I'm no expert, but big government seems like a natural progression to counter the influence of big businesses. Without anyone challenging big businesses, it seems like the perfect recipe for a Dystopian society. If we break up the businesses, we may have small government again ?
The reality is that big government was most of the time created by big business. Even the famous trust-buster Theodore Roosevelt wouldn't dare take on JP Morgan and the money trust, and every president since that time period has been supported by the banking and corporate class. There are some government programs such as FDR's New Deal and a lot of Ralph Nader's consumer protection legislation (a lot of which was gutted by Ronald Reagan) that are helpful counters to reckless exploitation by corporate coalitions. But almost none today. Big government exists almost totally today to serve the interests of extremely wealthy people. Chris Hedges described Obamacare as something which allow unemployed people to put their unemployed children on their non-existent healthcare plans. Even today, people are not signing up, because it was crafted primarily by health insurance companies and the costs still remain prohibitive. Just one example of so-called "big goverment", which is in reality a perverted form of government, crafted by cultures of people who have totally removed from their hierarchies anybody with a conscience. I wonder what the FBI file on Chomsky looks like.
I agree with Qwerty. What you say would indeed make sense but big government is essentially an arm of big business. As much as it represents people it is the big business counterweight you describe. But as much as it represents corporations, which I would argue it represents more, it is simply a tool to create the environment to achieve their goals at the expense of the general public. Even to the extent that government represent people it is only so far as the constraints of big business interests allow. The New Deal was the last time it went beyond the interests of business into the peoples and political history since has been the undermining and regression of the New Deal and its eradicating its origin and ethos. You can see McCarthyism and the destruction of labor unions as examples of this trend. But yes if we break up the big businesses it is possible that smaller government could be achieved. I for one, however, can not imagine our greatest challenges of climate change and habitat destruction being overcome without the influence of larger government and some kind of planning and goal system being in place to create new incentive structures and so on to overcome these challenges.
Sometimes, I watch PragueU youtube videos. Some very flaw and bad arguement are made, but still there are some many likes. I was able to tell how those people are fooled by those propaganda. 80%of the time the arguement is that the government doesn't want you to work hard.
Psh they reference facts and state their case, anyone expressing a dissenting opinion is called propaganda from the other side nowadays, they dont actively deceive people like the outright liars on the left, they do argue logically, but they do make some weak arguments, particularly ones surrounding christianity. But you can't right off pragerU altogether sorry but they provide a lot more information than left wing media outlets which nowadays just entail constant ad hominems against the right, literally makes me feel like i am losing brain cells watching it. You may disagree with it but propaganda? My ass. It is just a right wing channel, by presenting information to persuade an audience in favour of a given proposition makes it propaganda by definition it is pretty easy to fit the criteria. I have not seen a whole deal of refutation of pragerU from a logical basis but just the outright dismissal of it, if you dont agree with anything pragerU says at all you must be completely anti-enlightenment values... have a bit of nuance for gods sake. The people who claim everyone watching pragerU is a racist idiot tend to be liberal racist idiots ironically. All i will say is open your mind up and expand it beyond your liberal indoctrination, and if you see no value in at least some of PragerUs economic analysis, you require an economic education before you can make a sound judgement on said source
The usual defence for corporations is that they compete in a free market, so must deliver value to consumers or be driven out of business. Compare this with Chomsky's assertion that Govt is easier to control than corporations. I imagine Chomsky's answer is that the market is distorted and not free - does he talk about this anywhere, preferably including evidence?
Firelord Azula Well, there are a few if you search for 'chomsky on free markets'. His main points seem to be that the profit-motive is not naturally responsible for 'externalities' (environmental standards for example normally require collective legislation, to avoid a 'race to the bottom') and that some things can't be delivered simply through individual participation in markets e.g. public infrastructure (we can individually purchase a Ford or a Toyota, but we can only collectively purchase a subway.)
Why is it that when I read many of the post to Chomsky's videos that I think of the "Dunning-Kruger Effect"? Whether or not I agree with him, Noam's intellect is astounding, which makes some....
The US needs to unify under a 3rd major party - the Constitutional Direct Democracy Party. Votes on foreign interventions, global organisation and treaty membership, simple bills, department heads, expenditure at state and national levels, open subcontract bids - by the people, for the people. A constitution with individual over group rights to stop petty control freaks. Minarchism, not monarchism or anarchism. Detailed department accounts published monthly for busy-bodies, the media and independent watchdogs to peruse.
Chomsky is right about saying it's our fault. I have always seen this a problem of the entire species. Although that is true, I can't blame people who want to live out their days outside of this core hub of super corporate run states. If most of the intelligent people have a major exodus from the U.S, it'll only only help speed up the dissolving from within, and potentially bring down or massively reform the Idiocracy the majority has solely desired the country to become.
People, hopefully, are not lost causes. causes, can be the element of humor. Even though, I think of we (USA) as greatly generous and kind people. (In fact, the most generous people in the world), do not have to disintegrate each-other by insult, anger or Humor. Maybe, their is away of enforcing the humane causes and make those causes that are absurd, to either side -as I was "saying" ...to reach for the goodness of each-other, from faulty reason's and lost rationale, The way so many people have done for my-self.(Professor Chomsky being my only worth while part of a true academic education.). ...again, perhaps I can try to find that unlikely people, who accidentally support absurd and lost causes do not need or want to be at the end of comic relief. -So I should look for and can see how to reenforce all of our friend's and aquaintence's potential. "Nobody's right if everybody is wrong, for what it's worth.". Please look for the Narrative Promise's, you will find at their greatest depth a sincere calling. I am not suggesting a facisest or any kind of dictatorship society. Thankfully; to always seek problems that need answers is American- and worth every moment to be so.. I don't doubt for a second that we risk too much Love; and too much agreement. Nevertheless; a never ending stream of effort is possible and probable. Good to be vigelent, ALWAYS. This is why I say, with hat in hand, That The United States of America is the world's best chance at Love. The all-ways surprising points that do deserve serious action. Are worth serious consideration and cooperation. Lead to survive, not to win. After all no-one dead soldier has ever won. NOT EVER. There are the dead of valuable life force and the surviving of valueable life force. It has always struck me as being agregiously unfair, that people who have to fight for freedom, and hand it to US -at the cost of their lives, so many millions of times... how terrible it is that they will never experience more Earthly Love and Freedom, while those of US continue to live among these Culture's of death. Yet, maintain the joy of Freedom and worst of all jaded physicalities. These are things I think... because of my deep respect for Professor Chomsky, He knows so many things -we know are thruth's and hopes. His unwillingness to abuse Freedom or exchange it for a lack of dignity. His refusing not to evade the gift of intelligent humon will power ... Never, gives up on pasafisism. Love is of no useful definition if it is not successful for both sides. Pasafisism... The odd thing is, that it is exactly what Professor, Dr. Chomsky has been doing for the last sixty years. He is aware of what he is doing. If you do not like him or agree with him, read 9/11. By the end of his book, how is that steadfast, direction, seemingly, becoming an unwillingness to just sit down and die, by refusing to fight CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY? I think of three people at this moment. My-self signing my draft card as Conscience Objector. And my willingness to fight against CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY at the drop of a hat. Professor Dr. Chomsky a truer pasifist is not known of by my studies. And George Bush Jr. Who "said" to me, in no uncertain terms. JOHN, YOU CAN NOT FIGHT CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY USING CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY. I OWE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE I WILL NEVER BE SBLE TO REPAY. And, sadly never even meet. So do you. I hope we can reach for agreement on this. I am thinking. I know many will not, though anyway I hope you like me.
There are far more members in the working class than the business class. Why depend on their system and succumb to their criticisms of us when we could create our own?
attackfighter I want us both to be able to live healthy, meaningful lives on a clean and sustainable planet, but your irrational fear of other human beings who are no more mentally capable than you and I is not going to get us there.
as ridiculous as some of their political rhetoric is, there's no doubt most people are just hard working nice people. thus the corporations take advantage of this. they turn the conversation into public healthcare = free = immoral and bad / private healthcare = u work hard = good. even though some things like healthcare or education should be guaranteed (especially for a richass nation like america) to ensure fair competition. on the other hand, the atrocities of american healthcare system serve as a warning for all other nations with public healthcare. in these countries, even the right wing cannot privatize healthcare because the citizens have all heard of how terrible the american system is.
+Avi Gindratt To be fair, African-Americans have never occupied the top echelon of culture and society; as long as they've been in the West, they've been abused and demonized. There's no "fall from the top" existential crisis to throw their entire identity into chaos and turn them into a fanatical panicky animal who feels that their rightful place in society has been usurped by traitorous unbelievers.
@@Theomite Very good comment. I don't agree that the working class white person has ever been in the top echelon of society, but they have certainly always enjoyed a position of power over african-americans, artificially put in place. They are for the most part not at all adapted.
@Cockoff Gewgle I wonder which demographic socio-economics disaffects the most? You're ultimately proving Chomsky's point of focusing on the Other, who has more in common with us, than the business elite. Sad
Unless you have an olygopoly, like we have here with internet providers. Also lawsuits only work if you have a nice and smooth judiciary system supported by government.
