If a child makes a decision on his or her feelings the first day they ever attend school (or even throughout thier school life) and the question is "do I want to go to school" the answer will be "no" even if that activity is good for them i.e. going to school to get an education. It's why we raise our kids to do stuff that doesn't feel immediately good so they can have a better life in the long run. If the evidence says one thing but another way feels better for whatever non-factual reason, we teach our kids to follow the evidence. Some kids don't get that sort of help and spend thier lives lying and using thier feelings to make decision especially if being popular amongst certain people is part of the decision making process (likethe conservative male host on Morning Joe who seems to think he's a liberal, weird!) All liberal know that only conservatives make decisions with thier feelings irrespective of the facts if that feels better. It's called "truthiness"...
How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? This is a case of exclusion. Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving? This is a case of inequality. Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.
In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.
POPE FRANCIS’S CHALLENGE TO GLOBAL CAPITALISM A week after Pope Francis released his first papal exhortation, the innocuously named “Joy of the Gospel,” it is still causing ruptures. Rush Limbaugh dismissed it as “pure Marxism coming out of the mouth of the Pope.” At least one Roman Catholic group demanded that Limbaughapologize and retract his remarks, but that seems unlikely. And meanwhile, some conservative economic commentators, while stopping short of echoing Limbaugh’s words, have accused the Pope of misrepresenting global capitalism, and ignoring its role in wealth creation.
Notice at 1:27 into the video the Fox News anchor calls Health Insurance "Free Health Care"... either they are so clueless they don't know what insurance is or they are lying to create hysteria which can ONLY work if thier audience ONLY watches them... and if they are lying then they are doing thier viewers a great disservice and if they ever find out there will be hell to pay.
Note: If they are talking about the Medicaid increase to help the poorest of families... I'm just speechless. And they call themselves Christian!
It's obvious from the above video that the GOP and Fox News don't care about America or Americans or American Families... just attacking Obama... LOSERS.
Note: BTW, notice how the GOP is using 'fine words' to manipulate people while doing the opposite (as in the below video)... so they are a real life Despotism/Tyranny/Fascist channel and should be observed to understand how these sort of groups are formed (it also indicates that the House is a despotic branch of Government - will explain in more detail later)
At 2 mins: Point that the laws don;t make better people is taken. That said bad people exist and basic law system that we have has existed since Hummarabi down through the Jews and Christians. A system that isn't working need to be fixed simply removing it altogether would get the same results as what Moses got after he came down from the mountains the first time. One fix is to have a more constitutionally aligned division between Federal and State laws. Departments which already exist at a State level aren't needed at a Federal level and leads to less people involved in making important decisions... also, the levels of corruption and bad ideas that can be enforced on the American people has gotten to such ludicrous amounts that for the safety of future generations it just makes sense to remove the 5 department that Ron Paul set up to have removed in his plan.
In Adam Smith's theory of the 'invisible hand of the market' what he said was that the market would work perfectly given the state of the variables. One important factor is that his theory was for mass-production using a model of the division of labor. A computer has amalgamated labor together as have other infrastructure developments (The Post Office is in the Constitution but 'what do we do now that we have email?', type of challenges will keep surfacing)so with division of labor being replaced by multi-tasking a key component of his wealth of nations theory has been put on its head.
A market will always lead to an equilibrium of some sort and can thus be seen as 'free' to some while restrictive to others depending on who loses and who wins and how fair the situation was to begin with: What the means is if you have a shortage and people are scrambling for something and giving away family heirlooms for bread (such as in the past in some communist eras) the market has found the right balance for the resources available. The market would find a similar solution in a famine or drought. If the State encourages corporations to gain monopoly power then removing Government and laws would just make it easier for such monopolies to crush entry into the market for any new competition. Where we are now, with corporations controlling Government in rather indirect but obvious ways, to remove all laws would lead to a type of robber baron capitalist system that existed at the time of the feudal lords of the middle ages of Europe. Last solution to this was conscripting for a world war I think the best option forward is to work on building new infrastructure, education and skills for growth using methods to stimulate businesses so the private sector can come up with ideas while working on removing all corporate welfare and gettinglobbyists and corporations out of Washington and returning the Government of "we the people" back to we the people.
Note: A free market is not free if laws don't exist to protect people from keeping thier property as they wish to. The Constitution DOES provide a system of rules, regulations and laws which provide the basic structure of any market within the United States of America. That said there are good laws & regulations and bad laws and regulations... and some areas the Federal Government is not allowed to be involved in constitutionally.
Thoughts: Ron Paul believes in 'free markets' yet there are strong views on regulations that protect property - i.e. this isn't the pure market economy as envisioned in the economic models of perfect competition, market economy and Laissez-Faire Capitalism. Ron Paul has also mentioned, in other interviews, that there would need to be a transition. In other words, a model has to be discussed and implemented to help the country move to the way the constitution originally envisioned it 'according to Ron Paul'. Also note that the constitution provides for 3 branches of government and all the States with the freedom to move around in its own internal regulatory structure would create a unique market structure that would approach the ideas of free markets as long as the rest of the economic structures remain the same (i.e. across the world). Plus, avoiding empire/nation building seems to be written into the constitution, and that would save allot of money.
Quote of Naom Chomsky: "Globalization is the result of powerful governments, especially that of the United States, pushing trade deals and other accords down the throats of the world’s people to make it easier for corporations and the wealthy to dominate the economies of nations around the world without having obligations to the peoples of those nations." -- Profit over People: Neoliberalism and the Global Order
3. On top of that, Megyn Kelly decides to make an issue out of race on Christmas. I guess they can't have Santa for Christians in China cause they are Chinese? Talk about making a holiday of inclusion and good cheer one of exclusion and bad cheer. Geez. The Daily Show covers this black-hearted weirdness in detail: