.
Ozymandius Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 So, it looks like Cruz's campaign is over. 5 affairs, including Amanda Carpenter who is on CNN all the time supporting him. That makes the Trump the nominee.
truth on hold Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 So, it looks like Cruz's campaign is over. 5 affairs, including Amanda Carpenter who is on CNN all the time supporting him. That makes the Trump the nominee. He always wanted to be a televangelist. This completes his credentials.
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 Well.... That will most likely be the end of Cruz's slim chance. Now where it gets interesting is does the establishment let the Trumpeter win the nomination or does all hell break loose at the convention? The irony as many have speculated was that Trump may not have even seriously wanted to be president but was doing this for his ego. The insane part, if that is accurate, he is about to become the nominee by default by being the last guy standing.
3rdnlng Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 So, it looks like Cruz's campaign is over. 5 affairs, including Amanda Carpenter who is on CNN all the time supporting him. That makes the Trump the nominee. Can you at least provide a link?
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 (edited) Can you at least provide a link?I found a story after searching here. Sorry trying to paste from my phone http://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/blogs/news/94574273-8-things-you-need-to-know-about-ted-cruzs-sex-scandal Edited March 25, 2016 by drinkTHEkoolaid
DC Tom Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 I found a story after searching here. Sorry trying to paste from my phone http://www.conservativeoutfitters.com/blogs/news/94574273-8-things-you-need-to-know-about-ted-cruzs-sex-scandal Does Hillary use this as an example of the "war on women," or defend him against these "bimbo eruptions?"
IDBillzFan Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 So, it looks like Cruz's campaign is over. 5 affairs, including Amanda Carpenter who is on CNN all the time supporting him. That makes the Trump the nominee. The National Enquirer? The one that endorsed Trump? The one that says Hillary has brain cancer is will die any moment? One of the women is Katrina Pierson, Trump's spokesperson for the past few months? Don't you think that Katrina would have come out with that story a few months ago...or maybe sooner? Why did Trump need the paper that is endorsing him to tell him about his candidate having an affair with his spokesperson? Wishing for something to happen doesn't make it news. But you keep jumping into the abyss with the rest of the Branch Trumpidians.
GG Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 The National Enquirer? The one that endorsed Trump? The one that says Hillary has brain cancer is will die any moment? One of the women is Katrina Pierson, Trump's spokesperson for the past few months? Don't you think that Katrina would have come out with that story a few months ago...or maybe sooner? Why did Trump need the paper that is endorsing him to tell him about his candidate having an affair with his spokesperson? Wishing for something to happen doesn't make it news. But you keep jumping into the abyss with the rest of the Branch Trumpidians. It's not like it's NY TImes breaking a story about a GOP candidate having an affair.
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 Read what he said. He was referring to the case brought against Microsoft in the late 90's, when Microsoft was charged with monopolistic practices by including internet explorer for free with their windows operating system, nudging Netscape's Navigator out of the home PC browser market in doing so. he was using that as an example and I said it was a bad one. So, no, he was not just talking about that he was talking about entire regulatory agency
IDBillzFan Posted March 25, 2016 Posted March 25, 2016 It's not like it's NY TImes breaking a story about a GOP candidate having an affair. This will all be settled once Katrina Pierson confirms or denies the affair. She's had the mic for months on all the major networks. She's the one who makes or kills the story.
Recommended Posts