|
Pointing out that some products have failed due to low demand is a non sequitur. The fact is that people can never be experts at everything and when making a decisions companies will use their informational advantage to manipulate however they can. Monster cables, exploding Ford Pintos, diamond wedding rings, Activision in general, predatory ARMs, walmart charging extra half cents, this list could go on forever.
Why was there low demand is the question, don't try to dodge it by charging non-sequitir.
Everything you list is an example of a lack of information, not misinformation.
You're being attacked for having an argumentative style in which you grasp anything and everything (reality be damned), to support your opinion and oppose the opinion of others. It's a pain in the ass for readers who actually want to have or follow a normal discussion about things because it's indistinguishable from trolling, propaganda or subtle mental illness.
There it is again, reality be damned, still waiting for those examples of me copying King Canute - not in jest - and demanding the tide not coming in.
What I'm being attacked for is not having the right opinions and vigorously defending them. I could say that you and others act precisely the same way, and you do. You just support the other side.
Your arguments would kind of make sense for someone who would believe that the interest of the corporations always match the interest of the people.
It's getting a little tiresome, you telling me what I believe. Can I pleased be allowed to do that?
Unfortunately, it's enough to have a pair of eyes, a functional brain and not be completely blinded by your ideological standpoint to realize that it's very very very far from being the case.
Evidence please.
You just consider the way your food industry is working, the fact that 30,9 your population is obese, and you get it.
And people have absolutely no responsibility for that?
You think processed food wasn't in great supply in the decades after the war and between the start of the boom of obesity?
There's at least one missing link in your chain of logic here.
Or, you consider the fact that a quarter of people in jail in the world are in jail in America. That's more than a fucking % of your people in jail. And now, consider the fact that your private prison industry (have to be stupid, yeah, to give prisons to private interests) spends 400 millions dollars lobbying every year so that senators keep voting moire and more and more repressing laws.
What's really hilarious is that you believe that a quarter of the people in jail in the world are in America. You really trust those figures?
It's hilarious that you think North Korea and China, alone or combined, have less people locked up in some way than America.
And, Biff, you won't find a more ardent anti-drug warrior than me. About a third of those two million Americans should not be in jail and never should have been in trouble in the first place.
See Biff we can agree on some issues but for different reasons, which unfortunately undermines your arguments about my character.
Or the fact that you went to two useless stupid wars for the benefit of your militaro-industrial complex.
Etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc...
Your problem, Biff, and that of your compatriots, is that you take disagreements of opinion as disagreements of fact, and get annoyed when people don't just swallow your assertions. So you accuse them of denying reality or some other such silliness.
You know, I can talk to caradoc about all these exact same issues without either of us getting dragged into this awful muck we find ourselves in right now, maybe you should think about why I can't do it with you.
|
|
|
On October 23 2011 01:36 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +Yeah, it's going to be a nightmare scenario for the corporations. Instead of control the powerful corporations have now via a proxy (the government), they're going to simply have direct control instead. You give too much credit to corporations.
Only where it is due.
You are arguing that with a weaker government the stranglehold that the top of the food chain has over the society is going to (magically?) disappear because they no longer have to go through the government to get what they want. That only means that the government is out of the equation. It doesn't mean the power that the corporations are exerting through the government is suddenly gone. It's very much still there.
You really think it is so easy for corporations to "manipulate" people? Your low opinion of the common mass of humanity is either a delusion of grandeur on your part, or a low opinion of yourself as well.
Your trivial analogies over buying one product over the other as an example of exerting power over the fate of the corporations doesn't paint the whole picture.
How do you ensure social justice? Human rights? Healthcare? How do you deal with global problems that you can't handle with market logic (or which are actually caused by market logic)? How do you ensure unbiased (and affordable) education and scientific research?
What is it that you're offering to ME, directly, to get me to support your cause and your idea? Here's your chance, tell me something that I will find appealing and that makes my life better and easier (because that's what social systems are created to do - make people's lives better and easier).
Here's what I get right now (and I live in a pretty fucked up country, by the way, some other countries do all this stuff way better):
- Free education, and being a CS student and fairly well informed when it comes to education in the field, I can say it's pretty good as well.
- Free healthcare.
- Free internet (as a student).
- Certain benefits/advantages over foreigners when it comes to employment and/or opportunities to start my own business.
What you are offering me is the chance to buy oranges if I don't like apples, and I don't have any insurances that I will have anything to buy either apples or oranges WITH. Well thank you for that, but no thanks. -_-
|
You are arguing that with a weaker government the stranglehold that the top of the food chain has over the society is going to (magically?) disappear because they no longer have to go through the government to get what they want. That only means that the government is out of the equation. It doesn't mean the power that the corporations are exerting through the government is suddenly gone. It's very much still there.
Government is the reason they have that "stranglehold" (which is an exaggeration) is my argument.
Your trivial analogies over buying one product over the other as an example of exerting power over the fate of the corporations doesn't paint the whole picture.
Trivial analogies, how nice. You're really being convincing here.
How do you ensure social justice? Human rights? Healthcare? How do you deal with global problems that you can't handle with market logic (or which are actually caused by market logic)? How do you ensure unbiased (and affordable) education and scientific research?
I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, if that's what you're implying.
What is it that you're offering to ME, directly, to get me to support your cause and your idea? Here's your chance, tell me something that I will find appealing and that makes my life better and easier (because that's what social systems are created to do - make people's lives better and easier).
My system is morally, rationally, and historically superior at making people's lives better and easier.
What you are offering me is the chance to buy oranges if I don't like apples, and I don't have any insurances that I will have anything to buy either apples or oranges WITH. Well thank you for that, but no thanks. -_-
What I am offering you is the chance to not smother the goose that has laid a lot of golden eggs and will continue to do so in the future if it is not smothered.
I'm saying that what you advocate is reactionary, regressive, and doomed to create precisely the opposite results of what it intends.
I'm not saying let the goose run around the house shitting everywhere, I'm not saying let it peck the children, I'm saying don't smother it.
|
Capitalism can't exist without some form of government anyway. You need the monopoly of violence to protect the privatization of production, and private property in general. Without it, no ones stopping Corporations of either war with each other, or that people, rebel, revolutionaries, whatever take whatever they think is due to them. You wage war until either a a corporation is powerful enough to assert hegemony and build a dictatorship or "revolutionaries" win and put the form of government in charge that they want.
Look up how territorial states came into beeing in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. It's the same game, just different players.
I don't even tackle the point that a libertarian society would be destroyed within years or even less because rebels and revolutionaries would spread like a wildfire because nobody sane wants to live in a capitalistic society without rules. In the end it's aiding the communists you hate so much, why do you think the European welfare states ever came into being? Because people were asking nicely, and the people in power felt generous?
|
On October 23 2011 01:36 DeepElemBlues wrote:
You really think it is so easy for corporations to "manipulate" people? Your low opinion of the common mass of humanity is either a delusion of grandeur on your part, or a low opinion of yourself as well.
It is fairly easy. I would refer you to literature on marketing and PR, and then look at the massive multidimensional and enduring public efforts it takes to prevent young people from starting smoking.
This is a pretty uncontroversial example.
I would argue also though that arguments about the rationality of markets is also a direct result of corporate manipulation of the ideas available to people with the end result of proliferating a corporate-friendly discourse at the expense of the public. This is no less manipulation than the example about smoking, but it often evades discourse because people are usually caught up in the technicalities of evaluating much narrower perspectives, discussions of the existence of presuppositions such as market rationality don't enter into mainstream discussions.
Ask yourself if a discussion on whether markets are rational could ever appear on FOX. This is corporate manipulation, just not in the narrow, literal sense that you reference.
|
On October 23 2011 02:22 caradoc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 01:36 DeepElemBlues wrote:
You really think it is so easy for corporations to "manipulate" people? Your low opinion of the common mass of humanity is either a delusion of grandeur on your part, or a low opinion of yourself as well.
It is fairly easy. I would refer you to literature on marketing and PR, and then look at the massive efforts it takes to prevent young people from starting smoking. This is a pretty uncontroversial example. I would argue also though that arguments about the rationality of markets is also a direct result of corporate manipulation of the ideas available to people with the end result of proliferating a corporate-friendly discourse at the expense of the public. This is no less manipulation than the example about smoking, but it often evades discourse because people are usually caught up in the technicalities of evaluating much narrower perspectives, presuppositions such as market rationality don't enter into mainstream discussions. Ask yourself if a discussion on whether markets are rational could ever appear on FOX. This is corporate manipulation, just not in the narrow, literal sense that you reference.
It's like negating the propaganda of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century. Namely, Soviet Union and the third Reich. Propaganda can do anything, if it's made good.
|
On October 23 2011 02:13 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +Pointing out that some products have failed due to low demand is a non sequitur. The fact is that people can never be experts at everything and when making a decisions companies will use their informational advantage to manipulate however they can. Monster cables, exploding Ford Pintos, diamond wedding rings, Activision in general, predatory ARMs, walmart charging extra half cents, this list could go on forever. Why was there low demand is the question, don't try to dodge it by charging non-sequitir. Everything you list is an example of a lack of information, not misinformation. Show nested quote +You're being attacked for having an argumentative style in which you grasp anything and everything (reality be damned), to support your opinion and oppose the opinion of others. It's a pain in the ass for readers who actually want to have or follow a normal discussion about things because it's indistinguishable from trolling, propaganda or subtle mental illness. There it is again, reality be damned, still waiting for those examples of me copying King Canute - not in jest - and demanding the tide not coming in. What I'm being attacked for is not having the right opinions and vigorously defending them. I could say that you and others act precisely the same way, and you do. You just support the other side. Show nested quote +Your arguments would kind of make sense for someone who would believe that the interest of the corporations always match the interest of the people. It's getting a little tiresome, you telling me what I believe. Can I pleased be allowed to do that? Show nested quote +Unfortunately, it's enough to have a pair of eyes, a functional brain and not be completely blinded by your ideological standpoint to realize that it's very very very far from being the case. Evidence please. Show nested quote +You just consider the way your food industry is working, the fact that 30,9 your population is obese, and you get it. And people have absolutely no responsibility for that? You think processed food wasn't in great supply in the decades after the war and between the start of the boom of obesity? There's at least one missing link in your chain of logic here. Show nested quote +Or, you consider the fact that a quarter of people in jail in the world are in jail in America. That's more than a fucking % of your people in jail. And now, consider the fact that your private prison industry (have to be stupid, yeah, to give prisons to private interests) spends 400 millions dollars lobbying every year so that senators keep voting moire and more and more repressing laws.
What's really hilarious is that you believe that a quarter of the people in jail in the world are in America. You really trust those figures? It's hilarious that you think North Korea and China, alone or combined, have less people locked up in some way than America. And, Biff, you won't find a more ardent anti-drug warrior than me. About a third of those two million Americans should not be in jail and never should have been in trouble in the first place. See Biff we can agree on some issues but for different reasons, which unfortunately undermines your arguments about my character. Show nested quote +Or the fact that you went to two useless stupid wars for the benefit of your militaro-industrial complex.
Etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc... Your problem, Biff, and that of your compatriots, is that you take disagreements of opinion as disagreements of fact, and get annoyed when people don't just swallow your assertions. So you accuse them of denying reality or some other such silliness. You know, I can talk to caradoc about all these exact same issues without either of us getting dragged into this awful muck we find ourselves in right now, maybe you should think about why I can't do it with you.
Pity you didn't give an answer to any of my points. The only thing I can see is that if people get obese it's their responsibility. Fantastic news.
If it's people sole responsibility that creates obesity or if that's only the fact that they are messed up that get them to go to jail, if Coca Cola or Mc Donald have no responsibility in the former and your super powerful prison corporations in the later, I guess Americans are 10 times more eager to be criminals and three times and a half to be food addicted.
And it's not about food supply. It's about food incredibly unhealthy. You know what a Mc Donald super menu contains? Mc Donald is basically poisoning people. You'll tell me we have Mc Donald too. Yes, but our food industry is nowhere as fucked up as the US one because the State doesn't allow them to do whatever.
I don't give a crap that a quarter or not a quarter of the world population. If you need to compare to North Korea, you have an issue. I just point out that your population in jail is more than 10 times higher in percentage than ours. Figure out why.
I gave the evidences; You didn't.
Your stuff makes 0 sense. I'm off to practice now. Cya.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
DeepElemBlues
Why are you arguing with Biff?
You're basically lecturing someone that doesn't have a clue. It's a waste of time.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
And LOL at Biff "evidence".
Zero evidence provided so far.
|
On October 23 2011 02:20 DeepElemBlues wrote:My system is morally, rationally, and historically superior at making people's lives better and easier. Show nested quote +What you are offering me is the chance to buy oranges if I don't like apples, and I don't have any insurances that I will have anything to buy either apples or oranges WITH. Well thank you for that, but no thanks. -_- What I am offering you is the chance to not smother the goose that has laid a lot of golden eggs and will continue to do so in the future if it is not smothered. I'm saying that what you advocate is reactionary, regressive, and doomed to create precisely the opposite results of what it intends. I'm not saying let the goose run around the house shitting everywhere, I'm not saying let it peck the children, I'm saying don't smother it.
Dude, I'm not asking you to argue with me right now (we can do that later though). I'm asking you to convince me, and I'm serious about that. Tell me about how my life would be better if you had your way, and how would it compare to what I have now.
All I'm getting from you are empty lines and cheap analogies that don't really say anything relevant. You do realize that in order to achieve any of what you want and to turn those ideas into reality, you NEED popular support, right? Because the way you're going about presenting it... I can't imagine that too many people will jump on that bandwagon. I mean, without telling them that Jesus wants it that way, or that it's the American dream, or other cheap cultural shots that are being injected via media on regular basis.
Since I don't buy any of that, so tell me about how my life will be better and how you're going to give me free education, healthcare, internet, and job opportunities. Let me remind you it's what I already have - in what is honestly a fucked up backwater country.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
A common ground that I haven't really seen challenged is that the nexus of political power and moneyed interests is the basis for the severity of the crisis and the depth of the injustice. For future reference, I will call this The Collusion. If that isn't a correct diagnosis then provide a counter-argument.
From there the viewpoints diverge. Of the most radical view points:
One segments argues for moneyed interests out of political power with severe limitations on the participation of corporations in political speech. This is likely to evict the current power structure and create a power vacuum.
One segment promotes destroying the concentrated wealth structures with the added benefit of preventing future influence of moneyed interests. This is prerequisite on wresting control of the current power structure, and it is likely to be an exercise in wholesale destruction of wealth.
One segment seeks to destroy political power that attract moneyed interests with severe rollback of regulatory and financial powers. This is also likely to evict the current power structure and create a regulatory vacuum.
Maybe there are some that want to destroy both wealth and political power, but I can't imagine how that might happen.
If you want to argue the three latter viewpoints, please don't provide evidence of The Collusion. Everyone already agrees on that.
On October 23 2011 01:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Unfortunately, it's enough to have a pair of eyes, a functional brain and not be completely blinded by your ideological standpoint to realize that it's very very very far from being the case.
You just consider the way your food industry is working, the fact that 30,9 your population is obese, and you get it.
Or, you consider the fact that a quarter of people in jail in the world are in jail in America. That's more than a fucking % of your people in jail. And now, consider the fact that your private prison industry (have to be stupid, yeah, to give prisons to private interests) spends 400 millions dollars lobbying every year so that senators keep voting moire and more and more repressing laws.
Or the fact that you went to two useless stupid wars for the benefit of your militaro-industrial complex.
Point out The Collusion while asserting that your counterpart is ideologically blind or brainless isn't the greatest way to contribute. Please stop.
On October 23 2011 01:59 caradoc wrote:
So, if corporations are strong enough and influential enough to bend the state, which is supposed to represent the collective will of the people, explain to the thread how exactly creating a power vacuum with no teeth to counteract corporate influence is supposed to prevent these abuses?
This is a good point of contention. Let's get on this.
|
On October 23 2011 02:29 Tien wrote:
And LOL at Biff "evidence".
Zero evidence provided so far.
So you wanna say that USA don't have the highest incarceration rate and that it's not true that a quarter of the worlds prison population do time in the USA?
|
On October 23 2011 02:13 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +Pointing out that some products have failed due to low demand is a non sequitur. The fact is that people can never be experts at everything and when making a decisions companies will use their informational advantage to manipulate however they can. Monster cables, exploding Ford Pintos, diamond wedding rings, Activision in general, predatory ARMs, walmart charging extra half cents, this list could go on forever. Why was there low demand is the question, don't try to dodge it by charging non-sequitir. Everything you list is an example of a lack of information, not misinformation.
Who knows? Their advertising campaign was ineffective, the focus groups they used weren't representative of the population, the product was just fucking terrible, its a case by case basis. I'm not saying a corporation can manipulate you into buying a pile of dog feces but they can definitely try to hide a little bit of shit in their products to reduce costs and hope no one notices, or try to make you think the shit in a product is actually a feature. They could even make people think that shit on a stick is the new fad and make tons of money with a good bit of advertising. All you need to know about manipulation is that companies spend millions on PR and advertising.
Lack of information is effectively the same as misinformation as far as manipulation goes. One party has a deficit of information while the other has more and will use it to their advantage. If your argument is that a lack of information is the fault of the consumer and that its the consumer's job to be educated before making any purchase that is something we can discuss.
|
On October 23 2011 02:30 TanGeng wrote:A common ground that I haven't really seen challenged is that the nexus of political power and moneyed interests is the basis for the severity of the crisis and the depth of the injustice. For future reference, I will call this The Collusion. If that isn't a correct diagnosis then provide a counter-argument. From there the viewpoints diverge. Of the most radical view points: One segments argues for moneyed interests out of political power with severe limitations on the participation of corporations in political speech. This is likely to evict the current power structure and create a power vacuum. One segment promotes destroying the concentrated wealth structures with the added benefit of preventing future influence of moneyed interests. This is prerequisite on wresting control of the current power structure, and it is likely to be an exercise in wholesale destruction of wealth. One segment seeks to destroy political power that attract moneyed interests with severe rollback of regulatory and financial powers. This is also likely to evict the current power structure and create a regulatory vacuum. Maybe there are some that want to destroy both wealth and political power, but I can't imagine how that might happen. If you want to argue the three latter viewpoints, please don't provide evidence of The Collusion. Everyone already agrees on that. Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 01:56 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Unfortunately, it's enough to have a pair of eyes, a functional brain and not be completely blinded by your ideological standpoint to realize that it's very very very far from being the case.
You just consider the way your food industry is working, the fact that 30,9 your population is obese, and you get it.
Or, you consider the fact that a quarter of people in jail in the world are in jail in America. That's more than a fucking % of your people in jail. And now, consider the fact that your private prison industry (have to be stupid, yeah, to give prisons to private interests) spends 400 millions dollars lobbying every year so that senators keep voting moire and more and more repressing laws.
Or the fact that you went to two useless stupid wars for the benefit of your militaro-industrial complex.
Point out The Collusion while asserting that your counterpart is ideologically blind or brainless isn't the greatest way to contribute. Please stop.
You have no lesson to give in terms of criticizing someone's supposed or real ideological blindness, TanGeng. You treated me an insensitive monster and kept repeating I was a brainwashed mad communist a couple of month ago without bothering to understand what I was even saying.
Stop harassing me. I'd like to write in this forum without having my TanGeng moment every other post. I'm getting fed up with it. You please stop. Thanks.
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
The only reason we have the highest reported incarceration rate is because we don't murder our criminals at will we properly report our facts and figures.
Do you think Russia / China / North Korea is going to tell you how many people they murder / incarcerate and slaughter every year?
There is a problem with American politics, but blaming capitalism is being ignorant.
|
DeepElemBlues wrote:
There it is again, reality be damned, still waiting for those examples of me copying King Canute - not in jest - and demanding the tide not coming in.
Fair enough:
DeepElemBlues wrote:
You really think it is so easy for corporations to "manipulate" people?
The irony is, the 2008 mortgage crisis was large scale fraud and manipulation. Coincidentally, OWS (and by extension this thread) was a response to that. So quotes like this really do make people question whether or not you're in touch with reality. In case you just haven't been paying attention:
What happened was banks gave out loans to people that were unlikely to be able to pay them back. The banks then bundled these "toxic loans" into debt obligations. Doing so on a massive scale, they built up a bubble. They sold these obligations as investment to other corporations that were told these were safe and good. Knowing these investments could only fail, they then bet in the stock market that these corporations would go down. The bubble eventually burst.
Somehow you're still here arguing about how the solution is deregulation, that manipulation isn't really happening, etc. Get real!
|
On October 23 2011 02:41 Tien wrote:
Do you think Russia / China / North Korea is going to tell you how many people they murder / incarcerate and slaughter every year?.
I'm surprised you didn't choose to include Mordor in that list.
You do realize that there are other countries in the world, ones that handle these issues in a more civilized and transparent ways? Using North Korea for a benchmark - yay.
|
On October 23 2011 02:41 Tien wrote:
The only reason we have the highest reported incarceration rate is because we don't murder our criminals at will we properly report our facts and figures.
Do you think Russia / China / North Korea is going to tell you how many people they murder / incarcerate and slaughter every year?
There is a problem with American politics, but blaming capitalism is being ignorant.
Okay, so your penal system is competing with Russia, China, and North Korea. The first one a quasi dictatorship, the later two totalitarian states with North Korea even being stalinist. Maybe you should compete with other first world democracies like Denmark, Germany or Spain? Or are these states also faking the reports? Could you tell me why the USA have nearly ten times the incarceration rate of Germany?
|
On October 23 2011 02:44 Traeon wrote:Show nested quote +There it is again, reality be damned, still waiting for those examples of me copying King Canute - not in jest - and demanding the tide not coming in. Fair enough: The irony is, the 2008 mortgage crisis was large scale fraud and manipulation. Coincidentally, OWS (and by extension this thread) was a response to that. So quotes like this really do make people question whether or not you're in touch with reality. In case you just haven't been paying attention: What happened was banks gave out loans to people that were unlikely to be able to pay them back. The banks then bundled these "toxic loans" into debt obligations. Doing so on a massive scale, they built up a bubble. They sold these obligations as investment to other corporations that were told these were safe and good. Knowing these investments could only fail, they then bet in the stock market that these corporations would go down. The bubble eventually burst. Somehow you're so out of touch with reality that you're still here arguing about how the solution is deregulation, that manipulation isn't really happening, etc. Get real!
Get ready for something about one of these:
1) The government sponsored community reinvestment act made the banks do it.
2) Fannie and Freddie incentivized giving out loans
3) Its the Fed's fault in some way.
It couldn't possibly have been due to private enterprise.
On October 23 2011 02:45 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 02:41 Tien wrote:
Do you think Russia / China / North Korea is going to tell you how many people they murder / incarcerate and slaughter every year?. I'm surprised you didn't choose to include Mordor in that list. You do realize that there are other countries in the world, ones that handle these issues in a more civilized and transparent ways? Using North Korea for a benchmark - yay.
I was about to say that. Woo USA is above NK/RU/CN!!! USA #1 #1 #1!!!!111!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
