Re: Corporate Welfare

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011.

  1. Aardvark

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:39:22 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:

    SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.

    > Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think Wall
    > Street bailout.
    > Here's how corporatist Republicans fight for corporate welfare:
    >
    >
    > General Public: We should find a way to benefit from this special new
    > scientific development.
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: Because of the inherent cost of
    > development/economy of scale/physical constraints/huge upfront cost/
    > etc., the only way to build new infrastructure to support this special
    > new scientific development is with massive tax breaks and a guarantee
    > that the government will give the private developer a defacto monopoly.
    > This development is so critical the government must aid the market.
    >
    > Progressives: We strongly oppose private monopolies and giving
    > corporations the public's money. If you are saying this is something the
    > market is incapable of doing on its own but is critical infrastructure,
    > why not treat it like public roads and make it a publicly-run utility?
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: BIG GOVERNMENT IS BAD!!! We will never allow
    > the enlargement of government. Development and implementation must be
    > done by the ever-superior private sector.
    >
    > Progressives: But you said the private sector was incapable of doing
    > this and that we needed to provide the market with huge subsidies and
    > the promise of a monopoly to support development.
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: Are you communists? Is this some scheme to help
    > your public sector union buddies get jobs? This must be some kind of
    > union corruption otherwise why would you dare question the wisdom of
    > handing a large corporation $10 billions of the government money. The
    > only way we will allow this improvement to be developed is through the
    > private sector.
    >
    > Progressives: We are willing to accept a public-private partnership to
    > get this much needed development but we demand tough regulations on
    > these companies so they don't exploit the effective monopoly the
    > government is giving them.
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: This is an acceptable compromise to stop your
    > creeping socialism.
    >
    > Five years later...
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: We demand deregulation of this industry. It
    > will self-regulate thanks to the invisible hand of the market.
    >
    > Progressives: Wait; this is a monopoly you demanded the government help
    > create and continue to protect. Without regulation this monopoly will
    > rip off the public. There won't even be a market mechanism to inhibit
    > bad behavior. How can you say this tiny number of protected private
    > companies should be able to make endless profit from a massive
    > investment by the government?
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: Free Market is good! Regulation is bad! SMALL
    > GOVERNMENT FOREVER!!!
    >
    > Progressives: What free market? What small government? You demanded we
    > use the government's power and money to create this monopoly. There is
    > no market at work here, because there's no real competition. This isn't
    > the invisible hand of the market; this is your hand giving government
    > money to your friends.
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: Shhhh;if you are mean to the CEO they will
    > leave us without their superior benevolence guidance. They are Galtian
    > heroes; without their leadership our country would become a dystopian
    > hell.
    >
    > Progressives: This is absurd. No one is going to leave their $15 million
    > dollar job because we are mean to them. Even if CEOs leave any of these
    > companies, their vice-presidents would happily step up to take the job.
    > Since you demanded these companies become a unregulated
    > government-protected monopoly even a drunk monkey could make them turn a
    > profit.
    >
    > Corporatist Republicans: You hate the job creators. You must hate these
    > rugged individuals who build these companies with their own hands. You
    > want to take way their freedom. This means you hate America.
    >
    > <http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/01/01/how-to-rip-off-the-public-a
    > s-a-corporatist-republican-play-one/>






    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Aardvark

    G. Morgan Guest

    Aardvark <> wrote:

    >
    >SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >
    >> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think Wall
    >> Street bailout.


    I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    material re-posted like that.
     
    G. Morgan, Jan 2, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Aardvark

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 18:13:01 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:

    > Aardvark <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >>cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>
    >>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>> Wall Street bailout.

    >
    > I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted material
    > re-posted like that.


    Didn't appreciate the humour in the article, eh?



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011
    #3
  4. G. Morgan wrote:
    > Aardvark<> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >> cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>
    >>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think Wall
    >>> Street bailout.

    >
    > I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    > material re-posted like that.
    >

    Yeah Aardvark, the proper way is to ask first, then do it anyway.
     
    FromTheRafters, Jan 2, 2011
    #4
  5. Aardvark

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:47:00 -0500, FromTheRafters wrote:

    > G. Morgan wrote:
    >> Aardvark<> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >>> cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>
    >>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>> Wall Street bailout.

    >>
    >> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    >> material re-posted like that.
    >>

    > Yeah Aardvark, the proper way is to ask first, then do it anyway.


    I only replied to the OP and cross-posted.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011
    #5
  6. Aardvark

    G. Morgan Guest

    Aardvark <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 18:13:01 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:
    >
    >> Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >>>cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>
    >>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>> Wall Street bailout.

    >>
    >> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted material
    >> re-posted like that.

    >
    >Didn't appreciate the humour in the article, eh?


    Not nearly as much as him apparently.
     
    G. Morgan, Jan 2, 2011
    #6
  7. Aardvark

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:29:51 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:

    > Aardvark <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 18:13:01 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:
    >>
    >>> Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >>>>cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>>
    >>>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>>> Wall Street bailout.
    >>>
    >>> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    >>> material re-posted like that.

    >>
    >>Didn't appreciate the humour in the article, eh?

    >
    > Not nearly as much as him apparently.


    Him? Who him?



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011
    #7
  8. Aardvark wrote:
    > On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:47:00 -0500, FromTheRafters wrote:
    >
    >> G. Morgan wrote:
    >>> Aardvark<> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >>>> cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>>
    >>>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>>> Wall Street bailout.
    >>>
    >>> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    >>> material re-posted like that.
    >>>

    >> Yeah Aardvark, the proper way is to ask first, then do it anyway.

    >
    > I only replied to the OP and cross-posted.
    >

    Yeah, it's not as if it was taken from a private server or anything like
    that.
     
    FromTheRafters, Jan 2, 2011
    #8
  9. Aardvark

    G. Morgan Guest

    Aardvark <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:29:51 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:
    >
    >> Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 18:13:01 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to be
    >>>>>cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>>>> Wall Street bailout.
    >>>>
    >>>> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    >>>> material re-posted like that.
    >>>
    >>>Didn't appreciate the humour in the article, eh?

    >>
    >> Not nearly as much as him apparently.

    >
    >Him? Who him?


    Slow-wolf
     
    G. Morgan, Jan 2, 2011
    #9
  10. Aardvark

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 21:41:13 -0500, FromTheRafters wrote:

    > Aardvark wrote:
    >> On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:47:00 -0500, FromTheRafters wrote:
    >>
    >>> G. Morgan wrote:
    >>>> Aardvark<> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to
    >>>>> be cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>>>> Wall Street bailout.
    >>>>
    >>>> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    >>>> material re-posted like that.
    >>>>
    >>> Yeah Aardvark, the proper way is to ask first, then do it anyway.

    >>
    >> I only replied to the OP and cross-posted.
    >>

    > Yeah, it's not as if it was taken from a private server or anything like
    > that.


    LOL. Wolfus explained that he's in email contact with contributors to the
    site in question. I know him well enough to know he wouldn't want to piss
    them off- I would expect that they might even encourage him to spread
    their word.

    I dare say he'll comment on this, if he thinks it'sworth it.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011
    #10
  11. Aardvark

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 21:01:20 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:

    > Aardvark <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:29:51 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:
    >>
    >>> Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 18:13:01 -0600, G. Morgan wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Aardvark <> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING. If ever there was a post that deserved to
    >>>>>>be cross-posted to apse, this is it. Enjoy.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Nice explanation of the wingnuttian "thought" process. Hint: think
    >>>>>>> Wall Street bailout.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I already emailed the editor to see if he wants his copyrighted
    >>>>> material re-posted like that.
    >>>>
    >>>>Didn't appreciate the humour in the article, eh?
    >>>
    >>> Not nearly as much as him apparently.

    >>
    >>Him? Who him?

    >
    > Slow-wolf


    Wolfus always appreciates good humour, especially if its intended to
    educate the masses.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Jan 2, 2011
    #11
  12. Aardvark

    Eagle Guest

    Aardvark pretended :
    > On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:39:22 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >
    > SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING.
    >
    >> Nice explanation

    <snip boring dialogue>



    Top posting fuckwit.

    --
    Eagle
    "Be who you are and say what you feel...
    Because those that matter... don't mind...
    And those that mind... don't matter..
    In God We Trust
     
    Eagle, Jan 2, 2011
    #12
  13. Aardvark

    Eagle Guest

    ~BD~ was thinking very hard :
    > Eagle wrote:
    >> Aardvark pretended :
    >>> On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:39:22 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>
    >>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING.
    >>>> Nice explanation

    >> <snip boring dialogue>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Top posting fuckwit. :)
    >>

    >
    > Here Dave - you dropped the smiley you meant to add at the end! :)


    Aardvark knows I often forget to add imodicons, Dave. He should know
    that was said tongue in cheek since He started the phrase. ;-)

    --
    Eagle
    "Be who you are and say what you feel...
    Because those that matter... don't mind...
    And those that mind... don't matter..
    In God We Trust
     
    Eagle, Jan 2, 2011
    #13
  14. Aardvark

    Eagle Guest

    ~BD~ brought next idea :
    > Eagle wrote:
    >> Aardvark pretended :
    >>> On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:39:22 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>
    >>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING.
    >>>> Nice explanation

    >> <snip boring dialogue>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Top posting fuckwit. :)
    >>

    >
    > Here Dave - you dropped the smiley you meant to add at the end! :)


    Maybe one of these days Aardvark will stop being snooty with me and
    give me a great big hug! lol

    --
    Eagle
    "Be who you are and say what you feel...
    Because those that matter... don't mind...
    And those that mind... don't matter..
    In God We Trust
     
    Eagle, Jan 2, 2011
    #14
  15. Aardvark

    Eagle Guest

    on 1/2/2011, Aardvark supposed :
    > if he thinks it'sworth it.


    ALERT! A New word to add to your personal dictionary!
    "IT'SWORTH" :eek:)

    --
    Eagle
    "Be who you are and say what you feel...
    Because those that matter... don't mind...
    And those that mind... don't matter..
    In God We Trust
     
    Eagle, Jan 2, 2011
    #15
  16. Aardvark

    Jenn Guest

    Eagle wrote:
    > ~BD~ brought next idea :
    >> Eagle wrote:
    >>> Aardvark pretended :
    >>>> On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:39:22 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING.
    >>>>> Nice explanation
    >>> <snip boring dialogue>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Top posting fuckwit. :)
    >>>

    >>
    >> Here Dave - you dropped the smiley you meant to add at the end! :)

    >
    > Maybe one of these days Aardvark will stop being snooty with me and
    > give me a great big hug! lol



    ... and good luck with that! LOL
    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Jan 2, 2011
    #16
  17. Aardvark

    Jenn Guest

    ~BD~ wrote:
    > Jenn wrote:


    >>> Maybe one of these days Aardvark will stop being snooty with me and
    >>> give me a great big hug! lol

    >>
    >>
    >> .. and good luck with that! LOL

    >
    > A new year would be a great time for all to start over. :)



    Of course ..
    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Jan 2, 2011
    #17
  18. Aardvark

    Eagle Guest

    "Jenn" <> wrote in message
    news:ifqnk4$5mq$-september.org...
    > ~BD~ wrote:
    >> Jenn wrote:

    >
    >>>> Maybe one of these days Aardvark will stop being snooty with me and
    >>>> give me a great big hug! lol
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> .. and good luck with that! LOL

    >>
    >> A new year would be a great time for all to start over. :)

    >
    >
    > Of course ..



    No sweat of my tookus, Aardvark is just not that important in my life.
    <shrug>
     
    Eagle, Jan 3, 2011
    #18
  19. ~BD~ wrote:
    > Jenn wrote:
    >> Eagle wrote:
    >>> ~BD~ brought next idea :
    >>>> Eagle wrote:
    >>>>> Aardvark pretended :
    >>>>>> On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:39:22 -0700, §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> SORRY ABOUT TOP-POSTING.
    >>>>>>> Nice explanation
    >>>>> <snip boring dialogue>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Top posting fuckwit. :)
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Here Dave - you dropped the smiley you meant to add at the end! :)
    >>>
    >>> Maybe one of these days Aardvark will stop being snooty with me and
    >>> give me a great big hug! lol

    >>
    >>
    >> .. and good luck with that! LOL

    >
    > A new year would be a great time for all to start over. :)


    So, next year then?
     
    FromTheRafters, Jan 3, 2011
    #19
  20. Aardvark

    Eagle Guest

    FromTheRafters pretended :
    > So, next year then?


    It DOES LOOK like this year is hopeless for the big change here, FTR. I
    had hope thinking that the petty bickering and pointless gossiping over
    the backyard fence, [not to mention the childish threats going back and
    forth about this or that being illegal and grounds for criminal
    prosecution, or libel suits in civil court] was a past memory, but
    alas...this is not to be.
    So what does one do, knowing this NG will continue with the same-ole
    same-ole? I don't know...do you? :-?

    --
    Eagle
    "Be who you are and say what you feel...
    Because those that matter... don't mind...
    And those that mind... don't matter..
    In God We Trust
     
    Eagle, Jan 3, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?bWFza2Fs?=

    wireless lan for three computers within a large corporate network

    =?Utf-8?B?bWFza2Fs?=, Feb 4, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    610
    =?Utf-8?B?bWFza2Fs?=
    Feb 4, 2005
  2. shegeek72
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    483
    shegeek72
    Aug 3, 2005
  3. Dennis Ortsen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    389
    Dennis Ortsen
    Jun 10, 2004
  4. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    651
    Silverstrand
    Feb 9, 2006
  5. Novize
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    421
    Novize
    Oct 4, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page