June 7, 200917 yr In reality no government has ever done it's job completely. Maybe the government should run industry if the people cannot do it correctly? I don't know it's just a thought. What is the non-arbitrary way to determine how business should be run "correctly"? No one person/group of people knows the most effective way to allocate economic resources, which is why ownership of said resources should be spread out as much as possible, so that each individual can manage their small pile of resources.
June 7, 200917 yr What is the non-arbitrary way to determine how business should be run "correctly"? No one person/group of people knows the most effective way to allocate economic resources, which is why ownership of said resources should be spread out as much as possible, so that each individual can manage their small pile of resources. But in our country, they are not spread out. "The Big Three" - how many start up auto companies in the US are you familiar with. The wealth in this country is concentrated in the hands of the few.
June 7, 200917 yr But in our country, they are not spread out. "The Big Three" - how many start up auto companies in the US are you familiar with. The wealth in this country is concentrated in the hands of the few. That's just one industry. Let's theoretically say that 1% of the population controls 50% of the wealth. That seems like "concentrated in the hands of the few" but the reality is that is 3 million people. That seems spread out to me, at least more so than government ownership would be.
June 8, 200917 yr Those who only take assistance when needed, those who want real freedom that so many have died for, those who WANT to make it on their own........those that try to live within their means, those that do not want a nanny state.........those who see Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, and Obama for what they are................... I am one Vietnam era veteran that thinks this post is dead on.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.