• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which Economic Evil is Worse?

Which Economic Evil is Worse?

  • Total voters
    37
Free trade the worst evil- Economic warfare! The fight is on to save America from with in!
 
rathi said:
Except the government is the one giving the money away, not benefiting from it. The welfare recipients are fairly weak. Corporations and unions have both considerable power and the ability to use that power to enrich themselves. I still wouldn't use the term evil, as I am judging based on who causes the most damage not on moral intent.



True, and unions sometimes can cause more harm than corporations. However, for the most part guns can cause more destruction than knives and corporations can cause more harm than unions.
Click to expand...

politiicans get power by being elected to office so by giving OUR money away they gain power. Look at the wealth Bill Clinton and Obama have amassed from being president. Or Al Gore Sr-who used to brag about being a poor country teacher
 
digsbe said:
The unions. They are thugs who try to suck power and money away in the name of "standing up for the working class." They care about power, not about workers and the economy. Look at the American Auto Worker's Union. They are destroying America's Auto companies and refusing to compromise on benefits and pay (as it is, their pay and benefits is crazy). Also, look at the New Jersey teachers union, during economic times they refuse to take a temporary pay freeze and give around 1% of their salary to their benefits. Unions are the greatest economic evil among the 3.
Click to expand...

I am not a big fan of unions however at least in the case of the auto companies, executives at the corporations as responsible for the pay and benefits that the unions are receiving. They made bad decisions contingent on continued company growth that didn't happen. instead of standing up to the unions they caved. I have a hard time feeling sorry for them.
 
rathi said:
Corporations are the worst, not because they are actually more evil, but simply because they have more power and can cause more damage. Sort of like how a violent sociopath with a gun is worse than a violent sociopath with a knife.
Click to expand...

You think that corporations have more power than the government?
 
Phoenix said:
You think that corporations have more power than the government?
Click to expand...

I think some people trust the government with as much faith as they hate corporations. usually those who don't have investments or corporate jobs and envy those who do and want the government "to get even" for them.
 
TurtleDude said:
I think some people trust the government with as much faith as they hate corporations. usually those who don't have investments or corporate jobs and envy those who do and want the government "to get even" for them.
Click to expand...

Do you think that corporations can be detrimental to the growth of small businesses? My father owns a local electrical contracting company, earns on avg. $300,000 per year, has not invested a dime in the stock market, and obviously does not have a corporate job, yet he harbors a great deal of anamocity toward Corporate America. His views stem from his own experiences with them, mainly, Lockheed-Martin, Johnson Controls, and Northrop Grummond, all of which have done a great deal (at least in our geographic area) to "lock out" competition by smaller contractors. Do you believe that government should not have the capacity to "level the playing field" for smaller businesses in some instances?
 
FluffyNinja said:
Do you think that corporations can be detrimental to the growth of small businesses? My father owns a local electrical contracting company, earns on avg. $300,000 per year, has not invested a dime in the stock market, and obviously does not have a corporate job, yet he harbors a great deal of anamocity toward Corporate America. His views stem from his own experiences with them, mainly, Lockheed-Martin, Johnson Controls, and Northrop Grummond, all of which have done a great deal (at least in our geographic area) to "lock out" competition by smaller contractors. Do you believe that government should not have the capacity to "level the playing field" for smaller businesses in some instances?
Click to expand...

yeah the populist angle. I think the government should be limited to what powers were given it in the US constitution. leveling the playing field tends to drop it way down for everyone

in the long run economies of scale favor bigger corporations or bigger law firms etc. its nature. and while it might cause some evil, its not nearly as evil as people claiming they want to make things fair as a ploy to use the government to punish some and reward themselves.
 
TurtleDude said:
yeah the populist angle. I think the government should be limited to what powers were given it in the US constitution. leveling the playing field tends to drop it way down for everyone

in the long run economies of scale favor bigger corporations or bigger law firms etc. its nature. and while it might cause some evil, its not nearly as evil as people claiming they want to make things fair as a ploy to use the government to punish some and reward themselves.
Click to expand...

Would you, then, disagree with Theodore Roosevelt's approach to dealing with corporations? Roosevelt believed (witnessed) that many corporations, if left to grow/expand unchecked often worked to undermine the overall growth of business in America. in an optimal scenario (all things being equal sort of set-up) the markets would set their own limits on production by major corporations, however: in today's world (the GLOBAL economy) I believe, as did Roosevelt, that corporations often make decisions which supercede the demand curves of the strictly American markets. You must not forget, our corporations no longer operate in a "closed economy" and the "little guy" still has to be protected. Corporations, for the most part, still have the capital, to just "pick up" and move their assets into another market, the "little guys" don't always have that option.
 
FluffyNinja said:
Would you, then, disagree with Theodore Roosevelt's approach to dealing with corporations? Roosevelt believed (witnessed) that many corporations, if left to grow/expand unchecked often worked to undermine the overall growth of business in America. in an optimal scenario (all things being equal sort of set-up) the markets would set their own limits on production by major corporations, however: in today's world (the GLOBAL economy) I believe, as did Roosevelt, that corporations often make decisions which supercede the demand curves of the strictly American markets. You must not forget, our corporations no longer operate in a "closed economy" and the "little guy" still has to be protected. Corporations, for the most part, still have the capital, to just "pick up" and move their assets into another market, the "little guys" don't always have that option.
Click to expand...
TR was pandering for votes
 
TurtleDude said:
TR was pandering for votes
Click to expand...

No, he honestly wanted to keep corporations in check, because he saw what they could do when they were unregulated. For example, his inaugural speech, after taking over for Mckinley, was to deliver a speech against corporations.
 
Last edited:
repeter said:
No, he honestly wanted to keep corporations in check, because he saw what they could do when they were unregulated. For example, his inaugural speech, after taking over for Mckinley, was to deliver a speech against corporations.
Click to expand...

with politicians its hard to tell what motivates them-a desire to do good or a desire to do something that alot of voters think is good.
 
TurtleDude said:
with politicians its hard to tell what motivates them-a desire to do good or a desire to do something that alot of voters think is good.
Click to expand...

With Theodore Roosevelt, who was thrust into the Presidency, I think most people would agree with the former. Now, there really isn't much doubt politicians adhere to the latter, but thats another issue.
 
They are all equally bad.
 
repeter said:
With Theodore Roosevelt, who was thrust into the Presidency, I think most people would agree with the former. Now, there really isn't much doubt politicians adhere to the latter, but thats another issue.
Click to expand...

have you ever seen two female mantises placed in a jar? well I sort of see TR and corporations the same way. those who have a large amount of power tend to attack other holders of much power
 
TurtleDude said:
TR was pandering for votes
Click to expand...

Roosevelt appointed a Secretary of Commerce and Industries the SAME year that he became President. Also, that same year (1901) he began pushing Congress to create a Bureau of Commerce and Labor as well as a Bureau of corporations - although neither were approved until 1903. 1901 was not an election year, I do not feel that TR was "pandering for votes" at this point.
 
TurtleDude said:
have you ever seen two female mantises placed in a jar? well I sort of see TR and corporations the same way. those who have a large amount of power tend to attack other holders of much power
Click to expand...

Thats a real pessimistic view of one of our most memorable, and beloved presidents.
 
repeter said:
Thats a real pessimistic view of one of our most memorable, and beloved presidents.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't tend to be much into worshipping politicians and TR, while a brave man set some precedents that continue to screw this country up to this day-like causing the election of the horrid Woodrow Wilson. But as presidents go he was one of the better ones. Any man who likes to hunt I can appreciate
 
TurtleDude said:
Yeah, I don't tend to be much into worshipping politicians and TR, while a brave man set some precedents that continue to screw this country up to this day-like causing the election of the horrid Woodrow Wilson. But as presidents go he was one of the better ones. Any man who likes to hunt I can appreciate
Click to expand...

Fair enough I suppose
 
The Unions consist of only 1 out of 8 workers, enough to do some damage, and have enough purchasing power to rent a congressman or 2.
The Elite Corporate are a lot smaller number, but have tons of money and loads of power, and find it easy to buy a congressman or 2.
The Welfare class, very little money, no power except their votes, and they don't vote in an organized manner.

So, IMO, the elite corporate types on Wall Street who think what they do is "good" for America.
But the OP left out a 4th category, the stupid who vote according to the voices in their heads, voices that were put there by political pundits...
 
Of all those, corporate powers are the worst because they are sucking up all the money into their coffers, thus reducing the spending power of the lower classes; and then they throw their weight around with our government representatives too.
 
Orion said:
Of all those, corporate powers are the worst because they are sucking up all the money into their coffers, thus reducing the spending power of the lower classes; and then they throw their weight around with our government representatives too.
Click to expand...

Are you speaking in general or are you implying that corporations never reinvest their profits into expanding businesses which thus translates into expanded hiring and more consumer choice? Just wondering.
 
FluffyNinja said:
Are you speaking in general or are you implying that corporations never reinvest their profits into expanding businesses which thus translates into expanded hiring and more consumer choice? Just wondering.
Click to expand...

If supply is not balanced with demand, than it does no good.
 
megaprogman said:
If supply is not balanced with demand, than it does no good.
Click to expand...
I only asked be cause you posted that corporations "suck up ALL the money into their coffers." I was wondeing if you actually believed that?
And BTW.....when is supply EVER perfectly balanced with demand in the real world?
 
Wow ... look at all the anti-poor posters on here.

I feel sick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom