John Stossel: "I Was Brainwashed"

[PGH]

He never has evidence. His arguments are always "it will work because I say so."

Precisely.


Thanks but we're not looking to throw out the entire history of democracy based on your little plan to not pay taxes. You've stated your case. No one's in. Give it up or go try it somewhere else.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Private companies were able to get a man into space for a micro-fraction of the cost NASA spends.

I wonder who developed the technology used to get into space.

 

[Joey McGee]

Reality states it is immoral to use violence against an innocent person simply because you want something they have.

Fantasy would be believing that destroying property rights through violent expropriation can somehow result in greater prosperity and peace.

Actually, like I stated, I'm provably correct. If we didn't have the right to kick people off their land to build highways this country would be significantly crappier. Your little ideological rebuttal here does nothing to change that.

There are times that the individuals rights should trump the group and vice versa. You're trying to say individual rights trump all, all the time, and you wonder why people think you're a crank?

 

[corbin]

I wonder who developed the technology used to get into space.

Are you seriously arguing that technological innovation is best achieved by a centralized government, rather than the profit motive of the market? Markets force private enterprises to be productively efficient or fail. State-sponsored monopolies, on the other hand, face no efficiency-forcing competition and are often funded in the face of poor performance.

Not surprising though, as I often see the most basic and widely accepted aspects of economics denied on this forum. Quantity theory of money, causes of monopoly, etc.

 

[PGH]

Are you seriously arguing that technological innovation is best achieved by a centralized government, rather than the profit motive of the market? Markets force private enterprises to be productively efficient or fail. State-sponsored monopolies, on the other hand, face no efficiency-forcing competition and are often funded in the face of poor performance.

Not surprising though, as I often see the most basic and widely accepted aspects of economics denied on this forum. Quantity theory of money, causes of monopoly, etc.

So what private company went to the moon?

 

[technoextreme]

So what private company went to the moon?

Actually a better question is how do you differentiate between private enterprises and government ones? My grandpa worked for Grummans. He helped build parts for the Apollo missions.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Are you seriously arguing that technological innovation is best achieved by a centralized government, rather than the profit motive of the market? Markets force private enterprises to be productively efficient or fail. State-sponsored monopolies, on the other hand, face no efficiency-forcing competition and are often funded in the face of poor performance.

Not surprising though, as I often see the most basic and widely accepted aspects of economics denied on this forum. Quantity theory of money, causes of monopoly, etc.

I'm not sure if this will be worth the effort, but... Government-funded research has the advantage of funding without requirement of immediate payoff. The free market, for example, would hardly have been able to develop the special relativity or quantum mechanics required for GPS:es or microprocessors, for instance; at least not for those purposes. The market, on the other hand, has the advantage of a short-term profit motive.

So I would argue that government-funded research may be better at the big, theoretical breakthrough, while the free market can more efficiently effectivize existing technology.

There are of course exceptions.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I really enjoyed this debate because FMOTL theory was pretty new to me.

The discussion here is about an-cap, not FMOTL. FMOTL is demonstrably false crap about how our society and laws actually are; an-cap is political / economic theory about how society and laws should be.

 

[marplots]

Markets force private enterprises to be productively efficient or fail. State-sponsored monopolies, on the other hand, face no efficiency-forcing competition and are often funded in the face of poor performance.

Markets only force what you claim when they are not gamed by the players involved. But there is a hidden market you aren't considering here. A company exists to make profits. If they can operate in a market where these profits are not directly tied to efficiency or innovation, they can succeed with no regard for the public good. For instance, if I can advertise heavily, I can sway purchases not with a better product, but better ads. But there are many other ways to do it. Microsoft is a great example. You might say that the public has voted to make it hugely successful with their dollars, but is it the best offering? I couldn't know unless I became a computer expert myself.

The public cannot be expert purchasers of all products. The market isn't as educated, nor as democratic as you might think. And company goals are sometimes at odds with public goals. There are many more ways to make money than delivering an improved product at a better price. Time scale leveraging is one -- you dip into a market with something shoddy and cheap and then you disappear. Or you default and escape justice, guarantees, and warranties by transferring your obligations to a proxy. Lots of ways to game the system.

 

[michaelsuede]

Are you seriously arguing that technological innovation is best achieved by a centralized government, rather than the profit motive of the market? Markets force private enterprises to be productively efficient or fail. State-sponsored monopolies, on the other hand, face no efficiency-forcing competition and are often funded in the face of poor performance.

Not surprising though, as I often see the most basic and widely accepted aspects of economics denied on this forum. Quantity theory of money, causes of monopoly, etc.

Clearly the US government has provided us tremendous technological benefits that have served to improve the lives of the common man.

Let us list the impressive technological achievements of government.

The US government has spent 20,575.13 billion dollars on military spending according to records dating back to the year 1792. Which basically means we spent enough money to create the entire country of the United States from the ground up. Accordingly, the vast majority of technological achievements have been in the area of killing people.

My top 10 favorite technological government achievements:

1. the hydrogen bomb
2. the neutron bomb
3. the atom bomb
4. super carriers
5. ballistic missile submarines
6. ICBMs
7. stealth bombers
8. nerve gas
9. sonic cannons
10. rail guns

Could you imagine a world without government there to spend our money on creating such wonderful technologies?

Clearly we would still be living in the stone ages shooting each other with repeating rifles. Now we have the ability to wipe out the entire human race! The glories of the State never cease to amaze me.

 

[Joey McGee]

Clearly the US government has provided us tremendous technological benefits that have served to improve the lives of the common man.

Let us list the impressive technological achievements of government.

The US government has spent 20,575.13 billion dollars on military spending according to records dating back to the year 1792. Which basically means we spent enough money to create the entire country of the United States from the ground up. Accordingly, the vast majority of technological achievements have been in the area of killing people.

My top 10 favorite technological government achievements:

1. the hydrogen bomb
2. the neutron bomb
3. the atom bomb
4. super carriers
5. ballistic missile submarines
6. ICBMs
7. stealth bombers
8. nerve gas
9. sonic cannons
10. rail guns

Could you imagine a world without government there to spend our money on creating such wonderful technologies?

Clearly we would still be living in the stone ages shooting each other with repeating rifles. Now we have the ability to wipe out the entire human race! The glories of the State never cease to amaze me.

Me too. I'm so happy that The United States rules the world with all of those weapons! My favorite U.S. government funded creation? The Internet! Not to mention the fortune spent on scientific medical research too! Gawd Bless The US of A

 

[michaelsuede]

Me too. I'm so happy that The United States rules the world with all of those weapons! My favorite U.S. government funded creation? The Internet! Not to mention the fortune spent on scientific medical research too! Gawd Bless The US of A

I have a picture of Al Gore hanging on my wall.

 

[Joey McGee]

I have a picture of Al Gore hanging on my wall.

Poorly played joke.

 

[marplots]

Clearly the US government has provided us tremendous technological benefits that have served to improve the lives of the common man.

Is that what you look for from your government, technological achievements?

I'm pretty satisfied with more than 200 years of governing with one civil war and no revolutions. That's a good government to buy on the free market.

Let's see some of the alternative products we didn't buy:
King
Communism
Theocracy
Libertarian Idealism

You could probably think of others that have failed to attract market share as well.

 

[DC]

The private system of justice that you are suing him under.

 

[michaelsuede]

The internet was originally conceived to coordinate strategic nuclear command networks. Again, an outgrowth of military spending.

Which basically means it was created by Fascist corporate-state partnership.

The express purpose of Fascist corporate-state partnerships is to socialize research and development costs on to the backs of tax payers so private entities don't have to cough up the research dough on their own.

This allows private firms to reap technological gains while having their research costs be subsidized by their competitors or by other industries that have no research costs.

Thus, corn farmers and teachers are paying to subsidize the research and development costs of companies like McDonald Douglas, Raytheon, General Electric, Pfizer and others.

This is very same reason why colleges and schools are heavily subsidized. It has nothing to do with providing a quality education, and everything to do with socializing corporate training costs. Thus, again we have potato growers and gas station owners subsidizing the training costs of corporate conglomerates through the educational system.

 

[Joey McGee]

The internet was originally conceived to coordinate strategic nuclear command networks. Again, an outgrowth of military spending.
Which basically means it was created by Fascist corporate-state partnership.

Oh please! You disrespect your own species when you make up stuff like this. We don't separate military from everything else because that would be stupid and pointless. We need a military, we need technology, they work together. This is a good thing.

The express purpose of Fascist corporate-state partnerships is to socialize research and development costs on to the backs of tax payers so private entities don't have to cough up the research dough on their own.

Really I thought humans like get together and work together for a common goal Just more of your ideological rantings...

This allows private firms to rea technological gains while having their research costs be subsidized by their competitors or by other industries that have no research costs.

That's ridiculous, please prove this, somehow.

Thus, corn farmers and teachers are paying to subsidize the research and development costs of companies like McDonald Douglas, Raytheon, General Electric, Pfizer and others.
This is very same reason why colleges and schools are heavily subsidized. It has nothing to do with providing a quality education, and everything to do with socializing corporate training costs. Thus, again we have potato growers and gas station owners subsidizing the training costs of corporate conglomerates through the educational system.

Subsidies are indeed controversial! But they are a great thing, again, the principle of focusing energies on what is good for everyone. Against your ideology, you will make up stuff to make that seem like a horribly diseased philosophy

 

[michaelsuede]

That's ridiculous, please prove this, somehow.

Lets use your example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

In an independent development, Donald Davies at the UK National Physical Laboratory developed the concept of packet switching in the early 1960s, first giving a talk on the subject in 1965, after which the teams in the new field from two sides of the Atlantic ocean first became acquainted. It was actually Davies' coinage of the wording packet and packet switching that was adopted as the standard terminology. Davies also built a packet-switched network in the UK, called the Mark I in 1970.[7] Bolt, Beranek & Newman (BBN), the private contractors for ARPANET, set out to create a separate commercial version after establishing "value added carriers" was legalized in the U.S.[8] The network they established was called Telenet and began operation in 1975, installing free public dial-up access in cities throughout the U.S. Telenet was the first packet-switching network open to the general public.[9]

The rest, as they say, is history.

 

[Joey McGee]

Lets use your example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

The rest, as they say, is history.

Are you seriously suggesting to me that government investing in business and technology is bad for society? I fail to see the corruption. Who was this unfair to in this case? So the government funded some technology, a private company ran with it and had great success?! PERFECT WIN! Well, they did setup free public internet, those fascists! So the government helping businesses succeed to the benefit of consumers a negative thing? Well let me be the first to say that I fully suport fascist coporate-state partnerships. And man it looks like they will be continuing far into the future with no one being able to do a damn thing about it! w00t

 

[TubbaBlubba]

The internet was originally conceived to coordinate strategic nuclear command networks. Again, an outgrowth of military spending.

Which basically means it was created by Fascist corporate-state partnership.

The express purpose of Fascist corporate-state partnerships is to socialize research and development costs on to the backs of tax payers so private entities don't have to cough up the research dough on their own.

This allows private firms to reap technological gains while having their research costs be subsidized by their competitors or by other industries that have no research costs.

Thus, corn farmers and teachers are paying to subsidize the research and development costs of companies like McDonald Douglas, Raytheon, General Electric, Pfizer and others.

This is very same reason why colleges and schools are heavily subsidized. It has nothing to do with providing a quality education, and everything to do with socializing corporate training costs. Thus, again we have potato growers and gas station owners subsidizing the training costs of corporate conglomerates through the educational system.

Notice the medium you are spreading these ideas through.