@@psicologiajoseh are you kidding? Don't you read/notice the news, legal actions, org's, movements, money, influencing and opposing corporations, or for that matter, many other things?
@@nleobold well, I see corporations fairing thousand with complete impunity, in the US and around the world. And there are many more outrageous things we don't even get to know that corporations do (explotation of people from poor countries). On the other hand, I see more regularly government reforms being made simply because a popular movement organized itself and voted out some politicians and voted in different ones in Congress and presidency. So, I thing the facts support this argument: that government, when theres is democracy and people have access to voting, oversight, and participation, can change more easily than corporations.
"Healthcare should determined by need" is almost a contradiction of biology. Need of heatlhcare is lack of health. And i have no idea why would you priviledge defective health over other things. When you subsidize somethin, you get more of it. If you make it easier to survive with obesity, you get more obese people. If you make it iesier to survive terrible disfunctions, you get more of terrible disfunctions. You can't get over this. Anyway, it is not only wealth that determines the acces, but also power in general (that includes many dimensions of ability to assert yourself and your family). That's now how things should be. That's just description. Btw most parasites live both at the top and the bottom of wealth distribution. The fact that it would end one's own life if he ceased his parasitism doesn't make him not a parasite. So much for the need.
easier to survive with obesity does not mean it is pleasant or desirable to be obese.. most people with obesity do not want to be obese at all whether or not there is universal healthcare or not.
“I’ll start believing in ‘Global Warming’ once I see palm trees in Alaska.” - Sarah Palin, American philosopher.
I'm no expert, but big government seems like a natural progression to counter the influence of big businesses. Without anyone challenging big businesses, it seems like the perfect recipe for a Dystopian society. If we break up the businesses, we may have small government again ?
Interesting thought. Never heard that before.
There is the opposing argument that you cannot have big business without big government.
The reality is that big government was most of the time created by big business. Even the famous trust-buster Theodore Roosevelt wouldn't dare take on JP Morgan and the money trust, and every president since that time period has been supported by the banking and corporate class. There are some government programs such as FDR's New Deal and a lot of Ralph Nader's consumer protection legislation (a lot of which was gutted by Ronald Reagan) that are helpful counters to reckless exploitation by corporate coalitions. But almost none today. Big government exists almost totally today to serve the interests of extremely wealthy people. Chris Hedges described Obamacare as something which allow unemployed people to put their unemployed children on their non-existent healthcare plans. Even today, people are not signing up, because it was crafted primarily by health insurance companies and the costs still remain prohibitive. Just one example of so-called "big goverment", which is in reality a perverted form of government, crafted by cultures of people who have totally removed from their hierarchies anybody with a conscience. I wonder what the FBI file on Chomsky looks like.
Spot On.
I agree with Qwerty. What you say would indeed make sense but big government is essentially an arm of big business. As much as it represents people it is the big business counterweight you describe.
But as much as it represents corporations, which I would argue it represents more, it is simply a tool to create the environment to achieve their goals at the expense of the general public.
Even to the extent that government represent people it is only so far as the constraints of big business interests allow.
The New Deal was the last time it went beyond the interests of business into the peoples and political history since has been the undermining and regression of the New Deal and its eradicating its origin and ethos. You can see McCarthyism and the destruction of labor unions as examples of this trend.
But yes if we break up the big businesses it is possible that smaller government could be achieved. I for one, however, can not imagine our greatest challenges of climate change and habitat destruction being overcome without the influence of larger government and some kind of planning and goal system being in place to create new incentive structures and so on to overcome these challenges.
Sometimes, I watch PragueU youtube videos. Some very flaw and bad arguement are made, but still there are some many likes. I was able to tell how those people are fooled by those propaganda. 80%of the time the arguement is that the government doesn't want you to work hard.
explain?
Yes they are utter propaganda
Brain-washed. Are you so pessimism and think people are stupid and easy to manipulate?
***** tell me, what to you is a source that isn't propaganda?
Psh they reference facts and state their case, anyone expressing a dissenting opinion is called propaganda from the other side nowadays, they dont actively deceive people like the outright liars on the left, they do argue logically, but they do make some weak arguments, particularly ones surrounding christianity. But you can't right off pragerU altogether sorry but they provide a lot more information than left wing media outlets which nowadays just entail constant ad hominems against the right, literally makes me feel like i am losing brain cells watching it. You may disagree with it but propaganda? My ass. It is just a right wing channel, by presenting information to persuade an audience in favour of a given proposition makes it propaganda by definition it is pretty easy to fit the criteria. I have not seen a whole deal of refutation of pragerU from a logical basis but just the outright dismissal of it, if you dont agree with anything pragerU says at all you must be completely anti-enlightenment values... have a bit of nuance for gods sake. The people who claim everyone watching pragerU is a racist idiot tend to be liberal racist idiots ironically. All i will say is open your mind up and expand it beyond your liberal indoctrination, and if you see no value in at least some of PragerUs economic analysis, you require an economic education before you can make a sound judgement on said source
The usual defence for corporations is that they compete in a free market, so must deliver value to consumers or be driven out of business. Compare this with Chomsky's assertion that Govt is easier to control than corporations. I imagine Chomsky's answer is that the market is distorted and not free - does he talk about this anywhere, preferably including evidence?
Corporations do not compete in a free market.
I actually would love to hear him talk about this too. Did you find it yet?
Firelord Azula
Well, there are a few if you search for 'chomsky on free markets'. His main points seem to be that the profit-motive is not naturally responsible for 'externalities' (environmental standards for example normally require collective legislation, to avoid a 'race to the bottom') and that some things can't be delivered simply through individual participation in markets e.g. public infrastructure (we can individually purchase a Ford or a Toyota, but we can only collectively purchase a subway.)
Why is it that when I read many of the post to Chomsky's videos that I think of the "Dunning-Kruger Effect"?
Whether or not I agree with him, Noam's intellect is astounding, which makes some....
The US needs to unify under a 3rd major party - the Constitutional Direct Democracy Party. Votes on foreign interventions, global organisation and treaty membership, simple bills, department heads, expenditure at state and national levels, open subcontract bids - by the people, for the people. A constitution with individual over group rights to stop petty control freaks. Minarchism, not monarchism or anarchism. Detailed department accounts published monthly for busy-bodies, the media and independent watchdogs to peruse.
They need a labour party.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 WE!
Chomsky is right about saying it's our fault. I have always seen this a problem of the entire species. Although that is true, I can't blame people who want to live out their days outside of this core hub of super corporate run states.
If most of the intelligent people have a major exodus from the U.S, it'll only only help speed up the dissolving from within, and potentially bring down or massively reform the Idiocracy the majority has solely desired the country to become.
People, hopefully, are not lost causes. causes, can be the element of humor. Even though, I think of we (USA) as greatly generous and kind people. (In fact, the most generous people in the world), do not have to disintegrate each-other by insult, anger or Humor.
Maybe, their is away of enforcing the humane causes and make those causes that are absurd, to either side -as I was "saying"
...to reach for the goodness of each-other, from faulty reason's and lost rationale,
The way so many people have done for my-self.(Professor Chomsky being my only worth while part of a true academic education.). ...again, perhaps I can try to find that unlikely people, who accidentally support absurd and lost causes do not need or want to be at the end of comic relief. -So I should look for and can see how to reenforce all of our friend's and aquaintence's potential.
"Nobody's right if everybody is wrong, for what it's worth.". Please
look for the Narrative Promise's, you will find at their greatest depth a sincere calling.
I am not suggesting a facisest or any kind of dictatorship society.
Thankfully; to always seek problems that need answers is American- and worth every moment to be so.. I don't doubt for a second that we risk too much Love; and too much agreement. Nevertheless; a never ending stream of effort is possible and probable. Good to be vigelent, ALWAYS. This is why I say, with hat in hand,
That The United States of America is the world's best chance at Love.
The all-ways surprising points that do deserve serious action. Are worth serious consideration and cooperation.
Lead to survive, not to win.
After all no-one dead soldier has ever won. NOT EVER.
There are the dead of valuable life force and the surviving of valueable life force. It has always struck me as being agregiously unfair, that people who have to fight for freedom, and hand it to US -at the cost of their lives, so many millions of times... how terrible it is that they will never experience more Earthly Love and Freedom, while those of US continue to live among these Culture's of death. Yet, maintain the joy of Freedom and worst of all jaded physicalities. These are things I think... because of my deep respect for Professor Chomsky, He knows so many things -we know are thruth's and hopes. His unwillingness to abuse Freedom or exchange it for a lack of dignity. His refusing not to evade the gift of intelligent humon will power ... Never, gives up on pasafisism. Love is of no useful definition if it is not successful for both sides. Pasafisism... The odd thing is, that it is exactly what Professor, Dr. Chomsky has been doing for the last sixty years. He is aware of what he is doing. If you do not like him or agree with him, read 9/11. By the end of his book, how is that steadfast, direction, seemingly, becoming an unwillingness to just sit down and die, by refusing to fight CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY?
I think of three people at this moment. My-self signing my draft card as Conscience Objector. And my willingness to fight against CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY at the drop of a hat. Professor Dr. Chomsky a truer pasifist is not known of by my studies. And George Bush Jr. Who "said" to me, in no uncertain terms. JOHN, YOU CAN NOT FIGHT CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY USING CRIMES AGAINST HMANITY.
I OWE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE I WILL NEVER BE SBLE TO REPAY. And, sadly never even meet. So do you. I hope we can reach for agreement on this. I am thinking. I know many will not, though anyway I hope you like me.
So can one trust the business class to work in support of the eventual overthrow of their system? Is there a choice?
There are far more members in the working class than the business class. Why depend on their system and succumb to their criticisms of us when we could create our own?
wish i could like this twice.
it is because the business class is inherently superior to us ... they will assimilate, and therefore destroy us, through genetic engineering
attackfighter
I want us both to be able to live healthy, meaningful lives on a clean and sustainable planet, but your irrational fear of other human beings who are no more mentally capable than you and I is not going to get us there.
The French came up with a good solution.
Guillotines.
ha
as ridiculous as some of their political rhetoric is, there's no doubt most people are just hard working nice people. thus the corporations take advantage of this. they turn the conversation into public healthcare = free = immoral and bad / private healthcare = u work hard = good.
even though some things like healthcare or education should be guaranteed (especially for a richass nation like america) to ensure fair competition.
on the other hand, the atrocities of american healthcare system serve as a warning for all other nations with public healthcare. in these countries, even the right wing cannot privatize healthcare because the citizens have all heard of how terrible the american system is.
wonder what he thinks of obamacare
Black people go through all that and more, and still we don't hate like that. So no, try again.
+Avi Gindratt To be fair, African-Americans have never occupied the top echelon of culture and society; as long as they've been in the West, they've been abused and demonized. There's no "fall from the top" existential crisis to throw their entire identity into chaos and turn them into a fanatical panicky animal who feels that their rightful place in society has been usurped by traitorous unbelievers.
@@Theomite Very good comment. I don't agree that the working class white person has ever been in the top echelon of society, but they have certainly always enjoyed a position of power over african-americans, artificially put in place. They are for the most part not at all adapted.
lol. You may want to check the crime rate.
@Cockoff Gewgle I wonder which demographic socio-economics disaffects the most? You're ultimately proving Chomsky's point of focusing on the Other, who has more in common with us, than the business elite.
Sad
Chomsky is wrong about a lot. Corporations can definitely be influenced by the public, for example by public opinion, boycotts, and lawsuits.
Unless you have an olygopoly, like we have here with internet providers. Also lawsuits only work if you have a nice and smooth judiciary system supported by government.
Yeah, sure, Dr. Leobold. Try organizing employees at Apple or Walmart, or get your buddies together and sue them. Tell me how it goes.
Are you being sarcastic or are you serious? Do you actually believe corporations can be that easily influenced?
@@psicologiajoseh are you kidding? Don't you read/notice the news, legal actions, org's, movements, money, influencing and opposing corporations, or for that matter, many other things?
@@nleobold well, I see corporations fairing thousand with complete impunity, in the US and around the world. And there are many more outrageous things we don't even get to know that corporations do (explotation of people from poor countries).
On the other hand, I see more regularly government reforms being made simply because a popular movement organized itself and voted out some politicians and voted in different ones in Congress and presidency.
So, I thing the facts support this argument: that government, when theres is democracy and people have access to voting, oversight, and participation, can change more easily than corporations.
"Healthcare should determined by need" is almost a contradiction of biology. Need of heatlhcare is lack of health. And i have no idea why would you priviledge defective health over other things. When you subsidize somethin, you get more of it. If you make it easier to survive with obesity, you get more obese people. If you make it iesier to survive terrible disfunctions, you get more of terrible disfunctions. You can't get over this. Anyway, it is not only wealth that determines the acces, but also power in general (that includes many dimensions of ability to assert yourself and your family). That's now how things should be. That's just description.
Btw most parasites live both at the top and the bottom of wealth distribution. The fact that it would end one's own life if he ceased his parasitism doesn't make him not a parasite. So much for the need.
easier to survive with obesity does not mean it is pleasant or desirable to be obese.. most people with obesity do not want to be obese at all whether or not there is universal healthcare or not.
do you understand you're arguing for eugenics?
divide et impera
I agree with this pervert 😂