WALKER: This is what happens when Democrats and Independents stay home on Election Day. A doltish 2.59 GPA college drop out and corporately bought lackey governor gets elected!
@HUMANSAREBENEATHME The field is certainly open for patriots to act. The Wisconsin 14 took a heroic and legal step to protect the state from disastrous harm by the Koch cat's-paw in the governor's chair. None of the world's great wrongs has been righted without heroes stepping out of the crowd and leading the way.
Bush let the floodgate open of too much immigration just like the white man did to the American Indians, build churches on Indian holy land but then complain about a mosque! ok that make sense? The Indians did not have a voice just like they want to do to the Unions.
NEWSFLASH!!!! American Germans are know to be very conservative. Catholics, even hispanic votes are known to be extremely conservative to the point of bordline extremism. So now, which political party really is likely to hide socialist, Hitler types of motives on state and local levels in government???????????????NEWSFLASH!
Yeah, I am starting to think that GOP scum should appreciate Liberals. Liberals are the buffer between the GOP and the millions of less-friendly Americans who would like to put all Republicans in a pit.
You should appreciate those 60s Liberals. (By the way I wasn't even born then so you don't have to be a boomer to be a hippie, motherfucking piece of shit republican rats. )
I support Gov. Walker's position to "correct" the "collective bargaining" for public employees & their wages & their contributions the law requires they increase to their health care & pension plans..
I now have a question for Mr. Koch..My mother's mother's maiden name was Elizabeth Koch who married Henry Litzenberger.. of the "VOLGA DEUTSCH" who immigrated from Russia to America around 1914-15 & finally settled in Colfax, WA. Curious if there's possibiltiy of a family linkage here!!
@TheAbleAmerican Kochs hail from Germany. Their father, Fred, was a founder of the John Birch Society. Fred's assets were seized by the U.S. because he was using his wealth to support the Third Reich while the U.S., including him, was at war with it.. (Sadly, we gave back his assets after the war, and ever since, he and his sons have been building up a fortune greater than the assets of many countries. for the purpose--it now appears--of transforming the U.S. into a corporatist state.
@letom82 U liberal/democrats are the real problem here in America but your too brain dead to figure it out so you'll push and push until we''ll have to take all u asses out. It's that simple. Can your simple mind understand that bro?. 1 less liberal parasite=several freed tax payers!
@letom82 Your limited brain is showing moron. Seriously, you're brain dead bro. You must take it up the ass. That's been proven hundreds of yrs' ago too cause brain damage.
The answer would have been to fire all public employee's & bus in several thousand Black & Muslin families & give them the union jobs with all the benefits. That would solve the fact that many of these minorities are out of work without retirements.That would get them off public assistance and the union employees would be helping their fellow comrades. That's what the liberal union progressive are always saying they want is to help the minorities. Well now is their chance to do the right thing.
@Claycat4 I used to listen to all the other news and realized that they are bias liberals and none of it is accurate information. So when Fox news came around due to a vacuum in the news media i started viewing while traveling on the road. They are fair and balanced and report dozens of stories never in the other news media so continue being indoctrinated by the liberal bias (socialist/communist) media that's your right but don't tell what's actually happen in this country because i see clearly.
@ISUCN Are you for real? You make me think of a characateur of a person! I had hope for the human race, but when I read comments like yours, I begin to think we are devolving instead of evolving!
By the way, you might want to review the actual meaning of communism. If you studied political science, you would know that the societies that were considered communist were actually totalitarian. Communism in its pure form is an ideal state, but cannot be attained, because humans are too greedy.
@Claycat4 Right about communism, it can't work. So who are these people that drive us closer to it? They know it will never work. So capitalism has been the best system to date. Why is it being destroyed by these same people that want to spend other people's money when it's never work? Where do u they plan on taking us? It isn't going to be pleasant for anyone. I think they consider having to thin out the population big time. Consider me crazy from here on out.
@ISUCN This is not true capitalism! It is fascism! Our government is being run by huge corporations. They are intent on destroying the middle class. We are becoming a slave planet. We are going to owe our souls to the company store.
True capitalism would be evident by the survival of small businesses and family farms. They are not surviving!
If people would pay attention, they would realize this is not a lib/con problem but one of class warfare. The globalists against the rest of us!
@Claycat4 I don't disagree. Many on wall st are leftist who control 65%/ intent on total control and rape of this country. Government regulations the past several decades. Back in the 1950's 60's things work far better before these leftist got involved. Things all changed after the leftist assassinated JFK and then his brother Bobby. Who took over after JFK was shot. That's right, a leftist, Look at what Johnson did. Socialist started US take down. I'm an independent constitutionalists.
@Claycat4 I don't disagree. Many on wall st are leftist who control 65%/ intent on total control and rape of this country. Government regulations the past several decades. Back in the 1950's 60's things work far better before these leftist got involved. Things all changed after the leftist assassinated JFK and then his brother Bobby. Who took over after JFK was shot. That's right, a leftist, Look at what Johnson did. Socialist started US take down. I'm an independent constitutionalists.
@ISUCN "none of it is accurate information" is a thoroughly non-objective statement. You lose all credibility on whatever else you have to say when you make statements like that. If you think that "none of it is accurate information" on legitimate news organization channels, you obviously are seeing very little clearly.
GOP WELFARE WHORES - At least three of the Wisconsin state Senate Republicans currently demanding that public workers sacrifice benefits, wages and even collective bargaining rights for the sake of the budget have applied for and received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal farm subsidies, a review of state and federal records shows.
The progressive movement has stalled. The problem is this.
Oil and Banking interests bought and trained historians and scholars, and got them positions of prestige. They literally rewrote history... and they bought the media. The media market is dwarfed by the banking and energy markets... so... they just bought it.
Central banks are unethical and disastrous to a nation. Aim your venom at THEM.
@bsharker No, look man your not accounting for a lot of data. They are bracketed to pay 50% before tax cuts, they own property and assets that are subisidized by us (tax payer). You have to look where the tax dollars go. We pay for advancements in tech through funding universities, grants and other subisidizations. They pay 50%minus breaks but capital gains aren't assessed the same way as income. Plus, the money they pay is used by them for them. However, this doesn't mean the rich are evil.
@hippydog123 Gov interference leads to corruption. Companies use gov connections to create monopolies and eliminate competition. I'm not entirely sure how gov funded research works, but I think you are vastly overestimating how good it is. By picking and choosing which companies and ideas we flood our tax dollars into, again, the gov chooses its favorites, not necessarily the BEST ideas. Thus, yet again, gov interference eliminates competition in the market place.
@peerpressure1999 No one is saying it is good. One of us, me, is talking about how things actually occur. One of us you is pretending like private companies subsidize their own tech advancements. and that the free market will lower prices when they can't afford the R & D. I'm saying it's corrupt. You're saying we need the gov't to stop intervening. That means no driving on the gov't funded roads to the gov't tech funded computer you are typing on, into the gov't funded internet you are using.
@hippydog123 Fine, gov funded roads are shit anyways. If they were privatized they would be better cared for and I wouldn't hit potholes on the way to work. Also, with out gov funding dumb ass bio fuel research, I would probably be driving in an electric car. And anyways, you clearly don't understand how companies are started and do research. Quickly, someone has an idea, they gather investors, start business, sell product. All research and money doesn't go through the gov like you think.
@peerpressure1999 "If they were privatized they would be better cared for and I wouldn't hit potholes "? You got proof of this? When did private corporations become perfect bastions of morality?
@peerpressure1999 as opposed to what roads? Private ones that don't exists. Why don't research the history of U.S infrastructure. There are reasons why private companies didn't make roads. Basically, roads are too expensive to make. Why would they be better? Because now somebody can profit off them by charging you to use them? Or what you will use a competitor's road that doesn't exist. Are we going to pave the entire country with non-existent roads? BTW-I own a company and a non-profit.
@hippydog123 Its called a toll way buddy, I don't know where you're from but your frame of reference is tiny. Please expand your horizons before you try to lecture me on US infrastructure. There are several advantages to these private roads. The gov monopoly is taken away, so people that own the roads have incentive to keep their road nice, because otherwise people won't drive on it. ALSO, they do not have eminent domain and can't force people to move.
@peerpressure1999's Arguments consist of ambiguity. Please specify them. Which "tollway"? The ones that used gravel before we built the high-service highway system of today? If that is to specific for you, then which state? pick one. Instead of Government monopoly you now have a private one. One that is protected by the gov't you hate. Is the road kept nice, or is it nice because of less service=less traffic? Explain how the effects of privatization during cali's energy crisis was good. Wiki it
@hippy I have several tollways where I live and they are always in very good condition. And no, they do not create a monopoly because there are many ways to get where you are going. If the owner of a road tries to charge too much for use, you can just take a different route. Where as if the gov owns all the roads, they can simply tax you whatever they want for use/upkeep and you have no say in the matter. Likewise they have little incentive to upkeep roads because you have no choice but theirs
@peerpressure1999 This is not evidence. Just because they exist doesn't mean anything. What is the rate of use as compared to a public road or major street? That is why I asked you to pick state. Look their. Then find a way to quantify road conditions. Potholes or something. Then get some numbers.
