or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by foregoneconclusion

  What other choices are there besides feudalism? Tribalism? That's really just an early stage of feudalism. The history of mankind has proven that over and over.
  Another fundamental fact that is that you can't eliminate "The State" by eliminating popular vote. You just usher in a non-democratic form of "The State".
  Please identify the "fallacy". Is it a "fallacy" that the founding fathers rejected monarchy and feudalism? Or is it a "fallacy" that non-democratic governments in human history tend to be feudal?  
  The founding fathers absolutely rejected monarchy, i.e. feudalism, as the choice for governing the country. If you reject the idea of rule by majority, then you're backsliding into the feudal mindset, where "individual choice" quickly transforms into "individual rule".
  Ah, another libertarian that is uncomfortable with the idea of democratic rule by majority. 
  The overall level of taxation in the U.S. relative to GDP is at a historic low point, not a historic high. Therefore, the claim that taxes are dragging the economy down are not based in reality. If anything, the U.S. should have proven the theory that low taxes equals a robust economy...and it obviously didn't. Also, European countries like Spain and Ireland were set up exactly the way conservatives in the U.S. claim is preventative to financial difficulty: pro-business...
  You seem to be forgetting that the current high unemployment rate is primarily due to the mass layoffs that occurred as the result of the housing market crash and financial meltdown in 2007-2009. You can't claim that someone who was laid off as the result of an economic recession is "unemployable".
Generally speaking, companies move jobs overseas to increase profit margin, not because they can't afford to pay American workers. Retail prices for products rarely have any close connection to the cost of labor involved. Just think about the markup for products like clothing and shoes...the prices are nowhere near to the actual cost of materials and labor.
  There's nothing wrong with an individual jury member having an opinion about the evidence that convinces other jury members. That's a standard part of jury deliberations. After all, didn't the lawyers on both sides primarily focus on swaying the jury towards their own personal interpretation of the evidence? Samsung's interpretation of prior art in this case is obviously not going to be the same as Apple's. 
So surprising that all the "competiton is good" posts on this site disappear when Apple launches a new product to compete with Google, not vice versa...
New Posts  All Forums: