Greed With John Stossel part 3 of 6

[1963danno]

They never state what the wages are of the privatized lifeguards. My guess jack shit

[ThatGuyCalledPhillip]

@1963danno Go watch a video about John Stossel talking about minimum wage :)

[1963danno]

@ThatGuyCalledPhillip I did and it's all bullshit.

[1963danno]

Cheaper price=Shitty wages

[USfutbol]

@1963danno so??

[1963danno]

@USfutbol So so suck my toe all the way to Mexico. That's all you have to say???????

[2011rosarot]

John Stossel doesn't understand what "greed" really means. The idea that everybody who does something good and productive is motivated by greed is preposterous.

[666or999]

@2011rosarot I don't think he was trying to say everything good that someone does is motivated by greed or that every greedy thing someone does is good. I think he is saying that people need to stop believeing the old myth that greed=bad and that if someone does something greedy they are automatically screwing you over.

[666or999]

@2011rosarot I don't think he was trying to say everything good that someone does is motivated by greed or that every greedy thing someone does is good. I think he is saying that people need to stop believeing the old myth that greed=bad and that if someone does something greedy they are automatically screwing you over.

[2011rosarot]

@666or999, that greed is bad is not an "old myth". It is simply true. Not primarily because greed often leads to exploiting others (although that is a common side effect, of course), but because we cannot be content and fully enjoy life AND be greedy at the same time. That is not possible. I know that I am correct about this....but if you don't believe me, that's just fine. :D

[USfutbol]

@2011rosarot He is making the point that the only reason why they are motivated to do something good and productive is to fulfill their own self interest.

[branddooon]

He contradicted his own point of view in this part...

[dstrbo13]

the philosopher they use likes ayn rand

[samantha34ize]

NEX TIME WEN A NIGGER ROB U DONT CALL THE COP

[casinohijack]

Cameras do not make anyone feel safe not the employee they just stop working jobs then society loses good people as well business lose because people do not shop at there stores and the shopping experience is terrible leaving them spending the bare minimum instead of spending more, people do not like cameras and avoid them. This is a Orwellian fascist country now. Eventually the only place you will be able to buy things will be Walmart and Walmart does not care about you.

[poop2poop2]

@casinohijack You're "theory" seems to be false as people don't mind being videotaped while working for the lifeguard company and being taped certainly hasn't stopped people from shopping at wal-mart. People hate government cameras, which is what Orwell was talking about. You seem to confuse people willing being taped to get better/cheaper products and people being taped by the government to stop them from being "anti-government"

[casinohijack]

@poop2poop2 Who do you think has the backup computers for the US government? Walmart. As well im sure you might of heard of the RFID chips that they would love to inject into all of our right hands so that we can do away with money all together. Walmart and Sams already have the technology in there stores to run the money less system. I dont care about cameras its a waste of money and when i shop at a place that has cameras i buy there bare minimun of what i need and nothing more.

[poop2poop2]

@casinohijack Well you are clearly an insane nutcase, so no one cares what you do or say and you certainly don't reflect the populous at large.

[rung3000]

about greed being good what about the financial meltdown and collusion

[dma777able]

Watching Stossel makes me sick..

[Ravengaurd6]

@dma777able then why watch?

[ladofmad]

I agreed with what he is saying about greed being able to motivate people into making better improvements in the quality of life for people, however, I am a little bit reserved about the last part when he said that public services like education and police are failures.

There are good public schools just as there are bad private schools.

[prosteelheader]

hehe! harder... longer... @3:05

[bjarnet3]

Walter E Williams is awesome!

[sadistgear]

There's a difference between the greed of a 26 year old man who is earning 23,500$ a year asking for a 10% raise and a 59 year old man who is worth 917 million dollars shipping jobs to china while RAISING the cost of his products to increase profit.

John Stossel seems to be implying the two situations are the same, and that all greed is good.

