Canndo will answer any question that is stated as such in this thread

[nontheist]

Canndo, you have made it apparent your distaste of big business and corporations. So how do you post with mud and twigs? Would you be happier if we all lived in the 16th century?

 

[canndo]

Canndo, you have made it apparent your distaste of big business and corporations. So how do you post with mud and twigs? Would you be happier if we all lived in the 16th century?

Yet again nonthiest, there is this absolute polarity, if I have a problem with unfettered free enterise, I must not want to use computers or live in a normal house. It is not either or, it is not polar and it is possible that even this argument is prompted by energy companies (I haven't looked). "hey, if you don't like energy companies, why are you using electricity"? This is not only a straw man argument (I don't hate energy companies, I just think they need to be well regulated and watched) but it presumes that only large evil companies are capable of giving us electricity.

I would be guilty of the same sort of thing were I to say "if you love corporations so much, why do you grow your own food? why don't you purchase one of everything?)

Now that is absurd, as is your argument.

 

[canndo]

Here is an example of my distrust for energy companies - I have watched 3 electric company ads in the last two hours. An electric company does not need to advertise, they know that if we are in their region we will purchase their electricity. Still they come on the air telling us how nice they are, how forward thinking, how concerned they are for our welfare. Rather than simply apply the cost of these ads to defray the cost of electricity, or defray the cost for the poor or disabled, they insist on attempting to have us love them.


That is why I don't like corporations.

 

[cannabineer]

Here is an example of my distrust for energy companies - I have watched 3 electric company ads in the last two hours. An electric company does not need to advertise, they know that if we are in their region we will purchase their electricity. Still they come on the air telling us how nice they are, how forward thinking, how concerned they are for our welfare. Rather than simply apply the cost of these ads to defray the cost of electricity, or defray the cost for the poor or disabled, they insist on spending real money from our energy payments to have us love them.


That is why I don't like corporations.

Litely edited to underline the question: cui bono? A company won't do that without expecting return on investment. I don't know what that return would be in this case. cn

 

[nontheist]

Yet again nonthiest, there is this absolute polarity, if I have a problem with unfettered free enterise, I must not want to use computers or live in a normal house. It is not either or, it is not polar and it is possible that even this argument is prompted by energy companies (I haven't looked). "hey, if you don't like energy companies, why are you using electricity"? This is not only a straw man argument (I don't hate energy companies, I just think they need to be well regulated and watched) but it presumes that only large evil companies are capable of giving us electricity.

I would be guilty of the same sort of thing were I to say "if you love corporations so much, why do you grow your own food? why don't you purchase one of everything?)

Now that is absurd, as is your argument.

The thing is canndo, those unfettered corporations with good ole competition makes it so your broke ass can afford such accommodations. You're like a burnt out hippy, can form a rebuttal but it doesn't make any sense.

I would be guilty of the same sort of thing were I to say "if you love corporations so much, why do you grow your own food? why don't you purchase one of everything?)
Grow or make me an 8gig stick of ram and then we will talk, or a cpu, or insulated wire that capable of carrying high frequencies in your back yard.

 

[UncleBuck]

The thing is canndo, those unfettered corporations with good ole competition makes it so your broke ass can afford such accommodations. You're like a burnt out hippy, can form a rebuttal but it doesn't make any sense.

justanotherhead?

 

[canndo]

Litely edited to underline the question: cui bono? A company won't do that without expecting return on investment. I don't know what that return would be in this case. cn

That is the point. They don't spend money for no return. If they want me to love them then they must be doing something that will have me hate them if I knew, or... there will be some issue during the election that they would like us to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[canndo]

The thing is canndo, those unfettered corporations with good ole competition makes it so your broke ass can afford such accommodations. You're like a burnt out hippy, can form a rebuttal but it doesn't make any sense.

I would be guilty of the same sort of thing were I to say "if you love corporations so much, why do you grow your own food? why don't you purchase one of everything?)
Grow or make me an 8gig stick of ram and then we will talk, or a cpu, or insulated wire that capable of carrying high frequencies in your back yard.

That I we cannot make ram is neither here nor there. That things are not polar, that I am not about to shun civilization simply because I have a problem with a totaly free market is. As you can see, my argument is as absurd as yours.

 

[nontheist]

 

[canndo]

Nonthiest? why do you suppose my electric company is airing ads that tell us how great they are?

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

jump to conclusions mat . . needs that square

 

[canndo]

What is it with this black and white polar perception the right has? If I say a single good thing for Obama I must be worshiping him, if I bring attention to the problems with free enterprise I must want to go back to the dark ages, If I take issue with police behavior I must be for anarchy. I suppose that is the only way the right can comprehend the world.

 

[cannabineer]

What is it with this black and white polar perception the right has? If I say a single good thing for Obama I must be worshiping him, if I bring attention to the problems with free enterprise I must want to go back to the dark ages, If I take issue with police behavior I must be for anarchy. I suppose that is the only way the right can comprehend the world.

My world is all polar perceptions and slippery slopes ... but is white&white, so I just don't get it. cn

 

[Red1966]

Althor, these are factual question, I welcome them but I don't see how your asking will result in anything different than your googling them. I see you are leading to something rather than attempting to get information about me or my ideology. I enjoy gotcha debates but I can't see that they would be of any relevence in this thread.

I believe you are trying to blame the housing bubble burst on Fannie, Freddie and Barney. If you want to debate this, start a thread and I will show you where you have been led astray.

You should answer his question, not belittle it. You might be exposed to facts you tend to avoid, so it may be a learning experience for you as well. My questions are how old are you, what state are you in, and what do you do for a living?

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

where was poster belittled(spin alert) . .you nobel prize winner assistants are sensitive eh

but you should just answer the question(not tryign to be pushy) . . and go on from there eh

 

[Red1966]

Trickle down economics is the concept that money the few are allowed to keep or are contributed to will find its way to lower economic entities as the top entites hire and spend others reap the results from the flow of money from the top down.

No, trickle down inplies that the better things are for a few points of wealth the more those points of wealth will spend. Should a very rich man be entitled to keep another 10 percent of his money, the theory supposes that the rich man will buy another boat or suit or house which will put people to work bulding that boat or house. In turn those who profit from their bulding the house or boat will spend their money at a cafe or bar and the owners or workers in that cafe or bar will wind up spending their money throughout the economy.

No, all economies are not trickle down. The economy in America is driven by the middle class and not by the rich. The rich profit from any flow of money in any direction - top to bottom, bottom to top or lateraly.

Obama and to a lesser extent Clinton both presided over an economy that is top heavy - the results of years of "trickle down" where what happend in reality is that wealth became concentrated at the top.

A rich man, when he has another $100 to spend will likely not put that monye back into circulation. He will likely not purchase another shirt or go out to dinner more often then he already does. Let a middle class person spend an additional $100 and he will likely purchase a few pairs of jeans in order to replace the worn out ones, he may have his daughter pick up a new pair of shoes, he may indulge in a visit to the Olive Garden with his wife where he would not ordinarily go. The lower down the socioeconomic ladder one injects money the more likely that money is to be circulated.

He asked a simple question and you gave him ten minutes of dogma.

 

[cannabineer]

You should answer his question, not belittle it. You might be exposed to facts you tend to avoid, so it may be a learning experience for you as well. My questions are how old are you, what state are you in, and what do you do for a living?

He asked a simple question and you gave him ten minutes of dogma.

Weird. cn .

 

[Red1966]

What do hold Mitt Romney to a different standard with his money? im gonna go out on a limb as to say tax evasion is a federal offense

why do you ask how his money in offshore accounts creates jobs?becuase it money in banks in off shore accounts will never create jobs here in the US. prove me wrong

but Obama's money goes unquestioned . . . . when were his finaces questioned and not answered?

Three questions, three strikes. You're out.

 

[Red1966]

I can blame a market that was unregulated and unwatched. What usually happens is that the right blames the CRA, fannie, freddie, Barney and finally Clinton. I have managed to trace this back to several radiocons and I suspect that the propaganda was diseminated through some of the less known radiocons into the public discourse. We have seen this before with the health care legislation and taking the onus off of BP during the spill.

I don't think, however, I knew the name of the PR firm or even their front organizations so I don't have the proof it would take to convince some here.

"I don't think, however, I knew the name of the PR firm or even their front organizations so I don't have the proof it would take to convince some here." PR firm? WTF are you talking about?

 

[UncleBuck]

geigh. ub.