Categories
$MONEY$ alpha males atlas shrugged beta males evil women I'm totally being sarcastic marriage strike MGTOW misogyny MRA

Ladies: He’s Going Galt — and it’s all your fault

Screw you, sister! I'm Going Galt!

Ladies! Better move fast if you want to sink your talons into some hard-working, high-earning beta man-wallet! Men’s Rights Redditor ShinShinGogetsuko is on to you ladies and your devious ways, and he’s taking his video games and going home. By which I mean: he’s GOING GALT!

Men are choosing to reject the culture that is being forced upon them which tells them to be anything but MEN. What they want us to be is slaves, to throw away our souls and toil away while women get to do whatever they want in the name of “female empowerment” and with a court system that will side with them. Equality is the ideal, but it’s not about equality–it’s about control. Men are going Galt.

When society takes a stand against the destruction of men’s character, then men will return to being men. Until then, Xbox 720.

See, I wasn’t kidding about the video games bit.

LINK and SCREENSHOT.

Thanks to tim-buckles on ShitRedditSays for the link (and the screenshot).

 

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

235 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

Ha! I just got into a fight with a Paulbot today! Did you know it’s totally not hypocritical for a libertarian to be pro-life?

Since being pro-life requires government all up in your uterus…
Hmm… How does that work?

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

See, that is generally a privileged bunch of people already, relatively speaking.

Yes. Yes it is, but that’s what seems to be the only way that those in power start to notice. If the poor brown people protest, they call it a riot and out come the hoses and dogs.
Poor people getting the shit end of the stick is dog-bites-man and media doesn’t even bother to acknowledge it. Just another day. Why so serious?
If privileged white students are out marching the media has to at least try and rationalize it, even if it’s only to marginalize it.
When privileged kids are at 18% unemployment, they’re going to be able to do something about it because they’re not scrambling to feed their families.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

God, MRAL, can you be a more short-sighted, idiotic little proto-libertarian with this shit? You said once you were a liberal; Despite being an MRA, I could believe that. But with that kind of shit, against the working class? Now I must say “Fuck you, you idiotic little child”. You’re only in college on your mom’s dime and you dare say shit like this? The economy sucks. How can you possibly be so blind as to think this is so easy to avoid? Do you just not have any friends? Because I know you’ve got family struggling (Though not necessarily family you care about, I’m aware that most white people don’t actually know their cousins, aunts, etc), and you clearly don’t care about them at all either.

I mean, shit, son, putting aside everything factually wrong with “Just work harder and a job falls into your lap”… the poor have a right to vent. They have a right to relaxation (or catharsis). It isn’t remotely just that people not in an awesome situation are supposed to be negatively judged for not actually enjoying their free time. That is bootstrap bullshit, peddled by people who don’t actually want the poor to be content in a meaningful sense.

Holly Pervocracy
8 years ago

NWO, when you find a hair in your soup, do you blame it on “The State”?

Also, how is it racist to observe that racial minorities weren’t fairly represented at the event? I think the phrase you were looking for is “not racist enough.”

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

What you’ve actually done by protesting for State run unions is handed more power to the State. 22 million State workers producing debt. How can debt, taken from the population produce wealth?

NWO continues to prove he knows nothing about economics. Once again he’s Not Even Wrong.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

NWO is just in a bad mood because it’s really hard to get homeowner’s insurance when your house is made out of tinfoil (to match your hat).

Nova
Nova
8 years ago

“@Nova – you’re totally right, I didn’t mean to imply that it’s just bad decision-making! I agree so much of it is up to luck – and getting in a car accident, getting sick is just stuff that happens that you have relatively little control over.

I was trying to say that the underlying idea behind the ‘I was responsible with my money and am fine’, ‘personal responsibility is all!’ logic is that people who don’t make great decisions somehow deserve to go without food or housing. Really? I mean, I get that I’m a bit left of center and everything, but I just don’t think people should be penalized for investing in a bad company with starvation, just as I don’t think people who are in an accident deserve to freeze or live in their cars. I don’t think that anyone in the world should be without decent food and shelter and health care. No ifs, buts or maybes. Idealist, perhaps, but it’s a morally sound position!”

Oh, I’m agreeing with you, but just taking it a step further. It used to be that way, even when I was young. If you did things the right way, there was a safety net for you and, if you got into a jam, you’d still be okay. Your health insurance, that EVERY company provided, would pay your medical bills, you had disability insurance through your job, so your family would be fed and the house note would be paid. If, for some reason, these things didn’t work out, there were charities and other organizations, to help people get through the tough times.

The only people that did hit rock bottom were those “bad decision makers,” and, as a collective, we could wag our fingers at them, pretending that it was really all their fault. Back when people got fired from their jobs for doing something wrong, rather than the shareholders wanting to make more money. Back when most employers did provide health insurance benefits and disability insurance policies. The only people who were homeless were those bad people and as a result of their bad choices. At least, that’s what everyone pretended and still, to some extent, still does, because it gives us a false sense of security to believe that, if we just do the right thing, we’re going to be okay.

These days, you can make all of the right choices, you can go to the right school, you can get the right degree, live in the right neighborhood and go to work every day that you’re suposed to and still, at any time, the rug can be pulled out from under you. It’s the great equalizer, because it can happen to anyone, anytime. Get cancer and your health insurance can drop you, because you’re too expensive. Get into a car accident and your insurance company can deny coverage, leaving you with the bill. Be a great employee and earn every raise for 10 years and you can get “laid off” because someone fresh out of college will work for less money and no benefits.

These days, it’s all about corporate health, rather than social health. If the corporations are making enough money, the world is okay. It doesn’t matter how many people are sleeping under bridges, because they lost their job. It doesn’t matter how many people are freezing to death, or dying from CO2 poisoning, because their wages are being so severely garnished to pay medical bills. Back in the day, people mattered. Now, we’re just grist for the mill and if we fall under the wheels, someone else will be there to push the corporate gravy train along.

I completely agree with you that people don’t deserve to starve to death, because of a circumstance, whether it’s beyond their control, or a bad decision. Corporations disagree with us and they own the country now, so we’re playing by their rules. And there’s no way that the individual can win. The basics of life, such as health care, nutritious food, transportation and child care are now “luxuries” that most Americans can barely afford or can’t afford at all. If we want to talk about slavery, men and women have a common master. Trent Reznor got it right, well beforehand.

Molly Ren
8 years ago

“Also, how is it racist to observe that racial minorities weren’t fairly represented at the event? I think the phrase you were looking for is ‘not racist enough.’”

Obviously you were being racist against the WHITE PEOPLE, Holly! No one ever gives a damn about the white people! 😛

shaenon
8 years ago

Note to MRAL: if you want me to let your comments through, tone it down, way down.

Ha ha! Did I make him mash his keyboard and/or call me a bitch? I hope it made him happy.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

You mean did he pretend to lose control because you made him mad?

KathleenB
KathleenB
8 years ago

How many layers of tinfoil is your hat up to, NWO?

blitzgal
8 years ago

What you’ve actually done by protesting for State run unions is handed more power to the State. 22 million State workers producing debt. How can debt, taken from the population produce wealth?

Dude, FUCK YOU. I’m so fucking sick to death of this BULLSHIT meme that state workers are lazy freeloaders. My mother worked for the state of Wisconsin for 37 years. She worked long beyond her retirement eligibility because SHE COULDN’T AFFORD TO RETIRE. Her salary, after 37 years of seniority? $25K per year. There were stretches of time when she didn’t get ANY kind of a raise for FIVE YEARS.

Create debt? What the fuck are you smoking, asshole? She earned the money she got by providing a service. Now explain to me why all of these state workers who earn their keep by providing public services that YOU benefit from every single day of your life are less deserving of the pittance they earn than corporations who are the ones actually creating debt by stealing our tax dollars through subsidies and entitlements?

blitzgal
8 years ago

And secondly, it’s the working and shrinking middle classes who keep this economy going. We’re the ones who actually spend the money we make. Rich people just keep theirs.

hellkell
hellkell
8 years ago

I love how NWO thinks current regulations are working. NWO, a lot of those, like Glass-Steagal have been repealed or made utterly meaningless, paving the way for a large part of the mess we’re in now.

Get off worldnet daily and read a book.

Holly Pervocracy
8 years ago

It’s interesting that NWO posts all the time about working under terrible conditions for low pay, but then he thinks unions are evil.

Dude. That’s the kind of thing unions could help you with.

blitzgal
8 years ago

It’s interesting that NWO posts all the time about working under terrible conditions for low pay, but then he thinks unions are evil.

It’s because he’s got this MRA bullshit stuck in his head and thinks that all of his problems are the fault of the systemic oppression of men by women. It reminds me of all the people who blame “illegals” for “stealing our jobs” instead of looking up at the corporations who pull up stakes for third world countries so they can hire workers for pennies. Stop looking at the people who are at the bottom with you and look UP already!

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

Shamelessly stolen~
“A DAY IN THE LIFE OF NWO REPUBLICAN”

NWO gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of water, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to ensure their safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer’s medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance – now NWO gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. NWO’s bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, NWO reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

NWO dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for the laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks on the government-provided sidewalk to subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

NWO begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. NWO’s employer pays these standards because NWO’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union.

If NWO is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn’t think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It is noontime and NWO needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. NWO’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect NWO’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

NWO has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that NWO and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime. NWO also forgets that his in addition to his federally subsidized student loans, he attended a state funded university.

NWO is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards to go along with the tax-payer funded roads.

He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers’ Home Administration because bankers didn’t want to make rural loans.

The house didn’t have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and demanded rural electrification.

He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so NWO wouldn’t have to.

NWO gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn’t mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit NWO enjoys throughout his day. NWO agrees: “We don’t need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I’m a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have.”

kristinmh
kristinmh
8 years ago

That sounds like a really nice day, cynickal. You left out the bit where he works for 28 hours surrounded by unqualified women in transparent micro-minis with no underwear on, but other than that, very good. We should all be so lucky!

Pecunium
8 years ago

One wonders why is that a job, created by a business taking money from people is a benefit to the economy, but a job created by goverment taking money from people is a drain?

I wonder this even more, in light of recent studies showing that gov’t employees do better work, for lower costs. It seems the advantages of experience (because gov’t workers aren’t being fired, so the employer can avoid giving them a raise) help.

Interesting thing just came out about New York City. Half of the small businesses in the city, are immigrant owned. Half. That’s what diversity/immigration gets you.

New York is a busy place, lots of people, lots of money moving around. Compare it to Georgia, where the state did it’s best to make the immigrants leave, they are looking at a huge problem because there isn’t anyone to harvest the crops. So a huge part of the state economy is going to be hurt.

darksidecat
8 years ago

#3) The State prints only as much money needed for the transportation of goods.
This is how the system was originally set up. There was no inflation, unemployment. Every crash and all inflation, any economic hardship is cause willfully and with full knowlege by the international bankers.

As a matter of history, this is totally and utterly wrong. Under the Articles, the federal government did in fact print paper currency during the revolutionary war, however, the lack of a tax power meant that they could not sustain it, so it inflated and then collapsed dramatically. Once the Constitution was passed, it is true that the federal government minted little money, but that was an economic issue in and of itself. Many states had almost the entire economy running on bank created currency. You think bankers have control now, you really wouldn’t want to live back when bankers issued almost every bit of commericial currency in the entire state of NY (less so in the South, but still to a large degree). There were dramatic cycles of boom and bust, people lost livelihoods due to bank collapses, the state courts made incredibly weird legal decisions about contracts and debts to try and sustain anything. But still, some have argued that early court decisions in regards to bank notes may have even been one contributing factor to the civil war, because of the rifts they put in place between the two different economic systems (the north used bank notes for everything, the south used property title barters, this created quite a lot of conflicts in trade, esp. as the north often did not allow property titles to slaves to be used and the increasing industrialization of the north meant that it had a monopoly on most of the non-agricultural economy). The subsequent increase post civil war in federal currency made dramatic economic improvements.

While it is true that unemployment was low in the early years of the US, this has less to do with currency and more to do with dramatic worker shortages (at least in the industrialized north, in the south, poor white unemployment was high, black people were used as slaves to fullfill the labor needs). Workers were abused, and forced into one sided contracts that often held them in a form of indentured servitude year round. Immigration was largely unrestricted in order to increase the numbers of workers (though only whites could naturalize), until around the civil war era, when large migrations from a variety of places, combined with the mass movements of freed slaves created a glut in the labor market.

What you’ve actually done by protesting for State run unions is handed more power to the State. 22 million State workers producing debt. How can debt, taken from the population produce wealth?

Because the state pays these workers to provide services, a large number of which would be far more expensive or near impossible to obtain without it. We get roads and hospitals, medical research and social security, we get access (to varying degrees, unfortunately) to courts of law to settle our disputes, etc. Also, as a point of order, state worker union does not equal state run union, in fact, it is best when it does not.

darksidecat
8 years ago

There were also state bank notes in the early US, but they are their own seperate mess as well.

mythago
8 years ago

It used to be that way, even when I was young. If you did things the right way, there was a safety net for you and, if you got into a jam, you’d still be okay. Your health insurance, that EVERY company provided, would pay your medical bills, you had disability insurance through your job, so your family would be fed and the house note would be paid. If, for some reason, these things didn’t work out, there were charities and other organizations, to help people get through the tough times.

Is this satire? Seriously? or did you not live in the US? or was the part of the “that’s how we pretended it was” in your next paragraph

I mean, I agree with you about how shitty things are now.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

Is this satire? Seriously? or did you not live in the US? or was the part of the “that’s how we pretended it was” in your next paragraph

I had the same initial reaction, but yeah, if you look at it all in context, zie’s saying “We pretended that there used to be a social safety net and that if you did everything right it caught you”.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Pecunium:

“One wonders why is that a job, created by a business taking money from people is a benefit to the economy, but a job created by goverment taking money from people is a drain?’

Because businesses typically don’t take money from people. A business has to provide a service to someone that is valuable to them. Businesses must persuade people to hand over their money to them. They can’t use force like the government.

Granted, there are exemptions to this. A monopoly has far more power to exert itself on others. Which is why we have anti-monopoly laws.

The government by default literally takes your money every paycheck or makes you pay quarterly if you are a business or self employed.

Also, the money going into businesses goes to creating better products and creates more value within the economy. Government takes money, allocates it (usually poorly) and spends it (usually poorly as well). A lot of that money is used to keep the bureaucracy going and doesn’t actually go to providing services to people. The government has more red tape and pointless regulations than any other organization and it costs lots of money to comply with them. A business tends to have less regulation to follow and is freer to find cost cutting methods to spend money more efficiently.

Sure, the government can provide temporary relief, but they often overspend on those projects which just requires them to tax more and more. It ends up being a catch-22.

So:

government taxation = coercion and to some people theft
business = persuade customer that their product is worth the money.

Molly Ren
8 years ago

Is Brandon an anarchist? 😀

Dracula
Dracula
8 years ago

Are you trying to imply that the business world isn’t corrupt or coercive?

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

I’m just going to copy and paste my standard response to the bullshit of taxation = theft.

Assuming that you live in a developed nation, there is a substantial difference.

The first, and largest, is that taxes are ideally used for the benefit of society at large. The maintenance and construction of public works is done by taxation, for instance, and these public works are things you may be familiar with, like schools and libraries. In a representative democracy, this usually has some loss of pure efficiency in the form of pork barrel horse trading, but these typically still employ workers and aren’t all bad.

Most public works are at minimum, of things that benefit society. Ideally, these are of things you don’t want motivated purely by profit (Which means cost cutting measures wherever possible, and over-reporting of success when piecemeal oriented). Education is one obvious facet (Ironically, in the US, still plagued by cost cutting measures due to insufficient funding by relevant municipalities and states), but others can include environmental cleanup (Which benefits everyone, but costs money so few companies willingly do their own), or law enforcement (Where privatizing can lead to even more dishonest reporting, a lack of public accountability, etc etc), and other fields.

In a republic or democracy, you also generally got a vote on it. Unlike theft, which I guarantee you had no or very little choice in, either your elected representatives or yourself got to vote on the matter. This lends fairness to the matter, and optimally means that the money will at least be put to public use, if not necessarily the public use of highest utility.

If you live in a sovereign state where War were Declared, you can also bet that every tank, APC, gun, and drop of fuel has been paid for with public money, obtained (generally) via debt. Debt that has to be paid back with taxes.

Obviously, taxes that are meant to be dumped into the pockets of the ruler, the representatives, or the representatives best friends bear little resemblance to any of this, and are ultimately legalized theft. That’s why I assumed a level of development, as developed countries have less of this. Obviously, not 0, as we’ve seen in Haliburton and the financial institutions bailed out recently.

Did you not take a Civics class that covered all of this or something? Granted I didn’t have to in high school, but I took classes that took these basics for a given.

“Are you implying it is morally acceptable for me to rob others as long as I am not doing this for my own benefit?”
ARe you aware of the classic moral dilemmas involving theft for the benefit of others? “Would you steal to feed your own starving children?” and the like.

Notwithstanding that taxes (Optimally) benefit the taxed person directly.

Also, the money going into businesses goes to creating better products and creates more value within the economy.

What do you think a road is, exactly, dimwit? Shit, son, you do realize that government employees get paid and create value as well, right? That services are a value?

Government takes money, allocates it (usually poorly) and spends it (usually poorly as well).

Statement assumes facts not in evidence. I wouldn’t be surprised if most ‘inefficiency’ that government is allegedly so bad at is really just not treating employees like shit. The post office follows laws that protect workers by maintaining their health very strictly. I can tell you from experience with both, that corporations do not. The government also provides very generous benefits.to employees, and those are ‘benefits’ that should be the norm.

A lot of that money is used to keep the bureaucracy going and doesn’t actually go to providing services to people.

Spoken as someone who’s never actually worked in a bureaucracy! Some of it is self perpetuating but some of it is in fact inevitable. Quite frankly, you *CAN NOT* have accountability without bureaucracy, when you operate on the scale of nearly any government.

. A business tends to have less regulation to follow and is freer to find cost cutting methods to spend money more efficiently.</blockquote.
YOU ASSHOLE. DO YOU HAVE ANY FUCKING CLUE WHAT THAT MEANS!? That means having one person carry a 120 lb box because two people carrying one box is 'less efficient'. That means rightsizing or cutting benefits just because you can, which is 'efficient'. Cost cutting methods aren't necessarily good, you jackass. You know what else would be a cost cutting measure? Not buying body armor for soldiers. Not all cost cutting measures are made equally, and if you give a fuck about people you should probably learn something about which ones are actually taken. Protip: They're not always good. IT's not always about firing a lazy person.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

Oh wait, I forgot, this is Brandon. He doesn’t give a fuck about people. He gives a fuck about Brandon.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

Incorrect-government workers provide service just as the average business does. The only difference is that government is required to provide those services (which by the way are not free.)

When I go to the Office of the Historian (US Department of State) and want to get papers to write a biography of James G. Blaine, US Secretary of State (1881, 1889-1892), someone has to be there to tell me I am in the wrong spot at the least and at the best, let me know about their contact over XYZ Federal Depository Library who could help me take a look at them.

That is not something that can be done by a recording (which by the way, would have to be made by someone at some point.)

Why there is this obsession with solely reducing the size of government rather then just clean out waste with a program like the Re-inventing Government program of the 1990s (which saved a lot of money and did a pretty good job of reducing redundancies) I have no idea. This is a giant nation in terms of size, people and ideas-we really do need to have more then just the 538 (100 senators, 435 congresscritters which has be unconstitutionally small since it should be about 1,029, Art. 1 Sec. 2, the Prez and Veep, and a Supreme Court jurist) that the US Constitution outlines.

Now I am going to go see if I can find out if someone actually keeps track of the number of documents the US government creates a day.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Because businesses typically don’t take money from people. A business has to provide a service to someone that is valuable to them. Businesses must persuade people to hand over their money to them. They can’t use force like the government.

Um… yeah. That’s why credit card companies take customers to court to, “get their money back” when they’ve already collected as much as 10 time the actual debt.

It’s why a toll-road operator sued the state of California for planning to widen a road (“restraint of trade”).

It’s why Disney sued to see to it that copyrights last longer, and longer; keeping vast swathes of works from entering the public domain.

It’s why Bechtel contracted with the gov’t of Bolivia to provide water to the country, and used the Bolivian Army to prevent people from collecting rainwater, or drinking from wells.

More to the point, you are wrong when you say gov’t doesn’t provide a service. They provide the police, the water mains, the schools, the requirements for doctors, an optometrists and pharmacists, and lawyers (and the tests to see to it they meet them). It inspects your meat, your milk, makes sure the workplace is safe, the spinach not contaminated. It regulates the markets (well, it used to; you can see the effects of a lack of oversight right now).

It determines what makes for a safe building, both in construction, and in things like fire escapes. Gov’t provides the roads the fire trucks move along, and park alongside the gov’t provided hydrants (using thos gov’t provided pipes).

Gov’t provides the Department of Defense, secures the borders, ensures (insomuch as they are allowed; i.e. funded, and staffed) that the products which come across the borders are safe, and that unwanted goods/objects are kept out.

It provides (inasmuch as it is funded) the social safety nets of unemployment insurance, aid to families with children; and other food related assistance. Insomuch as it is being allowed it provides for insurance against grinding poverty in old age.

It regulates the airwaves, as a public resource (insomuch as it is being allowed). It maintains a safely working airspace for travel, and shipping.

It issues patents, and maintains copyrights, so that people are not cheated profit from their inventions.

Those are just some of the goods and services gov’t provides.

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

Because businesses typically don’t take money from people. A business has to provide a service to someone that is valuable to them. Businesses must persuade people to hand over their money to them. They can’t use force like the government.

False. You ignore the current system of FIRE based economics.
Also false, as has been pointed out, that government provides no services for it’s dollars. Try running a business with no roads, copy right laws, patent laws, property rights laws, the vehicle to enforce those laws, or the ability to standardize currency, transportation, defend consumer rights or maintain a stable environment to conduct business in.

See, economic opportunities in Somalia.

Granted, there are exemptions to this. A monopoly has far more power to exert itself on others. Which is why we have anti-monopoly laws.

Which haven’t been enforced since 1984. Your economic theories are out of date with modern business practices. You might as well be defending mercantilism.

The government by default literally takes your money every paycheck or makes you pay quarterly if you are a business or self employed.

Businesses require payment up front for most consumer purchases. For B2B practices you are expected to submit payment in 30 days. Payroll taxes are the agreed upon method of payment for government services (much like automatic withdrawal) due to the difficulty for a majority of the people who use and need the governmental services being unable to pay on an annual basis.

