.
I need to have my temperature checked, because I’m certain that I am sick. Sick like a dog. Sick in ways that I cannot describe, and it must be something really nasty like syphilis or something because…
…I actually agree with something that Michael Moore said.
Yes, that Michael Moore, the fat, disheveled, slovenly one, who eats truth and shits lies like it is part of his biological process.
Right up until he blames the mess on capitalism, I agree with him. The government took our money and gave it to failed business enterprises in a form of corporate welfare that the world has never before seen, and cannot tell us where the money went because they don’t know!
But I have to depart from him when he goes on to say that capitalism is to blame. You know, the free-market, unimpeded-by-government economic structure that we have that failed miserably because the markets weren’t free and were impeded upon by government. Yeah, that one. Left to it’s own devices, this market would have:
A.) Never bet on the come with completely irresponsible lending because there would have been no benefit to it without the governmental intervention that incentivized it in the first place;
B.) Allowed businesses that participated in this mess to be transparently defunct and in trouble, instead of giving them a place to hide it through government intervention;
C.) Allowed these businesses to fail, which in essence would have redistributed all of the wealth that they had a strangle hold on to all of the people below them, which should have been the democrat’s wet dream – yet they bailed the businesses out (and to who’s benefit? I still haven’t figured that one out yet!)
D.) Never would have created the bubble that burst in the first place.
Shall I go on? The problem is not free market capitalism. The problem here came from government interference in the free market. The problem was any socialist or fascist (and I use that in the sense that fascists controlled markets just like socialists did, but did so while letting them remain privately owned in the nominal sense) tendency to mess with the free market to achieve some social goal.
So I guess I can take solace in the fact that I only partially agree with his flabbiness, Michael Moore. But it still scares the fuck out of me.
.
.
For Goober via Schteveo's Laptop
8 comments:
In China, business owners found to be corrupt are quietly and quickly shot. Simplicity is the key to everything.
what you have described is NOT Capitalism. It's what the left calls Capitalism. Capitalism, market ecomomy, without gov't interference to create the mess we are in, did not get us here. The gov't's set-ups did.
I find it odd that a guy worth approx. $50 million is, supposedly, an anti-capitalist. If he lived what he preaches, his movies would be free to see,once the money made all the costs back. But Michael Moore has a reality problem.
Michael Moore is a typical lying liberal.
If he really cared, he'd give half his money to the poor and homeless and the needy. But he'd rather have the gub'ment take our money and give it to the needy.
Fat-slob Moore is your typical western communist, in that he believes in wealth distribution. Just not his wealth. It's the standard Commiewood mentality.
I couldn't read past I actually agree with something that Michael Moore said.
I didn't even get that far
Thanks, Steve. You da man.
And I had a hard time writing that I agreed with him, C-bug. But it was only a little bit of agreeemnt. zat OK?
Thanks, Steve. You da man.
And I had a hard time writing that I agreed with him, C-bug. But it was only a little bit of agreeemnt. zat OK?
Another off-topic until I get this blogger issue figgered out...
Nuclear Ordinance? Good or Bad?
It is a simple question, and many think that the answer is very cut and dry – they feel that nuclear weapons are an unforgivable evil and blight upon the face of the world. Our leader, Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, thinks this way. He requested in front of the UN Security Council to eliminate nuclear weapons – all of them. (I won’t discuss the pipe dream that this obviously is any further, I think it is safe to assume that it is patently obvious that this can never, ever happen.)
I also think that the answer is very cut and dry, but in the opposite direction. Nuclear weapons have saved countless millions of lives.
Huh? What fucking planet is Goober living on?
Earth, just in case you missed the memo.
I mean, come on, folks, do any of you really think that the hostilities between the USSR and the USA wouldn’t have escalated into an all-out conventional war if it hadn’t been for the fact that doing so would ensure the complete annihilation of both sides?
Would the US have cleverly hid it’s involvement in the Russian/Afghanistan campaign if it weren’t for nukes, or would our involvement have been overt and forceful?
Would the US have allowed unescorted, unprotected Russian ships to resupply Hanoi during Vietnam if it weren’t for nukes, or would we have torpedoed every last one of them and started World War Three?
How about the Berlin Airlift?
The Korean War?
The Russian invasion and occupation of Czeckoslovakia?
The US’s overtly hostile actions against Cuba?
Shall I go on?
In a pre-nuclear world, any one of hundreds of incidents would almost surely have caused both sides to fall-to and start flogging the ever loving shit out of each other. We were hostile, belligerent nations, and the only reason that the war never happened is because we both had nukes. In a pre-nuke world, if the Russians had imported conventional weapons into Cuba capable of attacking Miami, you can bet the first marine division would have been on the shores of Guantanamo Bay that next morning, and the Big Red One in East Germany by the end of that week. Millions would have been killed.
But that never happened because nukes forced us to be polite – to forgive actions that would have led to war in their absence, and I worry that any effort to remove nukes from this world will simply remove any reason for belligerent nations to be polite and tolerant of each other. I worry that removing nukes could cause war.
Point in fact, has anyone noticed how quite Kashmir has been since both India and Pakistan got nukes?
Post a Comment