[jackooboy1]

"It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white as long as it catches mice." -Deng Xiaoping

[jackooboy1]

"It doesn't matter if a cat is black or white as long as it catches mice." -Den Xiaoping

[AroundSun]

A for profit military would still need to be given the rights by government in order to wage war. Congressional declaration. The leadership of the military would have to be different. If the military were larger than our government (that has no military), that would be dangerous no?

[theemergenceofgreed1]

The Emergence Of Greed /watch?v=CjJE2R4sNUU

[atlasshrugged2u]

This is a good report but all that's being described here is NOT REALLY the definition of greed.

Greed is "never having enough" never being satisfied or content with what one has, trying to figure out how to give the least effort or product for the most profit...Greed is a constant thirst for wealth or posessions no matter the price towards others. This report is more about the positives of Capitilism or a free Society...

[Writer01603]

@atlasshrugged2u No, Greed is exactly what he says it is. Greed is a person, yes, wanting more, but he doesn't have to cut corners, because if you're greedy, and what to keep your gains, then you have to do it legally, because, as we've seen, even if you're successful, eventually you will get caught and lose it all.

[atlasshrugged2u]

@Writer01603 I respectfully disagree. The gov't is "legal" and they get away with dirty stuff all the time at the cost of the American people. Issue a new tax here, lobby something and hype it up there...This report did not describe "Greed" as I said before is just what I said it is look it up.

[MarcellaMarrin]

For profit firefighting was a dramatic failure in this country. Better fire safety has largely been the fruit of government employed professionals. I support free enterprise, but the idea that for profit entities are always better is an extreme ideology every bit as destructive as communisim. It has led to an explosive growth of corruption and subversion of the public good to private greed.

[rockandrock44]

@MarcellaMarrin

You must be reading Revisionist History then. For Profit Firefighting was not a 'dramatic failure' like other liberal statists would like you to think.

[stale27]

It's our language which holds us back

[Uuuurk]

red cross non profitable????

[cellardoor199991]

non profit means the funds go straight to the red cross org. Not dispensed somewhere else. Red Cross is all profit every business is, that's the point of a business: To make money and sell supply.

[laetrille]

stossel is my hero

[ChristainPatriot01]

I saw this in class and I fell in love with this. GOD BLESS JOHN STOSSEL!

[redraiders2K9]

i did too and i can't get enough john stossel since

[pr0gm3r]

These lifeguard is afraid to get fire and ruin their reputations.

[archmage33]

Ridiculous example

[archmage33]

Lies, Lies and more lies.

Outdated, primitive, backward concept.

LIES.

[ThePissedOffAtheist]

If only we could be as forward thinking as you. Retard.

[jsh78mang]

Explain how you feel it is outdated and backwards.

[archmage33]

@jsh78mang - The majority of people experience everyday problems which stem from power hoarding. The problems are so obvious it hurts. Solutions also. Power hoarding needs to be toned down and moderated. No one's contribution to society is so great, that they should be allowed to rule it through their accumulated power. We need to solve problems... it's not Communism, nor Capitalism. It's flexible ... it's ...

SOLVEALISM?

[jsh78mang]

@archmage33 I will reply with something a wise man once told me. "If you do not like who has all the money. Stop giving it to them."

[AshillaBeige]

Outdated.... yes the concept that voluntary interactions are good and that all business relations should be determined by an uneducated third part is a great idea. The Soviet Union was so forward looking unlike capitalists; that's why the USSR is the strongest nation in the world... oh wait...

[archmage33]

It's got nothing to do with communism. You don't have to cling to predetermined concepts... fool :) ... Not everything we implement (live by) has to have a name.

Capitalism \ Communism .. is that all there is? How about moderating \ modifying the existent or inventing a new system? How about flexibility, meeting obvious problems with obvious solutions? Is it absolutely necessary to live by the "rules" invented hundreds of years ago? .....

As I already said: OUTDATED SYSTEMS \ GRUESOME LIES.

[AshillaBeige]

@archmage33

I only implied that state socialism has never worked. I'm not against pooling resources, but doing it via mandatory taxation is not the best way.

Also, feudalism is a very old system, and the current state is very similar to that.

So, I'm for modifying the system by ending this corporatist "insurance" scheme that helps lobbyists and people who are irresponsible at the expense of everyone else, rich or poor. That's state socialism, which is actually a kind o fiscal fascism.

[archmage33]

@AshillaBeige. .. Yeah, I can see your views are broad enough, only, replying to me it made no sense to take this stance, because I never mentioned \ considered actual system models (a.k.a. socialism, capitalism, feudalism, etc.)

I actually prefer rendering all these names irrelevant and focusing on Capt. Obvious stuff. That way, the average Joes reading / listening to your words actually get what you're saying.

[AshillaBeige]

@archmage33

And I would advise against calling people "fools" when you yourself can't form an argument other than "can't we all just get along... under my system of income-reaming statism?" My other piece of advice is for you to never engage in political discourse since you have no understanding of economics or political theory. We name things to be efficient. I'm just calling the system what it is.

Basically, you have the political comprehension of a middle schooler.

Stop embarrassing yourself

[archmage33]

@AshillaBeige It's infinitely interesting how you formed conclusions on the extent of my knowledge base, based on a single comment. Another thing I notice is that you keep referring to bogus shit I never mentioned, acting as if I said things like "mandatory taxation" and "can't we all just get along"

You say: " I'm just calling the system what it is." ... the names you mention are never the equivalent of the actual state, present in reality... therefor they're irrelevant... they don't exist.

[scrateshooter]

Walter Williams is cool. He sits in for Rush.

[032125]

Williams is a hell of a lot cooler than ElRushbo.

Paul-Williams 2012 anyone?

[wilcox71]

I would vote for that!!

[AshillaBeige]

Limbaugh is a tool. Williams is amazing though: he's a great economist. I hate when people who are fiscally conservative get sucked in by neoconservatives who are currently hiding under the guise of being libertarian until they can push their agenda again *cough* Glenn Beck.

[fomastephanovitch]

Glenn Beck's not a neo-con, he's just the right-wing equivalent of a marxist useful idiot.

[Bigturns33]

If neocons are conservitives then the pope is the devil. I am for Lasie-far capitalism myself. Nothing is more fiscal than that. The conservitives play the game but are the biggest threat to capitalism more so than the demos and the librals. Atleast with the Librals you know your getting spending and control. Lets just say exactly what made america tick from the start. Lassie fare capitalism. As the peopel said, "Government, LEAVE US ALONE".

[ForTehNguyen]

pure capitalism doesnt work, however a free market does which is capitalism with minimal govt to ensure a free market: anti trust laws etc. After all monopolies don't make a market free. Don't confuse the terms pure capitalism and free market.

[DavidKretzmann]

Monopolies are not created in a true free market. Harmful monopolies are created through government force, special favors, etc. Monopolies in a free market can only be created if people buy the products. No one is forced or coerced to buying a product.

[jtandbear]

Thank you!...someone with a brain

[PsychiatryExposed]

I agree.

[OpenComments]

Scientology OT LVLs

Section III OT = OT3 = Incident II. 75 million years ago Xenu commits mass extermination, drops bodies in volcanoes on earth,souls are subjected to 36 days of hypnotic implants which then attach to humans. OT3 is all about auditing out these body thetans.

OT4 = more body thetans and drugs

OT5 = even more body thetans and NOTs

OT6 = how to really audit body thetans out this time

OT7 = apply what you learned in OT6

OT8 = a review of above. Not successful?Start all over again!

[OpenComments]

Todd Rosier, Did you know that Incident II is nothing more than the XENU story told in OT3? Also, OT8 = You mocked up your own past lives.

[OpenComments]

L. Ron Hubbard was given Vistaril© by Dr. Gene Denk in his final days, by intramuscular injection in the right buttocks. Vistaril© is a psychiatric drug, used to calm frantic or overly anxious patients. He died on January 24th, 1986, eight days after the fatal stroke, and one day after signing his last will and testament.

These are public documents, available from the San Luis Obispo Sheriff's Office. Coroner's file #8936.

Why did L. Ron Hubbard die with a psych drug in his system?

[TheSlothook]

@DavidKretzmann thats not entirely true. John Kenneth Galbraith wrote in one of his books that certain corporations converge to a colluding monopolistic practice.

[DavidKretzmann]

@TheSlothook Even in such a scenario, there would be nothing preventing new entrepreneurs or businesses from taking market share from those corporations. Let the corporations merge if they like, but there is nothing they can do to hold new entrepreneurs and competitors from entering the market. Unless, of course, government steps in with laws, codes, and regulation. Without government, monopolies of coercion cannot exist. A free market society guarantees free choice in consuming and producing.

[TheSlothook]

@DavidKretzmann thats not really true though. Once you have market share being dominated by 1 or a few firms, they are able to put in barriers to entry. They do so in several different ways. for example, because they have established economies of scale, they can essentially drive up input prices or even tank their own prices for a short while so that prospective new firms are driven out of business. The pt im making isnt government is great, but to show that even free markets have drawbacks.

[Ravengaurd6]

@TheSlothook the thing about that is the fact that even large businesses can fail,but that doesn't happen when they're propped up by the government.

[Silvertaker]

@DavidKretzmann In my hometown there is only ONE company that provides electricity service. People DO have to buy their service - or live in the dark ages with no cooling for food, no air in scorching hot summers, etc. It is a monopoly, and a disgusting one that drives more families into debt every year.

This is what capitalism leads to. Deprivation in a world where the resources exist to provide for everyone in existence many many times over. 

[TheShaniqua1992]

@Silvertaker

Another dumb post. There is one electric company because the GOVERNMENT granted this electric monopoly.

You are the most ignorant person I've ever seen.

[Silvertaker]

@TheShaniqua1992 No. I educate myself and intensely research everything before offering my opinion. The profit agenda is what is ruining our world and has already ruined our culture. Resource-based social economy is the only humanitarian way to go in a world where there are resources enough to provide a comfortable life for every human being - with no one left out. Only the greedy or uneducated or selfish would disagree.

[Ravengaurd6]

@Silvertaker how does a resource based economy operate? how does react in respect to the choices of the parties involved? what role does force play?how about inventors or those with talents, how will they be encouraged to use their assets to benefit their fellow man?

[Silvertaker]

@Ravengaurd6 The profit drive in a resource-based economy is gone; so is the idea of incorporated bodies as independent beings who can drive social issues in response to and for the benefit of their own greed. Industry is driven by and dictated by need, logic, and technology: The profit drive is replaced, by commonality and the drive to move forward in all areas of human existence. Education replaces trash culture. This all requires a moral and intellectual zeitgeist in our species.

[Ravengaurd6]

@Silvertaker do people have power in this community?

[Silvertaker]

@Ravengaurd6 Collectively, yes. Singularly - absolutely not. You should research the Venus Project. You can learn a lot more about it on your own, much easier than I could explain it.

[Wonglow]

@DavidKretzmann Im all for free markets , but with the system we have now and EVEN with a true free market , Im unsure how to get around Electrical company monopolies untill the technology advances enough to make getting electricity to consumers much cheaper.  Face it with the way things are now and even in a free market ... Certain areas would be dominated by single electrical companies , Due to the infrastructure involved thats required to provide the service .

[DavidKretzmann]

@Wonglow There may be only several companies in a certain industry, but that's not necessarily a terrible thing. Netflix has a majority market share of the DVD-by-mail market, but that's because they deliver a superior product at a great price. Same goes for a company like Google in its industry. In a free market there is no legal barrier to new entrepreneurs competing or creating an alternative service. It is free competition in a free market that leads to superior products and living standards

[BaileysBeads]

@DavidKretzmann Only a libertarian troglodite manages to put these two sentences in one post and not see the problem.

"Monopolies are not created in a true free market"

and

"Monopolies in a free market can only be created if people buy the products"

[DavidKretzmann]

@BaileysBeads I was unclear with my definition of monopolies. Monopolies in the more sinister sense (complete control of an industry/market) are impossible in a true free market. However, it is not impossible for a company to gain a large majority (even 99% or 100%) of an industry/market by delivering a great product or service to people at a good price. The difference is that in a true free market scenario, there is no force involved; there are no laws/regulations prohibiting market entry.

[BaileysBeads]

@DavidKretzmann Okay I'll hand it to you that in theory everyone is free to enter the market. But in practice it's very easy for the big corporations to employ strategies to quell any upstarts. Walmart is a great example of this practice. It first competes all the small retailers out of the area by lower prices after and effectively kills all competition. After that the logistics make it no longer possible for any competitor to start around a Walmart location.

[BaileysBeads]

@BaileysBeads Now I'm not saying anything should be done about this. I don't see what could be done about it. But this effect gets worse when we're talking about limited natural resources, like energy and water. Companies can buy all aquafiers in an area and hold a 100% monopoly. Nobody can touch them then, it's physically impossible to enter the water market after a company holds a monopoly, they can ask any price they like for water, being the flexible good it is.

[DavidKretzmann]

@BaileysBeads Today Walmart receives special subsidies and breaks from government, so it's not an example of a true free market entity. Tom Woods has done work on this; it would be economically detrimental for Walmart to employ the practice you described. Of course, it isn't impossible that smaller competitors have to adjust their practices to fit with customer demand. People will support the business who they value and appreciate most.

[patillac50]

You have contradicted yourself. Free market has NO government interference, that's why it is called a FREE market, not a 'Sorta Free Market.' The only monopolies in America are run by the government. The free market, and YES pure capitalism and free market go hand in hand, would not allow a monopoly to exist as there is always someone who will find a way to compete. Please, learn the basic ideas and you will have a better grasp on reality.

[mus5599]

capitalism is good, but it needs rules. companies can make a lot more money if they use child labor like in the industrial revolution.

greed caused banks to be very creative. they created new ways to loan money- this is why we are in the current economic crisis.

yes "greed" is a good thing, but it needs common sense rules.

[punkofmudd]

exactly!

[Scoforever]

But who benefited from child labour. The children who got jobs. Banning child labour caused families to starve.

With tthe banks Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were given special privileges by the government to create all the bad debt. With the community reinvestment act banks were forced to hand out these bad loans. Once there was a bubble the market filled it. Had the government not got involved the bubble wouldn't have appeared. It was Ron Paul (the free market capitalist) who predicted this.

[Questfortruth86]

People look down upon the industrialists during the industrial revolution, but they should look at the facts. The people worked out of their free will; but why? During that period there were massive famines, and enormous population growth. The people had two choices, work in a factory, or die on a farm. If you want to look at a nation not industrializing during this period, simply look at Ireland: 2,000,000+ dead and misplaced because not enough potatoes.

[brentisone]

@Questfortruth86 You're wrong and I hope you know that. In Ireland the small farmers did not own their land which was in the possesion of big landlords (since 1541), who forced them to pay their lease to them, even if there wasn't enough food for themselves to eat or suvive. Britain in a first place wished not to interfere in this "free market" construct, so it was very difficult at that time to support the starving people in Ireland.

[AFRIKTODAY]

We need to change our monetary system instead I believe! You can not put a rule on human nature and some people will always try to cheat others. However, the legal system if enforced can punish those who are caught! The question rather is: Who is going to punish destructive government policies like lower interest rates, bailouts, overtaxation and wars mongering? Those are the issue that are, in my opinion, preventing a realistic social economical growth for most! Let's abide by the constitution!

[robertwc82]

thats all well and good, but what happens if you take away the competition factor? such as privatised water.

[lumpfish99]

this guy ought to go to palestine and watch the israelis and count their crimes......

[Naturyl]

Wow, how much Ayn Rand did Stossel read?

This whole series is pure capitalist propaganda.

[akennedy403]

'Capitalist propaganda?' Could you please refute (with facts) several of the arguments stossel is making in this series? What exactly do you perceive to be false or unfairly framed?

[lumpfish99]

i agree, its his presentation and more importantly where he cuts off the flow of info...like with rockafella....at the start sure he was an opportunist guy but later he became a monopolist, that part this guy didnt go into....

[punkofmudd]

kinda is...

[nikehp99]

I love Stossel!!!!!!

[FranklyMisterShankly]

"So we've seen that greed had helped to bring us many of the advances of our times!"

Like derivatives, default credit swaps, and most recently, Bernie Madoff's $68 billion pyramid scheme! I guess those must just be "an extra mile to go in creativity and thinking of that solution no one has yet thought of."

[fonne2]

hey dumbass, stossel distinguised between cheaters and those who actually earn their money. And do you know what a derivative is? They have nothing to do with greed.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

These social parasites don't produce anything - they merely re-allocate resources without "producing" a thing. They no more "earn" their money than a casino & a gambler "earns" money. A derivative is based merely on speculation and artificial inflation/deflation of prices - a series of repackaged promisory notes that divorce the lender from the loan recipient so that a few fiancial gamblers can punt the repackaged product from one sucker to another until the whole thing collapses.

[fonne2]

They allocate resources efficiently and ensure liquidity. What's wrong with gambling? In every decision we make, we evaluate risk vs reward. Risks are taken voluntarily. You clearly don't understand derivatives. Their main purpose is to REDUCE risk. Sometimes this opportunity is provided by a speculator who increases his risk. When prices are set by the market, nothing is "artificial" about them.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

The purpose of derivatives is, technically, to spread risk - at the same time severing the relationship between the lender & the borrower when the real estate market goes belly up, closing any and all possibility for loan renegotiation - all because some greedy cunt wants to make a buck from nothing more than the *repackaging* of an existing financial product. Now, where is that "liquidity" and "efficiency" these days, now that the crooked derivatives scheme has finally collapsed upon itself?

[fonne2]

One should never expect loan renegotiation. If you enter into a contract, you should intend to keep to it. By "repackaging" you are most likely referring to CDO's, which are not derivatives, nor are they bad, as their use leads to lower mortgage rates. Plus, all CDO purchases are voluntary and benefit everyone involved. The liquidity and efficiency aren't there because of uncertainty surrounding government intervention in the markets and the continued destruction of the dollar by the Fed.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

"One should never expect a loan renegotiation"? What psycho nut ideological economic utopia are you do you live in? Loans get renegotiated all the time, especially in instances where the alternative is outright default - in which the creditor gets zero in return. Turning loans into traded securities eliminated this possibility of renegotiation between the creditor & the borrower, just about ensuring a resulting economic cataclysm.

[fonne2]

No, I live in the real world, where if you sign a contract you are expected to and are required by law to follow through on your promise. I didn't say renegotiations don't happen. I said you shouldn't ever borrow money expecting that if you don't pay it back, that you are just going to get some bailout or handout. In the case of mortgages, they don't get zero. They get collateral, aka you property. Turning loans into securities allowed any investor - like you and me - to lend to homeowners.

[COCOPUFF093]

walter williams. david kelley. STOSSEL!

god, are there enough libertarians on this show?! haha

[kcphaid]

Gotta Love Williams!

[COCOPUFF093]

haha that was funny when the lifegaurd got fired for having tha chick talk to him

[tubecoin]

You can also build a similar argument from the altruistic side. There is nothing wrong with earning a living, but the term greed signifies you are stepping outside the social coherency boundaries in order to satisfy your desires.

[Elasaltaculos]

and that similar argument would be?

[tubecoin]

One could argue that enlightenment and the empowerment of the masses over the ruling class has been a key driver in the industrial revolution, altruism, or the wish to do well to others at a cost to yourself, lying at its core..

America started as a country where people wanted to create a better world, but governments always extort their population, and as a result industrialization never limits itself to what is good for people.

[Elasaltaculos]

The people who arose above the ruling class through enlightenment were the Bourgeoisie. They did not do so through altruism. There is no evidence for the claim that altruism was what drove the industrial revolution. Actually, that seems kind of the opposite of what really happened.

America started as a country that wanted it's people as being the sovereign. It was an emphasis on the individual. A better world is not the same as "the common good".

[tubecoin]

You have many examples of industrialist that had an utopian vision of decent life for the masses. You will only be able to determine the motivation after it had its effect, but naked greed is less often it than a wish to do good. Most of us don't get out of bed to work because we feel greed (imho), but because we want a good life for ourselves and others. So I think the greed angle is a bit deprived.

[Elasaltaculos]

But that is not altruism. Atruism is selfless concern for the welfare of others. That means that people would get out of bed just for the welfare of others, at one's expense.

I understand what you are saying.  I care about others, and I want to see them do well. That just is not altruism by definition.

Even if you would get up everyday to benefit others at your own expense, you will not put forth the effort that you would if it also benefitted yourself.

[tubecoin]

Eventhough it is not altruism, itn't greed either.. My initial reaction to the video was to say: if you make this case for greed, you could (with some extreme examples) make the same case for altruism. It would be equally untrue..

[ace11rothstein]

The missing piece of the puzzle re: the pools is that in order to run a pool, regulations had to be put into place and also there are laws where patrons have the right to sue the pool if something isn't right.

So the cost/benefit analysis works for the private lifeguard company because of the regulation.

[quuaa1]

I agree with the thing about DMV. In Ontario (Canada) they privatized the DMV, instead of waiting in line for hours, they reorganized it to eliminate that. There's 3 separate lines, 1 for new people applying for a learners permit, another for license renewal etc., and a third for those doing their actual road test, which is booked by phone, through an automated system, which can be done 24/7. That made it quick and efficient, unlike other areas where you wait for hours on end.

[rdxm]

Holy shit, this guy is the master of the red herring.

[MsticalPrincess]

rdxm...I don't get it.

[ClearFire1]

Subscribed, I love John Stossel too.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

You're not very bright, are you. "What 'people'?" was a rhetorical question to demonstrate how undemocratic & contrary to any notion of competition the awarding of the contracts really was. Wolfowitz was part of the Bush/Cheney administration. Figure out the rest.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

What "people"? They have a subcontact via Halliburton, who received a no-bid contract from the US gov't because of CEO Dick Cheney. There were no "people" involved, it was a back-room deal.

[timbosforporn]

Haliburton didn't start the day Bush was elected. They were doing this stuff for the govt since the 90s so maybe we our president decided to roll with them vs going with some cheapo outfit. Would you rather have security guards r us patrolling bagdad right now?

[FranklyMisterShankly]

No, but if a war is to be fought, the way have consensus (or lack thereof) is via a draft, as we've had in all the previous wars actually declared by Congress. Vietnam and the popular backlash against it spooked the politicians, so they employed a professional volunteer army from the 80s on (drawn from a social underclass). This proved insufficient in the Gulf, so a de-facto corporate military was brought in, which was free from any "messy" concept of popular consent.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Yes! Screw a government-run security services! Blackwater is the futuristic model of a for-profit military!

[UltimoLatino]

WHAT?! Thats the crazyest thing I have ever heard. A for profit military goes against the constitution. The Gov't is charged with "providing for the common defence". Private companies do not allow THE PEOPLE to have a say so. A private company does things for profits not because voters allow them to do so. That is fine for Nabisco or Frido Lay but a for profit military would be a direct threat to American Freedom.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

It's so crazy that it's already happening: Blackwater, Kellogg Brown & Root, AirScan - just to name a few. Robert Gates (US Sec of Defense himself agreed that the Pentagon lacked sufficient oversight to control private mercenary companies.

[UltimoLatino]

Thats fuckin scary man, What is there to stop a CEO from engineering a Coup. Next thing you know we will be strong armed into giving a private coorperation a say in FOREIGN POLICY! And who we go to war with. Most wars stop as the result of the people not standing for it anymore. If a private company engaged in warfare with a country then it would stop when the boss SAYS it stops. Fuckin Terrifying not to mention international backlash from such a senario.

[ilovestossel]

Would you work as a soldier for a private company that plans on using you to kill other americans?

[UltimoLatino]

Uh... look at history, just because people are from the same country doesnt mean the military has not been employed with killing them. Our military imprisons american citizens in GITMO and did to Japaneese Americans in WW2 world history is drowning in examples where military's were turned against domestic populations. AND WITH A PROFIT INCENTIVE BEHIND IT IN A PRIVATE COMPANY WHOA NOW YOUR TALKING ATROCITIES MAN.

[premenstruals]

@ilovestossel

I'm sure a lot of american will do, but beside that, before you being an american you are a human being living on this plane, than a healthy or ill person, then a hungry or an obese person, then a smart or a silly person, then a good or a evil person, then a child or an adult, then many many things, before being an american. Think about it

[ilovestossel]

Nothing private violates the constitution. The constitution only applies to the government.

[UltimoLatino]

Uh... if a private company is taking over a role that is reserved for govt then its a violation of the constitution. Like If a private corporation all of a sudden started to make its own laws that whole communities were required to follow. THATS A VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION because only congress and publicly elected representatives are charged with the power to make laws. A PRIVATE FOR PROFIT MILITARY IS A CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION AND A VERY FREEDOM THREATENING CONCEPT.

[utubehayter]

The constitution does not reserve any role for the govt. Try finding any statement that people are prohibited are doing as private enterprises - not one restriction has been placed on people.

[eirefrance]

If the Constitution says that interstate commerce shall be taxed by the govt and you commerce interstatedly without paying taxes, that constitutes Consitutional violation, yes?

[utubehayter]

The constitution says that interstate commerce can be regulated by the federal govt - however with regulate - they did not mean tax. That is a modern adaptation to suit the ideas of the political entreprenuers - aka politicians.

[eirefrance]

Thank you for the correction, but that doesn't change the point of my comment, does it?

[utubehayter]

tax is not the same as regulate... and hence the tax is unconstitutional. The only reason govt can enforce it - is because it has all the guns and is educating people into not questioning its activities at every step. So not paying tax is not violation of the constitution.

[eirefrance]

Again, that does not change the heart of the validity of what I said.

[utubehayter]

Since you are asking a question - I don't think it has any implicit validity. Validity pertains to an assertion or a reason. You neither claim nor state that the constitution says "...." (fill in the blank).

Your question is - If x then y?

I said x does not exist based on the composition of the US constitution. So whatever validity is there - you can lay claim to it.

[eirefrance]

Fine. If the Constitution says that interstate commerce can be regulated by the govt and you commerce interstatedly without following regulation, that constitutes Constitutional violation, yes? Apply that to the comment I was originally replying to and you see that my point is still valid. Have I made myself clear enough?

[utubehayter]

People cannot violate the constitution - its impossible. You can violate laws but not the constitution. Only govt can violate the constitution.

[hint0122]

so the PMCs are illegal?