See, self employment

Also, the money going into businesses goes to creating better products and creates more value within the economy.

False. A majority of net profit are disbursed to stockholders rather than being returned to the business. The top 1% hold 40% of all corporate stock and 60% of all financial securities.

Government takes money, allocates it (usually poorly) and spends it (usually poorly as well).

False. 54% of the US budget goes to defense spending. 21% is for Social Security. The remainder, for things like the USDA, EPA, FAA

A lot of that money is used to keep the bureaucracy going and doesn’t actually go to providing services to people.

False. Government employees are more efficient, creating more services for less pay than comparable services in the private sector.

The government has more red tape and pointless regulations than any other organization and it costs lots of money to comply with them. A business tends to have less regulation to follow and is freer to find cost cutting methods to spend money more efficiently.

Which does nothing for the workers, customers and is increasingly likely to cause death and other environmental costs.

See, Big Tobacco, Shirt Waist Textile fire, Upper Big Branch mine, etc.

Sure, the government can provide temporary relief, but they often overspend on those projects which just requires them to tax more and more. It ends up being a catch-22.

False. See Adam Smith’s An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. and John Maynard Keynes use of the New Deal and World War 2
Also False the idea that business don’t overspend on projects. See KBR, Haliburton, Duke Nukem Forever, Windows 7, the Olympics, General Motors, Boeing, etc.

Amused
Amused
8 years ago

Because businesses typically don’t take money from people. A business has to provide a service to someone that is valuable to them. Businesses must persuade people to hand over their money to them. They can’t use force like the government.

To add to what Pecunium already said: I think it has been conclusively demonstrated by now that businesses, especially big ones, can manufacture “needs” and sell things of little to no value thanks to deceptive and predatory advertising practices. Businesses can also take money from people when they essentially bribe the government for contracts and provide dubious services at a net cost to the taxpayer (like, for example, the way that privately-owned prisons were behind Arizona’s anti-immigrant legislation). Businesses can lobby for government policies that sway consumers towards buying products and services that are overpriced, or that they can’t afford (as we have seen with the latest housing boom-and-bust). And, in an age where businesses are better-funded than governments, they can put the screws to people with the state backing them without as much as a semblance of due process (such as when Apple security personnel searched a man’s apartment without a warrant — or even having the official capacity to do so — using uniformed cops as muscle).

When you claim that businesses must persuade people to hand over money to them, you assume that:

(1) all actors in the Free Market have equal bargaining power; and
(2) all actors in the Free Market have unfettered access to complete, truthful and accurate information, and are not subjected to lies, distortions and other deceptive forms of manipulation.

Neither of those assumptions are true, however. The Efficient Market Hypothesis was debunked when, circa 1930?

Pecunium
8 years ago

I’ll add, in the Riverside Calif., and Bechtel cases, the companies were using tax moneys to enforce the contracts. If you drove on the toll-road without paying the toll, the DMV would issue a ticket. It might be automatic, in which case failure to pay was a hold/suspension of your license, or it might be issued by a cop; removing that officer from other duties, and imposing a bench warrant; with the power of the law to compel.

Bechtel wasn’t paying for the soldiers who broke rain-barrels and plugged wells, that was a required enforcement of the contract, and the taxpayer had to pay for having his property destroyed so Bechtel could make a slightly higher profit margin.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

Governments don’t provide services?

I’ll be right back after making a cup of tea, from water that comes out of a tap in a form that I can drink without it poisoning me BY MAGIC. The waterpipe elves must really love me to have protected me for so long just out of goodwill.

pwdergirl1
8 years ago

It seems I stumbled out of the civilized world and into LaLa Land with this blog…and I am LOVIN’ it! Women need men to abuse and rape them in order to feel whole, and, well, womanly? Wow…(sigh!)

Amused
Amused
8 years ago

I’ll be right back after making a cup of tea, from water that comes out of a tap in a form that I can drink without it poisoning me BY MAGIC. The waterpipe elves must really love me to have protected me for so long just out of goodwill.

Oh, CassandraSays, CassandraSays. Businesses would do it so much better! If a business supplied you with water that wasn’t safe, from lead pipes, people would get sick and start dying, and then people would just stop drinking water! Score one for the consumer! The business would be FORCED to change its practices. Or perhaps you could have 15 different systems of pipes in your house, so you could choose between 15 different vendors, just buy the water you like best. Caveat emptor!!

Next up: how boycotting food and shelter is an effective way to make businesses provide people with clean, healthy necessities at reasonable prices.

(That was sarcasm.)

hellkell
hellkell
8 years ago

Brandon, do you think think those anti-monopoly laws are working lately? Allow me to introduce you to the cellular phone industry and a few others if you do.

Brandon
Brandon
8 years ago

@Dracula: Absolutely not. Business just like government is susceptible to coercion and deception. Those traits aren’t inherent to government or business but of human nature itself.

@Rutee:

“The first, and largest, is that taxes are ideally used for the benefit of society at large. The maintenance and construction of public works is done by taxation, for instance, and these public works are things you may be familiar with, like schools and libraries. In a representative democracy, this usually has some loss of pure efficiency in the form of pork barrel horse trading, but these typically still employ workers and aren’t all bad.”

Ideally…yes. But we don’t live in an ideal world. Also, government often spends far more than it needs to for supplies for those products because the person overseeing it doesn’t really care as much as they should about those taxpayers funds as you know,…the actual taxpayer.

“Most public works are at minimum, of things that benefit society. Ideally, these are of things you don’t want motivated purely by profit (Which means cost cutting measures wherever possible, and over-reporting of success when piecemeal oriented). Education is one obvious facet (Ironically, in the US, still plagued by cost cutting measures due to insufficient funding by relevant municipalities and states), but others can include environmental cleanup (Which benefits everyone, but costs money so few companies willingly do their own), or law enforcement (Where privatizing can lead to even more dishonest reporting, a lack of public accountability, etc etc), and other fields.”

I want practically everything motivated by profit. Then maybe I will actually get a decent product or reliable service. More often than not my time dealing with the govt is slow, convoluted and a pain in the ass.

Are you really saying that schools don’t already receive enough money? The US spends more money per pupil than practically every other first world nation. The ironic thing is that many of the schools that spend less actually do better than US students.

I do however think that everything within the justice system should be run by the government (sans private attorneys). Courts, law enforcement, prisons etc,,, No private entity should be allowed to strip you of your rights and freedom and send you off to prison.

“In a republic or democracy, you also generally got a vote on it. Unlike theft, which I guarantee you had no or very little choice in, either your elected representatives or yourself got to vote on the matter. This lends fairness to the matter, and optimally means that the money will at least be put to public use, if not necessarily the public use of highest utility.”

How nice of my fellow citizens to say I should pay more in taxes. Democracy is like two wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for dinner.

“What do you think a road is, exactly, dimwit? Shit, son, you do realize that government employees get paid and create value as well, right? That services are a value?”

Yes I am well aware of that. However, I think it is slightly disingenuous to pick an industry that is basically a government monopoly. If you want to pick something slightly better, you can go with the USPS…which UPS, FedEX and email are basically destroying the USPS. Government services when competing against private companies will most likely lose in the long run.

Never worked in a bureaucracy? I served in the military…the biggest damn bureaucracy around. During peace time, everything is slow and tedious. Even getting simple things done is a chore. That’s why we have “hurry up and wait” because soldiers move faster than the bureaucracy.

@Elizabeth: No, but the federal government could digitize them, put them up on a website (a la wikipedia) and let people find it themselves. They then can archive all those files, reduce the amount of space they are using and have a smaller team manage the website and IT requirements. The initial spending will be more, but over the long term savings could be drastic.

@Pencunium: You agreed to that credit cards contract before you were issued a card. You agreed to pay a certain amount of interest and any fees that accrue. There are also ways to lower that burden: bankruptcy, negotiating terms, etc…

Hell, I pitted credit card against credit card to get a better deal. I called one card and told them that I would pay them first if they gave me a better deal than my other credit card.

The other examples you mentioned is what happens when business and govt get all buddy buddy with each other. This is what happens when capitalism becomes more corporatist which leads to fascism. Just like we have a separation between church and state…we need a separation between business and government.

I didn’t say the government doesn’t provide services…just crappy service. Practically everything the government does can be done better. USDA, FDA, OSHA, etc… They all suck at doing the job they are supposed to be doing.

Pecunium
8 years ago

@Pencunium: You agreed to that credit cards contract before you were issued a card. You agreed to pay a certain amount of interest and any fees that accrue. There are also ways to lower that burden: bankruptcy, negotiating terms, etc…

Yes, the myth of the almighty contract. The Credit Card companies rig the deal. They get to set the rates; you can’t negotiate. You can, sometimes, manage to borrow from peter to pay paul, but if they set the scheme up properly, you are in a hole before you know it. One slipped payment, to anyone, and they reserve the right to rack your rate.

More to the point, the example I gave, the actual amount lent had long since been recovered, but the rates were such that the principal wasn’t being charged off. So for a 1,000 total they had collected 10,000 and wanted more.

The thing is, businesses have the money, and the means, to prevent the non-business from getting a fair shake. The small print is theirs to change, at will. If they change the terms, you have two options, accept them; even if they punish you, or find the means to pay in full.

One has to play by their rules (which are not written with the consumer in mind), or not play at all. Want to rent a car? If you don’t have a credit card it costs you. First you will have to let them freeze a significant chunk of your bank account. They may insist, for a longer rental, on a cashier’s check (which isn’t free).

So you have to have the credit card. If you don’t use it, your issuer may cancel it. So you have to be very careful, if you don’t want to get stuck with insane interest rates. When the new law got passed, restricting the fees for personal credit cards, a lot of people found they had been moved to business accounts.

BofA, among others, used to have a policy of handling debits before credits, and the largest debit first. That meant people, who had guaranteed deposits (things like paychecks, and SS,etc.) saw themselves hit for half a dozen $30 overdraft charges, because they had paid bills. Bills that they had the money to cover.

Way back when I had an account at BofA. ATMs were just becoming standard. They put a fee on using a teller. Then they put a minimum balance requirement on use of the ATM. If, at any point in the billing cycle (it, after all, wasn’t a free checking account; I didn’t have 5,000 I had no use for), one’s balance fell below $250, they charged for the use of the ATM. I was delivering pizza at the time, and I’d stop at the bank on my way home to put my tips in. I’d hit the bank when I needed cash for gas, groceries (this was pre-debit cards).

I got a more than 15.00 charge for ATM deposits, because my cycle was such that paying my bills dropped me just below the limit, just before the month tripped… and they retroactively charged me for every single visit. I was being dinged for the privilege of depositing money for them to lend out at a profit.

But hey, I signed a contract, right? I moved my money to an S&L the next day, and BofA didn’t understand why. The manager, when I closed my account, was asking what he could do to make me stay. I told him change the ATM policy.

But people need to bank, and the rules are that the banks get to make the rules.

The other examples you mentioned is what happens when business and govt get all buddy buddy with each other. This is what happens when capitalism becomes more corporatist which leads to fascism. Just like we have a separation between church and state…we need a separation between business and government.

And you propose to fix this how? By shrinking the ability of the gov’t to perform oversight? You say, “Practically everything the government does can be done better. USDA, FDA, OSHA, etc… They all suck at doing the job they are supposed to be doing.. What’s your solution… you said earlier that private business can/should do what the gov’t does (e.g. the USPS, which is a bastardised “semi-private” enterprise), and will do it better.

So what in your fairy tale land of the Perfect System, is the means by which the, SEC, USDA, FDA, OSHA, FCC, FAA, etc. are able to do the job they need to do to prevent the phenomenon known as, “regulatory capture”.

What’s the solution. You seem to know so very much more than all of us, so regale us with the proper ways to fix the system. Show us where we are wrong. Give actual counter-examples to our examples.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Brandon: You did what, “four and out”? The reason for, “hurry up and wait” is that the Army/Navy (the Air Force has it’s own problems, but the way it’s works is different, largely because of changes in the way air warfare works; not some fundamental difference which can be fixed) are the last of the “labor economies”.

In peacetime you have a lot of troops who have nothing to do, more, in fact, than can be productively put to work.

It also happens they need more bureaucrats than they have; because there is really only so much adding more clerks does in terms of efficiency. When you have a couple of hundred young kids, who like to blow shit up, running around the woods; blowing shit up, a lot of things that need a fair bit of paperwork happen (how many line of duty investigations did you take part in? There is a fair bit of paperwork in one, because that’s what you need to keep some bean counter, ten years later, from saying, “That soldier doesn’t deserve to have the taxpayer pay for that; it wasn’t really service connected).

So yeah, the Army has a lot of paperwork, it’s also performing a logistical nightmare. Ever been responsible for ammunition projection? You have to plan 12 months out, and the only thing you can do once the plan is tendered is is reduce the amount?

Why? Because ammo has to be made, stored, shipped, checked for life-expectancy, allocated at the ASP, controlled for in the field, accounted for as expended, and returned to inventory, and destroyed as it goes out of date.

The alternative? Stockpiles the self-detonate (part of the Ammo-handler’s, and Armorers courses (both of which I’ve done), is indcident reports on mistakes in handling, and storage, as well as what happens when someone is clever and figures out a flaw in the accounting system; I don’t know about you, but the idea of a case of grenades and a couple of dozen AT-4s being sold to [insert group of bad guys here] isn’t something I want to see happening.

There are, all told, about a quarter of a million people the army is keeping track of; and trying to keep the balance of forces in balance, as 20 percent of them engage in a change of station (with all their dependents) every year. As well co-ordinating the training, and various excercises of the Guard and USAR.

Imagine, just think about it, what it takes to send a brigade through the NTC; all the movement orderts, ammo forecasts, medical records, vehicles to move, mail to hold/forward, Red Cross to keep in the loop (because family emergencies happen year round), soldiers to get to schools, PCS to account for, etc.

Now do that 15 times a year. Do the same for the jungle warfare school at Ft. Polk, and the Mountain/Winter Warfare school.

Take care of all the MEPS, IET/AIT, the Split Option training, the various summer camps of ROTC, etc.

The Army has a lot of bureacracy, but it’s not bloated, it’s overworked.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Trivia questions:

1: What is the medical insurance provider with the highest level of customer satisfaction?

2: What’s the medical insurance provider with the lowest overhead?

3: What’s the medical insurance provider which has the best cost controls on non-medical costs.

1: Medicare
2: Medicare
3: Medicare

cynickal
cynickal
8 years ago

If you want to pick something slightly better, you can go with the USPS…which UPS, FedEX and email are basically destroying the USPS. Government services when competing against private companies will most likely lose in the long run.

Wrong again: “When it comes to low-weight shipping for residential customers, consider the efficient, economical FedEx SmartPost service. By utilizing the United States Postal Service® (USPS) for final delivery, FedEx SmartPost reaches every U.S. address, including P.O. boxes and military APO and FPO destinations. You can even use FedEx SmartPost to ship to Alaska, Hawaii and all U.S. territories”
http://www.fedex.com/us/smart-post/index.html

The private shippers push the USPS for the most resource consuming part of their delivery business.

Of course that doesn’t touch on the rediculous burden that has been placed on them regarding their pension plan.
http://www.pionline.com/article/20111005/DAILYREG/111009945/bill-would-let-us-postal-service-use-pension-overpayments

Anything else you’d like to be wrong about?

Dracula
Dracula
8 years ago

It’s my general opinion, (I don’t really have time to argue this in detail) that the reason those regulatory agencies you mention aren’t doing their jobs as well they should be is both they and Congress are far too heavily influenced (or corrupted) by the industries they’re supposed to be regulating.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

Ideally…yes. But we don’t live in an ideal world.

Indeed. In an ideal world, we wouldn’t need building codes, because construction crews wouldn’t cut corners to save money. In an ideal world, we wouldn’t need to regulate food, because companies would safely take care of it and dispose of infected or rotten food instead of selling them elsewhere with weaker regs.

Also, government often spends far more than it needs to for supplies for those products because the person overseeing it doesn’t really care as much as they should about those taxpayers funds as you know,…the actual taxpayer.

Yeah, having seen the side of that for defense contractors, it’s probably more likely that it’s because the contractors are trying their absolute-fucking-hardest to rip off the government. Shit, some of the bureacracy you so hate is specifically because of that shit.

Are you really saying that schools don’t already receive enough money?

Yepperoni.

The US spends more money per pupil than practically every other first world nation.

Not Really. It only does that if you use Purchasing Power Parity, which tends to really fuck with an accurate grasp of expenditures (Protip: Not everything is priced like cheap food. If you are not talking about Cheap Food, PPP is not really helping you). If you sort by percentage of GDP, the US spends substantially less. The problem I’m finding is that I’d have to actually math myself if I don’t want to convert by PPP, and I am at least somewhat lazy.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2206rank.html

I want practically everything motivated by profit. Then maybe I will actually get a decent product or reliable service.

You’re an idiot. Do you just not fucking remember [i]The Jungle[/i]? Have you ever been to a Meriken Hospital? Someone else raised the rather infamous South American for-profit water companies; were you not paying attention when this happened?

More often than not my time dealing with the govt is slow, convoluted and a pain in the ass.

Yes I am well aware of that. However, I think it is slightly disingenuous to pick an industry that is basically a government monopoly. If you want to pick something slightly better, you can go with the USPS…which UPS, FedEX and email are basically destroying the USPS. Government services when competing against private companies will most likely lose in the long run.

This tired meme. UPS and Fedex ONLY have to take packages that are profitable. The US Postal Service accepts *ALL MAIL PERIOD*. A lot of shit isn’t profitable to move at all; it still has to be done. UPS and Fedex are also the people I was directly referring to about not following regulations. You do realize that their workers will die sooner and have more health problems, because they aren’t permitted by the company to take basic safety precautions (even legally mandated ones), right? The USPS is not anywhere nearly so toxic to its employees; It also provides expensive and *fantastic* benefits as civil servants, which increases costs. Taken as an aggregate, you kind of expect it to lose. That doesn’t mean you (Or anyone else) should want it gone, you twit.

You don’t get it. Profit is not the end all. The Postal Service isn’t SUPPOSED to turn a profit; it’s supposed to do shit that USians need done. Shit, son, what’s next? “THE USAF IS LOSING MONEY COMPARED TO BLACKHAWK!” Um, duh. Also, the USAF causes less damage to our own interests by pissing off the Afghani and Iraqi people, isn’t massively illegal under International law, and isn’t as amazingly slipshod at securing weapons. I’m pretty okay with the USAF being a giant money pit, I just want them to stop shooting brown people. I’m also okay with the USPS being a smaller money pit, because they provide valuable services to the poor that simply aren’t properly replicated elsewhere.

How nice of my fellow citizens to say I should pay more in taxes. Democracy is like two wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for dinner.

Yeah, if you’re not past 250k I’m not concerned that you’re not paying sufficiently in taxes. And I don’t think you are, from the shit you’ve said. I’m concerned that the people who benefit the most from our government, in absolute profit, pay far too little for those benefits. If you’re not in the top 5%, I honestly don’t want your taxes going up. You’re probably struggling enough as is. You’ll also benefit substantially more, relatively. Well, maybe not you, specifically, because you hate children and despise everyone else. I mean, I hate kids too, but I want the system that benefits me to work for the next generation too.

Never worked in a bureaucracy? I served in the military…the biggest damn bureaucracy around.

….
If you think the military is the biggest bureacracy around, you’ve got a ways to go, twit.

During peace time, everything is slow and tedious. Even getting simple things done is a chore.

You’ve never worked in a corporation before? Protip: Shit like that happens.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

No, but the federal government could digitize them, put them up on a website (a la wikipedia) and let people find it themselves. They then can archive all those files, reduce the amount of space they are using and have a smaller team manage the website and IT requirements. The initial spending will be more, but over the long term savings could be drastic.

So you assume that digitizing is something that happens by the same magic elves in the pipes at Cassandra’s house?

1st, the US government’s pre computer era documents are in the billions of pages. The National Archives has been trying to keep up but according to them, 1.4 billion pages are added a year to the total.

2nd, you seem to believe that simply because something is now digitized, it is going to be destroyed. That is like saying “well we copied the US Constitution online, might as well trash the original.” A great deal of those documents are part of our national history and may not be destroyed or altered. Which makes digitizing them 1. a pain in the ass and 2. not a way to reduce the volume or storage requirements. In other words, we could lose a few thousand workers but it is not going to be a total reduction in the work force for this assumption on your part that “oh just stick them online.”

And that is just the National Archives…You have the Library of Congress, the Senate and House Historian offices, the aforementioned State Department Office of Historian, the military’s own historical offices (which includes all branches…)

Some of it is duped so maybe there is a way of avoiding having extra people here and there but not to the extent you so blithely assume it will be doable.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

You’ve never worked in a corporation before? Protip: Shit like that happens.

I have worked for massive corporations before…good lord can you say tedious make work?

Pecunium
8 years ago

Brandon: Also, government often spends far more than it needs to for supplies for those products because the person overseeing it doesn’t really care as much as they should about those taxpayers funds as you know,…the actual taxpayer.

So wait, you think the gov’t employees don’t pay taxes? Or is that getting a gov’t paycheck suddenly makes one not care about the work one does?

I look at the pay scale for a CEO, and I wonder how much s/he cares about the product being sold, as opposed to what can be done to manipulate the stock price to get more out of the people who invested in the company when they exercise their stock options, buy a new jet (on the company dime, that is coming out of stockholder dividends, and employee raises/benefits, and infrastructure, and think that it’s great they are so much more concerned about spending their budget wisely, because they have to answer to the stockholders.

And I look at the ways in which they remove money from my pocket, by moving it offshore, so that it’s not available to for salaries to employees, or to improve the production equipment, and it’s exempted from taxes (which the go v’t employee isn’t) and I am so convinced when you say that private business gives me more bang for the buck than the Gov’t.

Pecunium
8 years ago

PFKAE: Don’t forget that digitizing isn’t a, “once and done” job. Things which were converted to 8″ floppies need to be moved to 3.25″ floppies, need to be moved to CDs, need to be moved to something else.

Someone also has to check for decay. MIT and CalTech have huge projects in recovering data before it decays.

So ‘d guess that even if it were all digitized (and everyone knew how to work the search engines) the people who are presently face to face librarians would become archivists, and the budget would be the same.

That, or the digital copies would degrade until they were useless, and we’d better hope teh paper was well stored.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

Yep, simply sticking them online is not going to solve the problem because that stuff has to be stored in databanks somewhere and creating redundancy so if the first databanks are destroyed by accident, operations run smoothly.

At least we have all those old mines in PA to use.

katz
8 years ago

Good lord, I come home and we’re talking about my day job.