@hippydog123 That means your precious gov can't come boot you out of your family home because some corporation just paid them off to vote a free-way to be constructed going through your back yard. You see the corruption that comes about when there is gov interference.
@peerpressure1999 hey, Why is there gov't corruption? What is that a byproduct of? I got to see your rational here. Maybe you would enjoy wilhelm von humbolt's "limit of state action". I think this will aid in clearing some of your intellectual confinment. He was libertarian, from there, you can assess the most dominant institution of our time, the U.S corporation and understand power dynamics.
@hippydog123 I think you are intellectually confined is because of your method, namely, leaping to conclusions about my position on the role of gov't in the economy. Disparaging another argument doesn't mean yours is true. This is a poor approach. Again because you haven't proven anything. I have facts, and you have up to this point, poor rhetoric. You might have data, but you haven't displayed any. Except for like"there is thing that might of happened, and so that means in all instances X"
@hippydog123 I think you would find that the corporation has FAR less power when they don't have gov protection and laws defending their interests. If corporations are so powerful, don't you think they could easily change the current system if they wanted to? The reason they don't is because they LIKE how our system is. The gov interference only makes them stronger and serves THEIR interests, not the ours. You're very confused about how the world really works.
@peerpressure1999 There is no such thing as a corporation that doesn't have goverment protection. That is why it was invented. Investors didn't want to take a risk of building a bridge or roads because they are to expensive. Look at how many supreme court case regarding protecting the rights of a corp where brought after the 14th amendment was passed. (15 african americans 135 corps) When we didn't have the wagner act employess who went on strike where slaughtered. A biz owner would go to a
@hippydog123 court get an injunction and just wipe out the work force. This is the actual world. The U.S has an extremely violent labor history. I asked you to unpack free market. You aren't using that term how Adam Smith would or a free market economist would. Please let me know what you mean by "free market economy".
@hippydog123 Are you telling me that the Wagner Act made it illegal for business owners to kill their workers? Even if that were true, Do you really think that is a necessary law in today's world? Do you think the public would stand by a company that slaughtered its workers? Do you think anyone would even work for them? Come on, tell me you're smarter than that. Even if it were necessary 100 years ago, it is irrelevant to today's world or this discussion.
@peerpressure1999 Are people fundamentally different since 1935. Would the public standby? They didn't stand by, that is why you have/had the act. Or are some people like you and no idea what happened in the past or what is happening today.
@hippydog123 The WORLD is fundamentally different. In 1935, a company in the middle of nowhere Wyoming could kill its entire workforce and no one would know about it. If that happened today there would be live streaming video of the massacre going out to millions on the internet and the 24 hour news cycle would be all over it. Anyways, it still has zero relevance to what we are talking about
@peerpressure1999 Media mergers occurred during Theodore Roosevelt (and the rest of progressive presidents, in case you don't know before 1935). Nice anachronism. Do we live stream having 20% of our children growing up in poverty? Do we live live stream having the worst health care outcomes of any industrialized nation? Do we live stream that U.S citizens work more hours than all other industrialized nations but have since real wages decline since Regan? Do we live stream massive foreclosures?
@peerpressure1999 Please read carefully. I didn't say, " All research and money goes through the gov". I said all major tech advancements are funded by the gov't. I made this clear with examples, about computers, roads and stuff. Understand the argument before you respond. If you don't understand, ask for clarity. I will gladly oblige.
@peerpressure1999 also, man you premise here is not good. I want some dichotomies to emerge for you. ok so, Just because gov, connection are used to create monopolies doesn't mean that has to be used only for monopoly creation. Furthermore, Why did we have anti-trust/trust law? If you a governemtnal system that is upholding monopolies, should dissolve the government or should dissolve the monopolies. Should you use the gov't to do so? Can you dissolve monopolies w/out the government? how?
@hippydog123 With unions, both the unions and walker is wrong. Unions should certainly have the option to organize for collective bargaining, but that doesn't mean it is a RIGHT that should be given by the gov. Likewise, under a free-market system, there shouldn't be a law against them bargaining. If they freely decide on it, then alright, if they don't, then that is their choice. We don't need a gov law forcing them to do either, they are grown ups.
@hippydog123 A free-market system is the ONLY way to prevent monopolies. Every monopoly that has ever existed has come about through gov intervention, by legislative laws preventing people from entering the market. Monopolies are IMPOSSIBLE in a free-market because if a company tries charging too much for their product or their innovation stagnates, then competitors will emerge who will provide said service at a lower price or improve it some how.
walker is just showing off, bragging about how awesome he is. Listen to him! I wonder who he's trying to impress...he sounds like such a self-righteous tool.
~*~For 30 years REPUBLICANS have waged war on American working families.Our economy has been incrementally destroyed& nothing of any significance has been done to improve our infrastucture.SHAME ON REAGAN. More Americans are now destitute while corporations& billionaires enjoy RECORD profits. 1/3 of all corporations pay NO TAX while enjoying corporate welfare in the form of TAX PAYER BASED SUBSIDIES.ENOUGH! REPEAL THE REAGAN & BUSH TAX CUTS! DEMAND THAT CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OFTAXES!
@poindexterwitkowsky For even longer, democRATS have been waging war on business. This whole mess is the fault of Jim Doyle, and the former liberal WI senate & legislative majority spending like idiots, taxing business so much than many have fled the state or just outright liquidated. These businesses are no longer in the state nor are the jobs. This is the liberals fault- they are the ones waging war on workers (now unemployeed). Unemployement = liberal empowerment.
He keeps a picture of ronald reagan in his house? What a fucking dork! Does he pray to it too? Keep his On his nightstand? Masturbate to it? What an asshat!
Scott Walker is doing exactly what is needed with this bill, and saying exactly what needs to be said! He is truly representing the real WORKERS of Wisconsin. Unions and public workers are the ONLY people that oppose this bill, and everyone else in WI feels helpless as those idiotic protesters in Madison drown out the rest of us. It's just plain selfish what the unions are doing, making up the lies like they are and spreading them in classrooms amongst us very gullible and fragile children.
@20012607 [...us very gullible and fragile children]
It is disheartening to see kids used as pawns. Most young children have a fondness for their teachers. I'm sure they have no idea what public unions are.
[Unions and public workers are the ONLY people that oppose this bill]
If this is true, then clearly the Senators who fled do not represent the people but merely the public unions that got them elected with taxpayer money.
A CEO, a Teapartier and a Teamster sit with 12 cookies at a table. The CEO grabs 11, then tells the Teapartier, " That teamster wants part of your cookie."
A CEO, Tpartier and a teamster sit with 12 cookies at a table. The CEO grabs 11, then tells the Tpartier, " That Teamster wants part of your cookie. "
Everything questionable suggested by the impostor was shot down by Walker. This phone conversation suggests to me that Walker has more integrity than the 14 Democrats who skipped town.
Notice how ALL the badmouthing and derogatory language is by the impostor trying to bait Walker?
the republicans have really pissed on their shoes this time. After all the graft on Wall Street with the help of the banking industry...........causing world wide recession and huge shortfalls of income for most states, then........................NOW to lay the blame at the feet of teachers and civil servents................who did nothing wrong, just as a bait and switch...........in order to destroy collective bargaining........state by state.....It is just evil and will not stand.
out of staters were not the ones walking around the capitol this past saturday. it was 16 degrees outside, breezy, and snowing steadily. the only people that were equipped for these conditions were the cheeseheads from all over the state. i was there. walker is out of touch with these folks in the street. i saw ONE teabagger the whole afternoon. 100,000 were there, but only over the course of the entire day. many people could only stay for a couple of hours--they had kids with them.
a governor that thinks andrew black bart does good journalism. 'good stuff' he says. so he condones outright lying & smear tactics? no wonder walker got tossed out of a restaurant with his buddies last friday. didn't hear much about that, did you? the guy can't even go out to eat in madison. maybe he should've grabbed one of those delicious slices of pizza i saw getting passed around the capital. black bart's getting sued by shirley sherrod for destroying her career with blatant lies. ha!
Riddle - what difference does it make if the greedy billionaire businessman or the powerful unions who just look out for themselves bleed the rest of us taxpayers dry?
Answer- none the rest of us poor non-union people and small business owners are screwed either way.
This is pretty true. Although the unions are getting weaker and weaker the greedy billionaires are getting stronger. Unions have a democratizing effect on society, billionaries do not. Let me know if you are interested in sources.
@danielranschaert You just called me a moron for asking a question, and then called me lazy and uninformed. Der dee Derp, you become informed from asking questions, and I took the time to ask it in the first place. You sir, must be trollin.
@island4diver I don't think so. If Walker had talked to this guy before he wouldn't have fell for it which shows he isn't very close with Koch. Almost the whole conversation was Walker talking about his job. He comes off as dedicated and sincere.
@bsharker They benefit more. No they do not pay their fair share. Kochs and Paris Hilton pays at most 15 percent because trust funds are capital gains, not earned income. Earned income from working is taxed higher. Plus when Reagan lowered taxes on the rich the first year, he raised taxes for the rest of us seven times.
@bsharker they pay 50 but have 95 percent. The founders had near confiscatory inheritance taxes (until the civil war) to prevent people like the Kochs.
@peerpressure1999 name one place where this libertarian paradise worked? Then the companies that have a monopoly become the de facto government, which is a dictatorship You are talking about feudalism, or Mexico or the Philippines. Which is great unless you are one of the serfs, which is about 95 percent.
@island4diver I can't name a place its worked because its never been allowed to come even close to realization. I CAN tell you, however, that when free market and libertarian principles are implemented, society benefits. I can also tell you that these public unions are a cancer, and towns that have privatized things like transit and city maintenance have seen huge benefits, like better quality of work, work done faster, cheaper cost to citizens, etc.
@peerpressure1999 No you can't name an instance of privatizing city maintenance or public works improving anything, because it has never happened. I would speculate this is why you DIDN'T name an instance of it occuring. Research this, the facts are just the opposite of your conclusion.
@hippydog123 YOU do YOUR research. Look up Sandy Springs, Georgia. They are the first US city to do so and have had OUTSTANDING results (I tried putting a link to an article about it for you, but apparently youtube doesn't allow that.) The fact is that public jobs don't create wealth, they stagnate it by killing competition and entrepreneurs. Also, any jobs that the public sector "creates" are simply stolen from the private sector.
@peerpressure1999 Look up what privatization in Sandy Springs, Georgia? They are not the 1st US city to do this. The entire state of California tried to privatize it's energy and it the result was raised prices and lower service quality. This isn't anything new. I would be interested to read if this was successful Sandy Springs. Please give me more details as to what to look for.
Respond to this video... Public Transit, utilities and such are called "natural monopolies", they don't "inspire entrepreneurship". or competition. quite the opposite. They are natural monopolies because investor's don't want to take the risk of investing enough capital to build a rail system or lay a bunch of copper for telephone wire, you get the picture. It's called "barriers to entry" in the market.
@hippydog123 You should just look up an article about it, but basically, by privatizing city maintenance they were able to cut the amount of workers in half and public satisfaction with the work was increased. There are private bus companies. However, it is difficult for them to keep drivers because, SURPRISE, it is impossible for them to compete with the wages and benefits that public drivers make. This should prove to you that these drivers are making WAY too much money.
and finally how does,"any jobs the public sector "creates" are simply stolen from the private sector." happen? This is not clear to me because, 1.Property only exists insofar as the laws of the State says it does. 2. Business entities only exist insofar as the State says they do. Therefore, all jobs/businesses require public/state recognition for legitimacy. Does this make sense? You see, you cannot have a business without the state legitimizing, that is why you have to file for charters.
Also if the public sector can't create wealth, why is that the most successful period in U.S history is when we had the most semi-command style economy in U.S history (Post New Deal era, including, 1997 Glass Steagall act, HOLC, Wagner act,? Why is it then that the most successful industries in the U.S are backed by government contracts and subsidization. For example, pharmaceutical companies spending 2x on advertising then on R and D, because the U.S gov. subsidizes R and D costs. (Dean Baker)
@hippydog123 If they worked for any NORMAL bus company, their demands would be financially IMPOSSIBLE for the business to meet, because they simply aren't making enough money to support that. However, because it is the gov and taxes paying for public driver salaries, money is no object, the sky is the limit, so these people are paid unsustainable wages and the city is forced into debt. This is the same for almost all public employees. They are paid far above market wages, resulting in debt.
@hippydog123 And I'm not sure, but I would be willing to guess that companies receiving gov subsidies are successful BECAUSE they are getting a huge influx of money from the gov. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a company that is getting millions of free money to improve their services will probably make more money than one that isn't. However, the problem with this is that it opens the door for special interests to interfere and steer a company away from market demands.
@hippydog123 I would assume that companies receiving gov subsidies appear to be more successful BECAUSE they are getting huge amounts of gov capital. If you are getting millions of free money to improve your services, of course you are going to do better than a corporation that must survive purely on their OWN profits. The problem with that is it opens the door to special interests and steers the company away from the market demands.
@hippydog123 For example, G. W. Bush was giving people tax breaks for buying SUVs and he pumped millions of gov aid into hydrogen cell cars. This tech is owned by Big Oil and is a pipe dream that will not be realized for decades. So, when the market was calling for electric cars, the gov found a way to steer the market back towards gas guzzlers to support the oil industry. Also, they give HUGE amounts of money to bio-fuels which is a dead end and only prolongs our dependence on fossil fuels.
@peerpressure1999 So then, do you agree with me that the government/public sector can create wealth? You just stated that it can, and that it did. Am I misunderstanding you? Again why is that the times with most intervention produce the most wealth and lower the deficit. Look, in competitive markets, the pieces don't increase in value, the pieces exhaust value. ok. If pieces increase in value, then competition propensity is diminished because it is harder to start up a competitive business.
@hippydog123 No, the gov doesn't create wealth by intervening. In my example, by helping out the oil companies, perhaps those SPECIFIC companies made money. However, OVER ALL the economy is hurt. Think of all of the new companies and areas of growth in the alternative fuel arena that are squashed out because of gov backing the oil companies with huge tax breaks and subsidies. And you are misguided. I think you'll find that states with less gov intervention are far better off than ones with more
@peerpressure1999 "I think you'll find that states with less gov intervention are far better off than ones with more". The only problem with this argument is that all of history contradicts it. Please tell me of one instance otherwise. Again yes, if pieces increase in value competition is hurt. In a pretend world where fantasy free-markets exist then your argument is conceptually true. In the real world, where gov't is the shadow cast by big business(john dewey) it is actually true.
@hippydog123 sorry it is *not* actually true. I think you are assuming that Gov't intervention through subsidies is a rarity or is somehow a byproduct of businesses with unions. If you think for two seconds that is silly. Private interests are not oreinted around competition. They are oriented around non-competition, because non competition produces profit. You don't have to like it, it is what Adam Smith warned against. But back to the point:Libertarian principles.
@hippydog123 ok so where does the funding for R and D come from for your alternative fuel sources? A private firm. No. Just like with all major technological advancements (internet, rail, battery technology, solar, infrastructure,satelitte,cell tech,computers) there innovation is subisidized by the State. That's us amigo. The profits are privatized. There is no evidence of libertarian principles being implemented and a State and citizens benefitting because of the context I just mentioned.
@hippydog123 And again research the california energy crisis. Research MBTA in Massachusetts. When private companies take over public utilities it has consistently been a scam, raised costs and lowered service quality. Simply because in most instances(that of natural monopolies) there is not competition. Go build a private funded electric company and compete if you can. You won't have enough capital to build anything. I will check sandy springs. My hypothesis remains the same.
@hippydog123 Unions are not perfect institutions. They don't suck money from the government either. If the Gov't where paying for them, then the private sector wouldn't care. The private sector doesn't care enough to pay it's taxes. 158 billion dollars in (I think 2001) unpayed revenue according to Dean Baker CEPR. If you don't like unions then go ahead and work 14 hour days with no benefits as was the case before there existence. Or pretend that libertarian principles will somehow sort this
@hippydog123 out. Secondly. If we are going argue conceptually and academically(though I would rather not) Market demand isn't determined by us. We, according every major public opinion poll, want mass transit not alternative fuel(this is by a vast majority. I didn't see that option in the market. Libertarian market principles are inefficient and conceptually based because they don't tackle corruption or deal with the actual world which has a state that funds innovation and lower's risk.
@hippydog123 Libertarian principle do tackle corruption. Look at the most recent market collapse. Because of gov interference, corruption on a massive scale was supported and rewarded. If those unscrupulous banks were allowed to fail, then banks that made smart/honest investments would be the only ones left. They then would be able to move in and replace the dishonest banks. Instead, the bad banks got even bigger by getting bailed out, then buying up other banks that the gov allowed to go down
@peerpressure1999 (another conceptual arg) ok so, with libertarian principles you wouldn't have an FDIC(started during the new deal aka gov't reg). Which bails out banks each friday and ensures your deposits. There would be no banks left. You wouldn't have a consistent currency. It was libertarian principles that pushed the repealment of Glass Steagall in 1997 which lead to removing the seperation of financial markets and the collapse you are talking about.
@hippydog123 I don't care if repealing that act lead to the financial meltdown, what I care about is what happened next. Businesses that fucked up were allowed to survive and get bigger instead of failing like the market wanted them to. The market can't work if you remove its ability to punish stupidity by bailing out bad companies.
@peerpressure1999 You would rather see millions of people live in a box on the street suffering for decades to come rather than prop up some businesses that took stupid risks until things can be unwound and somewhat fixed such that we avoid a meltdown? You are a fucking idiot, a disgusting one at that. If thats what your free market demands, that millions suffer due to the hands of the few, then you can take your ideals and shove them up your worthless ass.
@Shyhalu Just so you know, bailing the banks out didn't keep people from losing their homes, there are still thousands of foreclosures going on across the country as we speak. And guess who is getting to keep the houses. THAT'S RIGHT, the banks that caused the problem, then got propped up by our gov. How does that make sense to you? And while all those people are homeless, those CEO's that were saved get 20,000,000 dollar bonuses. Is that fair? The market would have dealt out better justice.
@peerpressure1999 No shit sherlock. It makes sense to me because the alternative is to let them keep the houses while they fire people left and right and destroy the economy and further cause a domino effect. For fucks sake, the Dow HALVED. The market doesn't deal justice, if it did we would not have corruption in private business. The crash wasn't just about the banks either.
@peerpressure1999 You think unemployment is high now? Imagine how bad it would be if we didn't catch the falling banks and prop them up until they fixed their trash and continued doing the BILLIONS of dollars worth of business with other companies. When giant companies fall, they take others with them. Its a lose lose situtation. Your dumbass is in lala land, come back to reality - where you can't always win.
@Shyhalu Your ignorance is startling. If you let those big banks fail, their assets don't just disappear. More responsible banks that didn't fuck up buy up their debt and take on their business. All this new business means that they need to grow, so they hire more people, creating new jobs in the wake. Meanwhile, greedy execs that caused the collapse lose their jobs. And again, I think one of the reasons unemployment is too high now is because of too much gov interference.
@peerpressure1999 "If you let those big banks fail, their assets don't just disappear." Who the hell is going to purchase them when investors are pulling their money out of the market? New businesses don't just pop out of thin air. You think unemployment is the way it is because you are an anti authority idealogue, which makes you no better than a religious zealot flying shit into buildings.
@Shyhalu And who wouldn't buy up those assets? Lets say I owe a bank money on my mortgage, then said bank goes under. You don't think another bank would come in and buy up my loan? And while no country implements a PERFECT libertarian system, several countries use certain aspects, and they usually work well. Portugal legalized all drugs, their rates of abuse dropped. Poland has a very free-market economic system and they are the only country in the EU whose economy was untouched by recession
@peerpressure1999 Which banks are you referring too? The are all overleveraged its called a fractional reserve system. You only have 3% capital requirements. Dude, seriously, read.
@Shyhalu I also find it interesting that Paulson chose to bail out the bank that he used to run, giving it money and allowing it to buy out its competitors that Paulson decided were alright to let fail. Don't you find that a little shady? This happens ALL the time in business. Because of gov interference, corporations are able to use their contacts and lobbyists to push their own agenda and influence the market in an unnatural manner, and it just fucks everything up. Why can't you see that?
@peerpressure1999 I am not arguing it wasn't corrupt, couldn't have been better, or was a good situation to be in. I never said corporations don't abuse their power and I just ASKED YOU what corporation is a fucking perfect angel that you think you wouldn't be running over potholes, stop making strawman arguments you fucking idiot.
@Shyhalu Probably the stupidest thing you said was companies won't magically appear. How dumb are you? That's how shit works. There is a demand in the market, some bright fellow sees this, gets some capital together and starts a business to supply it. That's fucking econ 101 dude. And I'm not saying that ALL regulation is a bad thing. I think corporations need to be accountable for people's safety, but I also think that the gov is too big and does way more than people need or want it to.
@peerpressure1999 You either have corporations abusing their power through government or abusing their power outright by doing sleezy shit. The best we can do is a hybrid system that tries to minimize both. Now, before your dumbass opens your hole again, show me a country that perfectly implements a free market.
@peerpressure1999 and when you are done trying to find the nonexistent, go ahead and tell me why, when the market HALVES IN VALUE, letting giant businesses fall en masse wouldn't lead to a depression. OH by all means, I can't wait to hear your bullshit rationalization of how companies will magically pop out of thin air when investors are pulling out of the market and we have millions unemployed.
@Shyhalu The market fluctuates. If a big company goes down, a new one will step up and fill the void, and as that business begins to make more and more money, new investors will come and put their money there. If someone lost his money by investing in a big bank, someone else will end up making millions by investing in the bank that rises to fill the old one's shoes. The economy is always evolving and it is a gamble to invest your money, everyone knows that, so sorry if you lose. Not our fault.
@hippydog123 Lets say you are a congressman, a small start up has a great new product, but it will hurt GE who just pumped 1 million into your campaign, who do you give the grant to? Government groups like the FDA have wreaked havoc on medical research, requiring companies to spend billions and go through years of testing a new product. Often, this testing is pointless because the real effects of medicine can take decades to become apparent; and in the meantime, potentially great meds go unused
@peerpressure1999 I'm saying this doesn't happen. In free market fantasies this happens. In the actual world, labs payed for with Gov't subisidies exist with researchers taught in schools payed by gov't dollars come up with breakthroughs. Ok does that make sense. You might be starting your cost analysis without accountng for these externalities.
WALKER: This is what happens when Democrats and Independents stay home on Election Day. A doltish 2.59 GPA college drop out and corporately bought lackey governor gets elected!
barbtube01 1 month ago
@barbtube01 Let's hope that it doesn't happen again this November.
chadem311 4 days ago
hey Wisconsin!
remember when he says "Thanks a million" at the end of this phone call?!
oh the irony..
ohmygodgangsta 1 month ago 2
he must be kicking himself
dozer992 4 months ago 2
I do hope every American remembers this on election day, we don't need more of November 2010!
the1tigglet 5 months ago
I wonder when a group of patriots will make a name for themselves,and rid humanity of the KOCH TERRORISTS...
HUMANSAREBENEATHME 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL 2012 our only hope!
5000Semmy 6 months ago
Love the picture of Walker. There should be a ballon caption over it reading:
“Doi di doi di doooh"
vdarte 6 months ago
Walker and the rest of the tea party have been exposed............the proof will come election time.
MrMoterhed 7 months ago
scott walker is a tool and a douche.
iamjsmith83 8 months ago
BLAGO SELLS SENATE SEAT ? GOP GOVERNORS SELL STATES TO KOCH BROTHERS !!!
kn9ioutom 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice videos this you tube world just gets bigger every day! When you have time come visit my channel!
chocolatediet11 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice videos this you tube world just gets bigger every day! When you have time come visit my channel!
FatReleaseSystem 10 months ago
Kloppenburg?
rw5791 10 months ago
More favors from Walker
jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/119159584.html
asf7sg89 11 months ago
Thom Hartmann -True story of the Tea Party.
watch?v=9UiLZk2TE8k
asf7sg89 11 months ago
I really hate when a millionaire tells me I make too much.
joethetrucker1 11 months ago
I wonder when a patriot will make a name for himself and rid humanity of the Koch bros...I bet he would get a movie/book deal.
HUMANSAREBENEATHME 11 months ago
@HUMANSAREBENEATHME The field is certainly open for patriots to act. The Wisconsin 14 took a heroic and legal step to protect the state from disastrous harm by the Koch cat's-paw in the governor's chair. None of the world's great wrongs has been righted without heroes stepping out of the crowd and leading the way.
ethangirlsmom 8 months ago
Comment removed
ethangirlsmom 8 months ago
Bush let the floodgate open of too much immigration just like the white man did to the American Indians, build churches on Indian holy land but then complain about a mosque! ok that make sense? The Indians did not have a voice just like they want to do to the Unions.
seventhdayfreedom13 11 months ago
@seventhdayfreedom13 The indians lost, get over it. Hey, at least they have casinos.
jamo387 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEWSFLASH!!!! American Germans are know to be very conservative. Catholics, even hispanic votes are known to be extremely conservative to the point of bordline extremism. So now, which political party really is likely to hide socialist, Hitler types of motives on state and local levels in government???????????????NEWSFLASH!
seventhdayfreedom13 11 months ago
Yeah, I am starting to think that GOP scum should appreciate Liberals. Liberals are the buffer between the GOP and the millions of less-friendly Americans who would like to put all Republicans in a pit.
You should appreciate those 60s Liberals. (By the way I wasn't even born then so you don't have to be a boomer to be a hippie, motherfucking piece of shit republican rats. )
DOWN WITH EVERYTHING KOCH.
DOWN WITH THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
RECALL WALKER
ARREST WALKER
RECALL SNYDER
beesleeper 11 months ago 2
Murphy's a libtard kook. Why doesn't he call Nazi Pelosi, and pretend to be George Soros?
LibtardsSuck 11 months ago
I support Gov. Walker's position to "correct" the "collective bargaining" for public employees & their wages & their contributions the law requires they increase to their health care & pension plans..
I now have a question for Mr. Koch..My mother's mother's maiden name was Elizabeth Koch who married Henry Litzenberger.. of the "VOLGA DEUTSCH" who immigrated from Russia to America around 1914-15 & finally settled in Colfax, WA. Curious if there's possibiltiy of a family linkage here!!
TheAbleAmerican 11 months ago
@TheAbleAmerican David Koch here. Yes! You are my brother! Hahaha. ooooboy.
plynth2 10 months ago
@TheAbleAmerican Kochs hail from Germany. Their father, Fred, was a founder of the John Birch Society. Fred's assets were seized by the U.S. because he was using his wealth to support the Third Reich while the U.S., including him, was at war with it.. (Sadly, we gave back his assets after the war, and ever since, he and his sons have been building up a fortune greater than the assets of many countries. for the purpose--it now appears--of transforming the U.S. into a corporatist state.
ethangirlsmom 8 months ago
He calls WI protesters "60's liberals", and then pulls out a picture of Reagan & says "30 years ago..." What an out-of-touch fucking hypocrite
poodlesusan 11 months ago 10
Comment removed
poodlesusan 11 months ago
@letom82 U liberal/democrats are the real problem here in America but your too brain dead to figure it out so you'll push and push until we''ll have to take all u asses out. It's that simple. Can your simple mind understand that bro?. 1 less liberal parasite=several freed tax payers!
ISUCN 11 months ago
@letom82 Your limited brain is showing moron. Seriously, you're brain dead bro. You must take it up the ass. That's been proven hundreds of yrs' ago too cause brain damage.
ISUCN 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Politifact confirmed it.
Just 400 Americans have more wealth combined than the total wealth of half of America.
400 > 153,503,275 Americans.
asf7sg89 11 months ago 3
The new kind of terrorism--not. Wielders of weapons of mass extortion, pure-evil economic terrorism.
xhanathos 11 months ago
The answer would have been to fire all public employee's & bus in several thousand Black & Muslin families & give them the union jobs with all the benefits. That would solve the fact that many of these minorities are out of work without retirements.That would get them off public assistance and the union employees would be helping their fellow comrades. That's what the liberal union progressive are always saying they want is to help the minorities. Well now is their chance to do the right thing.
ISUCN 11 months ago
macho men like koch whores!
padude64 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCOTT "KOCH SUCKER" WALKER...
HUMANSAREBENEATHME 11 months ago
I want to see these people as poor as the rest of us! The French wouldn't put up with this. Vive le resistance! Vive le revolution!
Claycat4 11 months ago
Comment removed
ISUCN 11 months ago
@ISUCN And, you show the brain of a mean-spirited neo-con who listens to Fox news too much!
Claycat4 11 months ago
@Claycat4 You have no idea what these anti American communist unions have been up to for decades.
ISUCN 11 months ago
@Claycat4 I used to listen to all the other news and realized that they are bias liberals and none of it is accurate information. So when Fox news came around due to a vacuum in the news media i started viewing while traveling on the road. They are fair and balanced and report dozens of stories never in the other news media so continue being indoctrinated by the liberal bias (socialist/communist) media that's your right but don't tell what's actually happen in this country because i see clearly.
ISUCN 11 months ago
@ISUCN Are you for real? You make me think of a characateur of a person! I had hope for the human race, but when I read comments like yours, I begin to think we are devolving instead of evolving!
By the way, you might want to review the actual meaning of communism. If you studied political science, you would know that the societies that were considered communist were actually totalitarian. Communism in its pure form is an ideal state, but cannot be attained, because humans are too greedy.
Claycat4 11 months ago
@Claycat4 Right about communism, it can't work. So who are these people that drive us closer to it? They know it will never work. So capitalism has been the best system to date. Why is it being destroyed by these same people that want to spend other people's money when it's never work? Where do u they plan on taking us? It isn't going to be pleasant for anyone. I think they consider having to thin out the population big time. Consider me crazy from here on out.
ISUCN 11 months ago
@ISUCN This is not true capitalism! It is fascism! Our government is being run by huge corporations. They are intent on destroying the middle class. We are becoming a slave planet. We are going to owe our souls to the company store.
True capitalism would be evident by the survival of small businesses and family farms. They are not surviving!
If people would pay attention, they would realize this is not a lib/con problem but one of class warfare. The globalists against the rest of us!
Claycat4 11 months ago 11
@Claycat4 I don't disagree. Many on wall st are leftist who control 65%/ intent on total control and rape of this country. Government regulations the past several decades. Back in the 1950's 60's things work far better before these leftist got involved. Things all changed after the leftist assassinated JFK and then his brother Bobby. Who took over after JFK was shot. That's right, a leftist, Look at what Johnson did. Socialist started US take down. I'm an independent constitutionalists.
ISUCN 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Claycat4 I don't disagree. Many on wall st are leftist who control 65%/ intent on total control and rape of this country. Government regulations the past several decades. Back in the 1950's 60's things work far better before these leftist got involved. Things all changed after the leftist assassinated JFK and then his brother Bobby. Who took over after JFK was shot. That's right, a leftist, Look at what Johnson did. Socialist started US take down. I'm an independent constitutionalists.
ISUCN 11 months ago
@Claycat4 The Right wing fake Tea Party won't realize the error of their ways till it just like the 1800s and start seeing people in rags everywhere
It's simple it's the rich vs the poor/middleclass and always has been
Koch brothers are like modern day robber barrons - they should be jailed!
scottsway 2 weeks ago
@ISUCN "none of it is accurate information" is a thoroughly non-objective statement. You lose all credibility on whatever else you have to say when you make statements like that. If you think that "none of it is accurate information" on legitimate news organization channels, you obviously are seeing very little clearly.
plynth2 10 months ago
These neo-cons will reap the whirlwind!
Claycat4 11 months ago
gov walker is a kochsucker and half-gov palin wants some too.
RECALL WALKER!
noflizone 11 months ago 2
Comment removed
ISUCN 11 months ago
I hate when a millionaire tells me I make too much!
joethetrucker1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I hate when millionaires tell me I make too much
joethetrucker1 1 year ago
I hate when millionaires tell me I make too much
joethetrucker1 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
ISUCN 11 months ago
GOP WELFARE WHORES - At least three of the Wisconsin state Senate Republicans currently demanding that public workers sacrifice benefits, wages and even collective bargaining rights for the sake of the budget have applied for and received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal farm subsidies, a review of state and federal records shows.
justonefirefly1 1 year ago
Republican politicians corrupt? Yes. Democratic politicians corrupt? Yes.
The progressive movement has stalled. The problem is this.
Oil and Banking interests bought and trained historians and scholars, and got them positions of prestige. They literally rewrote history... and they bought the media. The media market is dwarfed by the banking and energy markets... so... they just bought it.
Central banks are unethical and disastrous to a nation. Aim your venom at THEM.
ParrhesiaJoe 1 year ago
@bsharker No, look man your not accounting for a lot of data. They are bracketed to pay 50% before tax cuts, they own property and assets that are subisidized by us (tax payer). You have to look where the tax dollars go. We pay for advancements in tech through funding universities, grants and other subisidizations. They pay 50%minus breaks but capital gains aren't assessed the same way as income. Plus, the money they pay is used by them for them. However, this doesn't mean the rich are evil.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 It is just a structural flaw. i.e Check out 1031 free tax exchanges.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Gov interference leads to corruption. Companies use gov connections to create monopolies and eliminate competition. I'm not entirely sure how gov funded research works, but I think you are vastly overestimating how good it is. By picking and choosing which companies and ideas we flood our tax dollars into, again, the gov chooses its favorites, not necessarily the BEST ideas. Thus, yet again, gov interference eliminates competition in the market place.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 No one is saying it is good. One of us, me, is talking about how things actually occur. One of us you is pretending like private companies subsidize their own tech advancements. and that the free market will lower prices when they can't afford the R & D. I'm saying it's corrupt. You're saying we need the gov't to stop intervening. That means no driving on the gov't funded roads to the gov't tech funded computer you are typing on, into the gov't funded internet you are using.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Fine, gov funded roads are shit anyways. If they were privatized they would be better cared for and I wouldn't hit potholes on the way to work. Also, with out gov funding dumb ass bio fuel research, I would probably be driving in an electric car. And anyways, you clearly don't understand how companies are started and do research. Quickly, someone has an idea, they gather investors, start business, sell product. All research and money doesn't go through the gov like you think.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 "If they were privatized they would be better cared for and I wouldn't hit potholes "? You got proof of this? When did private corporations become perfect bastions of morality?
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 as opposed to what roads? Private ones that don't exists. Why don't research the history of U.S infrastructure. There are reasons why private companies didn't make roads. Basically, roads are too expensive to make. Why would they be better? Because now somebody can profit off them by charging you to use them? Or what you will use a competitor's road that doesn't exist. Are we going to pave the entire country with non-existent roads? BTW-I own a company and a non-profit.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Its called a toll way buddy, I don't know where you're from but your frame of reference is tiny. Please expand your horizons before you try to lecture me on US infrastructure. There are several advantages to these private roads. The gov monopoly is taken away, so people that own the roads have incentive to keep their road nice, because otherwise people won't drive on it. ALSO, they do not have eminent domain and can't force people to move.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999's Arguments consist of ambiguity. Please specify them. Which "tollway"? The ones that used gravel before we built the high-service highway system of today? If that is to specific for you, then which state? pick one. Instead of Government monopoly you now have a private one. One that is protected by the gov't you hate. Is the road kept nice, or is it nice because of less service=less traffic? Explain how the effects of privatization during cali's energy crisis was good. Wiki it
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippy I have several tollways where I live and they are always in very good condition. And no, they do not create a monopoly because there are many ways to get where you are going. If the owner of a road tries to charge too much for use, you can just take a different route. Where as if the gov owns all the roads, they can simply tax you whatever they want for use/upkeep and you have no say in the matter. Likewise they have little incentive to upkeep roads because you have no choice but theirs
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 This is not evidence. Just because they exist doesn't mean anything. What is the rate of use as compared to a public road or major street? That is why I asked you to pick state. Look their. Then find a way to quantify road conditions. Potholes or something. Then get some numbers.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 That means your precious gov can't come boot you out of your family home because some corporation just paid them off to vote a free-way to be constructed going through your back yard. You see the corruption that comes about when there is gov interference.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 hey, Why is there gov't corruption? What is that a byproduct of? I got to see your rational here. Maybe you would enjoy wilhelm von humbolt's "limit of state action". I think this will aid in clearing some of your intellectual confinment. He was libertarian, from there, you can assess the most dominant institution of our time, the U.S corporation and understand power dynamics.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 I think you are intellectually confined is because of your method, namely, leaping to conclusions about my position on the role of gov't in the economy. Disparaging another argument doesn't mean yours is true. This is a poor approach. Again because you haven't proven anything. I have facts, and you have up to this point, poor rhetoric. You might have data, but you haven't displayed any. Except for like"there is thing that might of happened, and so that means in all instances X"
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 I think you would find that the corporation has FAR less power when they don't have gov protection and laws defending their interests. If corporations are so powerful, don't you think they could easily change the current system if they wanted to? The reason they don't is because they LIKE how our system is. The gov interference only makes them stronger and serves THEIR interests, not the ours. You're very confused about how the world really works.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 There is no such thing as a corporation that doesn't have goverment protection. That is why it was invented. Investors didn't want to take a risk of building a bridge or roads because they are to expensive. Look at how many supreme court case regarding protecting the rights of a corp where brought after the 14th amendment was passed. (15 african americans 135 corps) When we didn't have the wagner act employess who went on strike where slaughtered. A biz owner would go to a
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 court get an injunction and just wipe out the work force. This is the actual world. The U.S has an extremely violent labor history. I asked you to unpack free market. You aren't using that term how Adam Smith would or a free market economist would. Please let me know what you mean by "free market economy".
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Are you telling me that the Wagner Act made it illegal for business owners to kill their workers? Even if that were true, Do you really think that is a necessary law in today's world? Do you think the public would stand by a company that slaughtered its workers? Do you think anyone would even work for them? Come on, tell me you're smarter than that. Even if it were necessary 100 years ago, it is irrelevant to today's world or this discussion.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Are people fundamentally different since 1935. Would the public standby? They didn't stand by, that is why you have/had the act. Or are some people like you and no idea what happened in the past or what is happening today.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 The WORLD is fundamentally different. In 1935, a company in the middle of nowhere Wyoming could kill its entire workforce and no one would know about it. If that happened today there would be live streaming video of the massacre going out to millions on the internet and the 24 hour news cycle would be all over it. Anyways, it still has zero relevance to what we are talking about
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Media mergers occurred during Theodore Roosevelt (and the rest of progressive presidents, in case you don't know before 1935). Nice anachronism. Do we live stream having 20% of our children growing up in poverty? Do we live live stream having the worst health care outcomes of any industrialized nation? Do we live stream that U.S citizens work more hours than all other industrialized nations but have since real wages decline since Regan? Do we live stream massive foreclosures?
hippydog123 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Please read carefully. I didn't say, " All research and money goes through the gov". I said all major tech advancements are funded by the gov't. I made this clear with examples, about computers, roads and stuff. Understand the argument before you respond. If you don't understand, ask for clarity. I will gladly oblige.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 also, man you premise here is not good. I want some dichotomies to emerge for you. ok so, Just because gov, connection are used to create monopolies doesn't mean that has to be used only for monopoly creation. Furthermore, Why did we have anti-trust/trust law? If you a governemtnal system that is upholding monopolies, should dissolve the government or should dissolve the monopolies. Should you use the gov't to do so? Can you dissolve monopolies w/out the government? how?
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 With unions, both the unions and walker is wrong. Unions should certainly have the option to organize for collective bargaining, but that doesn't mean it is a RIGHT that should be given by the gov. Likewise, under a free-market system, there shouldn't be a law against them bargaining. If they freely decide on it, then alright, if they don't, then that is their choice. We don't need a gov law forcing them to do either, they are grown ups.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@hippydog123 A free-market system is the ONLY way to prevent monopolies. Every monopoly that has ever existed has come about through gov intervention, by legislative laws preventing people from entering the market. Monopolies are IMPOSSIBLE in a free-market because if a company tries charging too much for their product or their innovation stagnates, then competitors will emerge who will provide said service at a lower price or improve it some how.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
walker is just showing off, bragging about how awesome he is. Listen to him! I wonder who he's trying to impress...he sounds like such a self-righteous tool.
SeeMoreGlass89 1 year ago
Last words on the recording from Walker: "Thanks a million"!
AnonOrange 1 year ago
~*~For 30 years REPUBLICANS have waged war on American working families.Our economy has been incrementally destroyed& nothing of any significance has been done to improve our infrastucture.SHAME ON REAGAN. More Americans are now destitute while corporations& billionaires enjoy RECORD profits. 1/3 of all corporations pay NO TAX while enjoying corporate welfare in the form of TAX PAYER BASED SUBSIDIES.ENOUGH! REPEAL THE REAGAN & BUSH TAX CUTS! DEMAND THAT CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OFTAXES!
poindexterwitkowsky 1 year ago 19
@poindexterwitkowsky For even longer, democRATS have been waging war on business. This whole mess is the fault of Jim Doyle, and the former liberal WI senate & legislative majority spending like idiots, taxing business so much than many have fled the state or just outright liquidated. These businesses are no longer in the state nor are the jobs. This is the liberals fault- they are the ones waging war on workers (now unemployeed). Unemployement = liberal empowerment.
TAXtheAtheist 1 year ago
He keeps a picture of ronald reagan in his house? What a fucking dork! Does he pray to it too? Keep his On his nightstand? Masturbate to it? What an asshat!
MCK3274 1 year ago
Scott Walker is doing exactly what is needed with this bill, and saying exactly what needs to be said! He is truly representing the real WORKERS of Wisconsin. Unions and public workers are the ONLY people that oppose this bill, and everyone else in WI feels helpless as those idiotic protesters in Madison drown out the rest of us. It's just plain selfish what the unions are doing, making up the lies like they are and spreading them in classrooms amongst us very gullible and fragile children.
20012607 1 year ago
@20012607 [...us very gullible and fragile children]
It is disheartening to see kids used as pawns. Most young children have a fondness for their teachers. I'm sure they have no idea what public unions are.
[Unions and public workers are the ONLY people that oppose this bill]
If this is true, then clearly the Senators who fled do not represent the people but merely the public unions that got them elected with taxpayer money.
danL1011 1 year ago
@danL1011
exactly right you are...
20012607 1 year ago
The point? There has never been, nor will there ever be a need for public unions. There was a good reason they were Illegal until recently.
Dethblo 1 year ago
Comment removed
Dethblo 1 year ago
A CEO, a Teapartier and a Teamster sit with 12 cookies at a table. The CEO grabs 11, then tells the Teapartier, " That teamster wants part of your cookie."
jazznfusion68 1 year ago
It would be a real shame if walker had an accident.
sutircomed 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A CEO, Tpartier and a teamster sit with 12 cookies at a table. The CEO grabs 11, then tells the Tpartier, " That Teamster wants part of your cookie. "
jazznfusion68 1 year ago
Now they're trying to outlaw prank calling in Wisconsin. Lol, fucking called it.
AltairEgo1 1 year ago 7
I wonder when a Loughner type will make a name for himself and rid humanity of the Koch family.
HUMANSAREBENEATHME 1 year ago
(part 2)
I am glad this got out. Scott Walker is a flat out crook. I can't believe this!
DingozUndead18 1 year ago
@DingozUndead18 [Scott Walker is a flat out crook.] How so?
Everything questionable suggested by the impostor was shot down by Walker. This phone conversation suggests to me that Walker has more integrity than the 14 Democrats who skipped town.
Notice how ALL the badmouthing and derogatory language is by the impostor trying to bait Walker?
danL1011 1 year ago
If this doesnt get passed by the time of his speech tomorrow 4pm, it doesnt go thru.
jazznfusion68 1 year ago
the republicans have really pissed on their shoes this time. After all the graft on Wall Street with the help of the banking industry...........causing world wide recession and huge shortfalls of income for most states, then........................NOW to lay the blame at the feet of teachers and civil servents................who did nothing wrong, just as a bait and switch...........in order to destroy collective bargaining........state by state.....It is just evil and will not stand.
douglasokc 1 year ago
out of staters were not the ones walking around the capitol this past saturday. it was 16 degrees outside, breezy, and snowing steadily. the only people that were equipped for these conditions were the cheeseheads from all over the state. i was there. walker is out of touch with these folks in the street. i saw ONE teabagger the whole afternoon. 100,000 were there, but only over the course of the entire day. many people could only stay for a couple of hours--they had kids with them.
flyingfishsurf 1 year ago
a governor that thinks andrew black bart does good journalism. 'good stuff' he says. so he condones outright lying & smear tactics? no wonder walker got tossed out of a restaurant with his buddies last friday. didn't hear much about that, did you? the guy can't even go out to eat in madison. maybe he should've grabbed one of those delicious slices of pizza i saw getting passed around the capital. black bart's getting sued by shirley sherrod for destroying her career with blatant lies. ha!
flyingfishsurf 1 year ago
god walker is an idiot to not realize this was a prank
zepps88 1 year ago
Riddle - what difference does it make if the greedy billionaire businessman or the powerful unions who just look out for themselves bleed the rest of us taxpayers dry?
Answer- none the rest of us poor non-union people and small business owners are screwed either way.
1overthehillsfaraway 1 year ago
@1overthehillsfaraway
This is pretty true. Although the unions are getting weaker and weaker the greedy billionaires are getting stronger. Unions have a democratizing effect on society, billionaries do not. Let me know if you are interested in sources.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@1overthehillsfaraway Actually if unions go down, labor becomes cheaper, your wages go down and small buisinesses are screwed.
island4diver 1 year ago
@danielranschaert You just called me a moron for asking a question, and then called me lazy and uninformed. Der dee Derp, you become informed from asking questions, and I took the time to ask it in the first place. You sir, must be trollin.
JackAcidSociety 1 year ago
@howitzer24 backfire on Walker
island4diver 1 year ago
@island4diver I don't think so. If Walker had talked to this guy before he wouldn't have fell for it which shows he isn't very close with Koch. Almost the whole conversation was Walker talking about his job. He comes off as dedicated and sincere.
howitzer24 1 year ago
@tryingoutmusic he turned them down only because he and his chief of staff decided that it was a bad idea, after thinking of it earlier.
island4diver 1 year ago
@bsharker They benefit more. No they do not pay their fair share. Kochs and Paris Hilton pays at most 15 percent because trust funds are capital gains, not earned income. Earned income from working is taxed higher. Plus when Reagan lowered taxes on the rich the first year, he raised taxes for the rest of us seven times.
island4diver 1 year ago
@bsharker they pay 50 but have 95 percent. The founders had near confiscatory inheritance taxes (until the civil war) to prevent people like the Kochs.
island4diver 1 year ago
@bsharker had the money before he lowered the taxes and handed out all of that corporate welfare to his cronies and benefactors.
island4diver 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 name one place where this libertarian paradise worked? Then the companies that have a monopoly become the de facto government, which is a dictatorship You are talking about feudalism, or Mexico or the Philippines. Which is great unless you are one of the serfs, which is about 95 percent.
island4diver 1 year ago
@island4diver I can't name a place its worked because its never been allowed to come even close to realization. I CAN tell you, however, that when free market and libertarian principles are implemented, society benefits. I can also tell you that these public unions are a cancer, and towns that have privatized things like transit and city maintenance have seen huge benefits, like better quality of work, work done faster, cheaper cost to citizens, etc.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 better qualit of work is ensured by Unions
jopaddy81 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 No you can't name an instance of privatizing city maintenance or public works improving anything, because it has never happened. I would speculate this is why you DIDN'T name an instance of it occuring. Research this, the facts are just the opposite of your conclusion.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 YOU do YOUR research. Look up Sandy Springs, Georgia. They are the first US city to do so and have had OUTSTANDING results (I tried putting a link to an article about it for you, but apparently youtube doesn't allow that.) The fact is that public jobs don't create wealth, they stagnate it by killing competition and entrepreneurs. Also, any jobs that the public sector "creates" are simply stolen from the private sector.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Look up what privatization in Sandy Springs, Georgia? They are not the 1st US city to do this. The entire state of California tried to privatize it's energy and it the result was raised prices and lower service quality. This isn't anything new. I would be interested to read if this was successful Sandy Springs. Please give me more details as to what to look for.
hippydog123 1 year ago
Respond to this video... Public Transit, utilities and such are called "natural monopolies", they don't "inspire entrepreneurship". or competition. quite the opposite. They are natural monopolies because investor's don't want to take the risk of investing enough capital to build a rail system or lay a bunch of copper for telephone wire, you get the picture. It's called "barriers to entry" in the market.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 You should just look up an article about it, but basically, by privatizing city maintenance they were able to cut the amount of workers in half and public satisfaction with the work was increased. There are private bus companies. However, it is difficult for them to keep drivers because, SURPRISE, it is impossible for them to compete with the wages and benefits that public drivers make. This should prove to you that these drivers are making WAY too much money.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Which article should i look up about it ? I want to see which data you looked at. If you did.
hippydog123 1 year ago
and finally how does,"any jobs the public sector "creates" are simply stolen from the private sector." happen? This is not clear to me because, 1.Property only exists insofar as the laws of the State says it does. 2. Business entities only exist insofar as the State says they do. Therefore, all jobs/businesses require public/state recognition for legitimacy. Does this make sense? You see, you cannot have a business without the state legitimizing, that is why you have to file for charters.
hippydog123 1 year ago
Also if the public sector can't create wealth, why is that the most successful period in U.S history is when we had the most semi-command style economy in U.S history (Post New Deal era, including, 1997 Glass Steagall act, HOLC, Wagner act,? Why is it then that the most successful industries in the U.S are backed by government contracts and subsidization. For example, pharmaceutical companies spending 2x on advertising then on R and D, because the U.S gov. subsidizes R and D costs. (Dean Baker)
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 If they worked for any NORMAL bus company, their demands would be financially IMPOSSIBLE for the business to meet, because they simply aren't making enough money to support that. However, because it is the gov and taxes paying for public driver salaries, money is no object, the sky is the limit, so these people are paid unsustainable wages and the city is forced into debt. This is the same for almost all public employees. They are paid far above market wages, resulting in debt.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@hippydog123 And I'm not sure, but I would be willing to guess that companies receiving gov subsidies are successful BECAUSE they are getting a huge influx of money from the gov. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that a company that is getting millions of free money to improve their services will probably make more money than one that isn't. However, the problem with this is that it opens the door for special interests to interfere and steer a company away from market demands.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@hippydog123 I would assume that companies receiving gov subsidies appear to be more successful BECAUSE they are getting huge amounts of gov capital. If you are getting millions of free money to improve your services, of course you are going to do better than a corporation that must survive purely on their OWN profits. The problem with that is it opens the door to special interests and steers the company away from the market demands.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@hippydog123 For example, G. W. Bush was giving people tax breaks for buying SUVs and he pumped millions of gov aid into hydrogen cell cars. This tech is owned by Big Oil and is a pipe dream that will not be realized for decades. So, when the market was calling for electric cars, the gov found a way to steer the market back towards gas guzzlers to support the oil industry. Also, they give HUGE amounts of money to bio-fuels which is a dead end and only prolongs our dependence on fossil fuels.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 So then, do you agree with me that the government/public sector can create wealth? You just stated that it can, and that it did. Am I misunderstanding you? Again why is that the times with most intervention produce the most wealth and lower the deficit. Look, in competitive markets, the pieces don't increase in value, the pieces exhaust value. ok. If pieces increase in value, then competition propensity is diminished because it is harder to start up a competitive business.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 No, the gov doesn't create wealth by intervening. In my example, by helping out the oil companies, perhaps those SPECIFIC companies made money. However, OVER ALL the economy is hurt. Think of all of the new companies and areas of growth in the alternative fuel arena that are squashed out because of gov backing the oil companies with huge tax breaks and subsidies. And you are misguided. I think you'll find that states with less gov intervention are far better off than ones with more
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 "I think you'll find that states with less gov intervention are far better off than ones with more". The only problem with this argument is that all of history contradicts it. Please tell me of one instance otherwise. Again yes, if pieces increase in value competition is hurt. In a pretend world where fantasy free-markets exist then your argument is conceptually true. In the real world, where gov't is the shadow cast by big business(john dewey) it is actually true.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 sorry it is *not* actually true. I think you are assuming that Gov't intervention through subsidies is a rarity or is somehow a byproduct of businesses with unions. If you think for two seconds that is silly. Private interests are not oreinted around competition. They are oriented around non-competition, because non competition produces profit. You don't have to like it, it is what Adam Smith warned against. But back to the point:Libertarian principles.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 ok so where does the funding for R and D come from for your alternative fuel sources? A private firm. No. Just like with all major technological advancements (internet, rail, battery technology, solar, infrastructure,satelitte,cell tech,computers) there innovation is subisidized by the State. That's us amigo. The profits are privatized. There is no evidence of libertarian principles being implemented and a State and citizens benefitting because of the context I just mentioned.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 And again research the california energy crisis. Research MBTA in Massachusetts. When private companies take over public utilities it has consistently been a scam, raised costs and lowered service quality. Simply because in most instances(that of natural monopolies) there is not competition. Go build a private funded electric company and compete if you can. You won't have enough capital to build anything. I will check sandy springs. My hypothesis remains the same.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Unions are not perfect institutions. They don't suck money from the government either. If the Gov't where paying for them, then the private sector wouldn't care. The private sector doesn't care enough to pay it's taxes. 158 billion dollars in (I think 2001) unpayed revenue according to Dean Baker CEPR. If you don't like unions then go ahead and work 14 hour days with no benefits as was the case before there existence. Or pretend that libertarian principles will somehow sort this
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 out. Secondly. If we are going argue conceptually and academically(though I would rather not) Market demand isn't determined by us. We, according every major public opinion poll, want mass transit not alternative fuel(this is by a vast majority. I didn't see that option in the market. Libertarian market principles are inefficient and conceptually based because they don't tackle corruption or deal with the actual world which has a state that funds innovation and lower's risk.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Libertarian principle do tackle corruption. Look at the most recent market collapse. Because of gov interference, corruption on a massive scale was supported and rewarded. If those unscrupulous banks were allowed to fail, then banks that made smart/honest investments would be the only ones left. They then would be able to move in and replace the dishonest banks. Instead, the bad banks got even bigger by getting bailed out, then buying up other banks that the gov allowed to go down
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 (another conceptual arg) ok so, with libertarian principles you wouldn't have an FDIC(started during the new deal aka gov't reg). Which bails out banks each friday and ensures your deposits. There would be no banks left. You wouldn't have a consistent currency. It was libertarian principles that pushed the repealment of Glass Steagall in 1997 which lead to removing the seperation of financial markets and the collapse you are talking about.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 They don't tackle corruption, they lead to it. You can think whatever you want. but you are still wrong.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 I don't care if repealing that act lead to the financial meltdown, what I care about is what happened next. Businesses that fucked up were allowed to survive and get bigger instead of failing like the market wanted them to. The market can't work if you remove its ability to punish stupidity by bailing out bad companies.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999
You don't care that the legislation that would of prevented the thing you are pissed off about from happening was repealled?
hippydog123 1 year ago
@hippydog123 why aren't you mad about this?
hippydog123 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@peerpressure1999 You don't care that the legislation that would of prevented the thing you are pissed off about from happening was repealled?
hippydog123 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 You would rather see millions of people live in a box on the street suffering for decades to come rather than prop up some businesses that took stupid risks until things can be unwound and somewhat fixed such that we avoid a meltdown? You are a fucking idiot, a disgusting one at that. If thats what your free market demands, that millions suffer due to the hands of the few, then you can take your ideals and shove them up your worthless ass.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@Shyhalu Just so you know, bailing the banks out didn't keep people from losing their homes, there are still thousands of foreclosures going on across the country as we speak. And guess who is getting to keep the houses. THAT'S RIGHT, the banks that caused the problem, then got propped up by our gov. How does that make sense to you? And while all those people are homeless, those CEO's that were saved get 20,000,000 dollar bonuses. Is that fair? The market would have dealt out better justice.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 No shit sherlock. It makes sense to me because the alternative is to let them keep the houses while they fire people left and right and destroy the economy and further cause a domino effect. For fucks sake, the Dow HALVED. The market doesn't deal justice, if it did we would not have corruption in private business. The crash wasn't just about the banks either.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 You think unemployment is high now? Imagine how bad it would be if we didn't catch the falling banks and prop them up until they fixed their trash and continued doing the BILLIONS of dollars worth of business with other companies. When giant companies fall, they take others with them. Its a lose lose situtation. Your dumbass is in lala land, come back to reality - where you can't always win.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@Shyhalu Your ignorance is startling. If you let those big banks fail, their assets don't just disappear. More responsible banks that didn't fuck up buy up their debt and take on their business. All this new business means that they need to grow, so they hire more people, creating new jobs in the wake. Meanwhile, greedy execs that caused the collapse lose their jobs. And again, I think one of the reasons unemployment is too high now is because of too much gov interference.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 "If you let those big banks fail, their assets don't just disappear." Who the hell is going to purchase them when investors are pulling their money out of the market? New businesses don't just pop out of thin air. You think unemployment is the way it is because you are an anti authority idealogue, which makes you no better than a religious zealot flying shit into buildings.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@Shyhalu And who wouldn't buy up those assets? Lets say I owe a bank money on my mortgage, then said bank goes under. You don't think another bank would come in and buy up my loan? And while no country implements a PERFECT libertarian system, several countries use certain aspects, and they usually work well. Portugal legalized all drugs, their rates of abuse dropped. Poland has a very free-market economic system and they are the only country in the EU whose economy was untouched by recession
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Which banks are you referring too? The are all overleveraged its called a fractional reserve system. You only have 3% capital requirements. Dude, seriously, read.
hippydog123 1 year ago
@Shyhalu I also find it interesting that Paulson chose to bail out the bank that he used to run, giving it money and allowing it to buy out its competitors that Paulson decided were alright to let fail. Don't you find that a little shady? This happens ALL the time in business. Because of gov interference, corporations are able to use their contacts and lobbyists to push their own agenda and influence the market in an unnatural manner, and it just fucks everything up. Why can't you see that?
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 I am not arguing it wasn't corrupt, couldn't have been better, or was a good situation to be in. I never said corporations don't abuse their power and I just ASKED YOU what corporation is a fucking perfect angel that you think you wouldn't be running over potholes, stop making strawman arguments you fucking idiot.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@Shyhalu Probably the stupidest thing you said was companies won't magically appear. How dumb are you? That's how shit works. There is a demand in the market, some bright fellow sees this, gets some capital together and starts a business to supply it. That's fucking econ 101 dude. And I'm not saying that ALL regulation is a bad thing. I think corporations need to be accountable for people's safety, but I also think that the gov is too big and does way more than people need or want it to.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 Really? Shit works as companies magically appear? REALLY? Where does this capital come from?
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 You either have corporations abusing their power through government or abusing their power outright by doing sleezy shit. The best we can do is a hybrid system that tries to minimize both. Now, before your dumbass opens your hole again, show me a country that perfectly implements a free market.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 and when you are done trying to find the nonexistent, go ahead and tell me why, when the market HALVES IN VALUE, letting giant businesses fall en masse wouldn't lead to a depression. OH by all means, I can't wait to hear your bullshit rationalization of how companies will magically pop out of thin air when investors are pulling out of the market and we have millions unemployed.
Shyhalu 1 year ago
@Shyhalu The market fluctuates. If a big company goes down, a new one will step up and fill the void, and as that business begins to make more and more money, new investors will come and put their money there. If someone lost his money by investing in a big bank, someone else will end up making millions by investing in the bank that rises to fill the old one's shoes. The economy is always evolving and it is a gamble to invest your money, everyone knows that, so sorry if you lose. Not our fault.
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@hippydog123 Lets say you are a congressman, a small start up has a great new product, but it will hurt GE who just pumped 1 million into your campaign, who do you give the grant to? Government groups like the FDA have wreaked havoc on medical research, requiring companies to spend billions and go through years of testing a new product. Often, this testing is pointless because the real effects of medicine can take decades to become apparent; and in the meantime, potentially great meds go unused
peerpressure1999 1 year ago
@peerpressure1999 I'm saying this doesn't happen. In free market fantasies this happens. In the actual world, labs payed for with Gov't subisidies exist with researchers taught in schools payed by gov't dollars come up with breakthroughs. Ok does that make sense. You might be starting your cost analysis without accountng for these externalities.
hippydog123 1 year ago