4 ms·

Repugnant policies like this are an ongoing evolution of the profit motive. It's such a simple mechanism: profit motive -> investment in policy support -> weake

Repugnant policies like this are an ongoing evolution of the profit motive. It's such a simple mechanism: profit motive -> investment in policy support -> weakened economic standing for the weaker players. What is the corrective mechanism, the courts?

ianlevesque 11y ago
Eligible voters actually voting would help.
- cmdrfred 11y ago
  Vote for whom exactly? Obama has done very little for labor. Do you content Romney would of done a better job? Or that a 3rd party candidate is viable? That trend trickles down to the local level in my experience. The US is not a democracy anymore[0] more drastic action is required. [0] http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
  - thaumasiotes 11y ago
    Politicians naturally drift to the issues that people will vote over. If the electorate cares about an issue, you'll see political action. In this sense, your parent comment is correct. Obama and hypothetical Romney aren't doing anything about this because it isn't a voting issue.
    - cmdrfred 11y ago
      > If the electorate cares about an issue, you'll see political action. Read the article I linked above and the study it references. That is empirically false.
      - thaumasiotes 11y ago
        It's also empirically true. It's very easy to observe votes moving politicians. Without some argument that this issue is governed by a particular special circumstance, your comment has no substance.
        imtringued 11y ago
        This is quite an interesting argument because except funding nothing prevents us from eliminating crime and poverty. The government is simply not interested in doing these things. They'd rather cater to the needs of their 'sponsors'. I think it's kind of funny that politicans are not interested in their own country.
        mdpopescu 11y ago
        Why? I'm not interested in my country either, I'm interested in my own household. Why would politicians be any different, given that it's not their country, they're just temporary CEOs? (We know how well the CEO situation works for large companies.) An absolute monarch might be interested in his country, because it's actually his property.
stvswn 11y ago
I think it's obvious we have to abolish the profit motive. I mean, what has it done for us lately?

ianlevesque 11y ago

Eligible voters actually voting would help.

cmdrfred 11y ago
Vote for whom exactly? Obama has done very little for labor. Do you content Romney would of done a better job? Or that a 3rd party candidate is viable? That trend trickles down to the local level in my experience. The US is not a democracy anymore[0] more drastic action is required. [0] http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  Politicians naturally drift to the issues that people will vote over. If the electorate cares about an issue, you'll see political action. In this sense, your parent comment is correct. Obama and hypothetical Romney aren't doing anything about this because it isn't a voting issue.
  - cmdrfred 11y ago
    > If the electorate cares about an issue, you'll see political action. Read the article I linked above and the study it references. That is empirically false.
    - thaumasiotes 11y ago
      It's also empirically true. It's very easy to observe votes moving politicians. Without some argument that this issue is governed by a particular special circumstance, your comment has no substance.
      - imtringued 11y ago
        This is quite an interesting argument because except funding nothing prevents us from eliminating crime and poverty. The government is simply not interested in doing these things. They'd rather cater to the needs of their 'sponsors'. I think it's kind of funny that politicans are not interested in their own country.
        mdpopescu 11y ago
        Why? I'm not interested in my country either, I'm interested in my own household. Why would politicians be any different, given that it's not their country, they're just temporary CEOs? (We know how well the CEO situation works for large companies.) An absolute monarch might be interested in his country, because it's actually his property.

stvswn 11y ago

I think it's obvious we have to abolish the profit motive. I mean, what has it done for us lately?