UncleMatt wrote:AND just think: if you applied the same standard of "transparency" to companies that so many want to apply to government, I am sure we would have a whole SLEW of NEW examples of waste and fraud to discuss...
When did this become about "transparency"? Yet another sheeple dodge.
This is about government being too big and burdensome. This is about government VASTLY exceeding its legitimate purposes and being abused by "users" (like those "executives you griped about) for their own purposes, purposes they could never get away with were it not for their ability to mis-direct the terrible power of government.
I mentioned transparency because people on the right keep acting like its a "must have" for government, but NOT for private companies. Those standards need to be applied TO ALL and not just the government.
It is none of your business what your neighbor does in his house or his garage, as long as he is not doing anything dangerous or illegal. It is likewise none of your business what he does at his BUSINESS. You don't have a right to spy on your fellow citizens, so calls for "Openness" or "transparency" regarding private citizens or private companies are completely inappropriate in a free society.
Liberals always try to turn society into a police state with neighbors spying on neighbors. This is exactly how a "STASI" gets started.
UncleMatt wrote:By the same token, most companies are "out to take our money", so should we also think of them in a paranoid way? What are they doing with "our money"??? Does it agree with my religion/politics/personal agenda? If not, time to FREAK OUT!
rolls eyes
If you think the government is somehow the ebil debil, you are simply off your nutter. The government is made up of the same people who work in the private sector, with all the subsequent good AND bad qualities. They aren't scaled aliens bent on domination.
I don't see how a company can take your money unless you actually buy the product or service they offer. What business is it of ours what they do with the money once they provide what you pay them for?
I think UncleMatt could've made a good argument, but hinging it on that particular example isn't credible. The government gave those crooked executives tax payers' money. The government's action, the government's responsibility. If it was wrong for the government to do it, why is it anyone else but the government's fault?
It's my understanding that Goldman Sachs has invested $50 billion into Facebook. Not the sort of speculation I would engage in, unless I expected another taxpayer bailout when it goes south.
If you think the government is somehow the ebil debil, you are simply off your nutter
Evil in what sense? Intentional? Depends. Stalin wanted to create a better life for his people. He had to get rid of a lot of people who stood in his way. Was it evil to want a better life for his people? After all he has a scientifically "proven" method.
Evil intent is not required to do evil. Just look at Drug Prohibition and the pious souls who support it. Or if you don't like that one go for Alcohol Prohibition. "Hell will be forever rent" - Billy Sunday - preacher.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
AcesHigh wrote:come on, you cant get more paranoid then the tea party!
both the left and the right are paranoid right now in the US. Deal with it.
I've been to both the so called peace marches and to tea parties. The tea parties are lot a more fun.
The chicks were hotter at the peace marches in the 60s (I was there). Today - only the uglies go. The TEAs? That is where I go for hot women these days (I'm in my 60s - some kind of symmetry there).
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
KitemanSA wrote: When did this become about "transparency"? Yet another sheeple dodge.
This is about government being too big and burdensome. This is about government VASTLY exceeding its legitimate purposes and being abused by "users" (like those "executives you griped about) for their own purposes, purposes they could never get away with were it not for their ability to mis-direct the terrible power of government.
I mentioned transparency because people on the right keep acting like its a "must have" for government, but NOT for private companies. Those standards need to be applied TO ALL and not just the government.[/quote}
It is none of your business what your neighbor does in his house or his garage, as long as he is not doing anything dangerous or illegal. It is likewise none of your business what he does at his BUSINESS. You don't have a right to spy on your fellow citizens, so calls for "Openness" or "transparency" regarding private citizens or private companies are completely inappropriate in a free society.
Liberals always try to turn society into a police state with neighbors spying on neighbors. This is exactly how a "STASI" gets started.
But we need those spies to stop the flow of drugs don't we? We don't call them secret police in America. The term is SO tainted. We prefer undercover police.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Amusing conversation. What I see is that most folks "discussing" here have no problem supporting theft by government and secret police in the furtherance of their pet projects.
The natural progression of a government project is to spend more money on a project and apply more police power the more the project fails.
Example: in 1970 the Feds were spending $100 million a year on Drug Prohibition. This year it is on the order of $25 billion. The result - it is easier for kids to get an illegal drug than a legal beer.
So what do I hear? Calls for at minimum Death For Dealers and from those who really "understand" the problem Death For Users. These are the very same people dercrying government intrusion and high taxes. And OH Yeah. Secret Police to police these crimes. From those who claim that the idea of an American STASI is a very bad idea.
It is a hoot.
As my friend Veeshir likes to say "Funniest End Of Civilization Ever."
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.