This is neoliberalism

[BotanyBoy]

Typo on my part -- I meant to type "corporationism." Call it that or corporatocracy, not corporatism, the latter name leads to confusion with the fascist system and is based on an entirely different meaning of the word "corporation."

If the people weren't organized and supportive along such lines, so staunchly tribal, I might agree with you on that corporatocracy part.

But they don't, we aren't quite there yet....still corporatism.

And it's not fascist, it's just good ol' socialist.

And at what point did the EPA develop that role?

Long ass time ago, since at least the late 70's.

I'm sure it didn't have it at the beginning.

Didn't take very long either.

And how do you know anything the EPA does is in service to a corporate-goon-squad agenda?

They don't care and cover for environmental damage when it's ubercorp doing it.

Blatantly do damage control for big oil, big ag.

Ubercorp executives fill the ranks of these agencies.

Even if it produces such effects, couldn't those be incidental and unintended by-products of a sincere effort at environmental protection?

Not when they have a better record of those effects than they do of protecting the environment.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Not when they have a better record of those effects than they do of protecting the environment.

And how do you know that is the case?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Do you see what he's doing and the reason that I pretty much don't respond to you any more?


He's cherry picking comments to get away from the subject in order to make you the subject.

 

[KingOrfeo]

If the people weren't organized and supportive along such lines, so staunchly tribal, I might agree with you on that corporatocracy part.

But they don't, we aren't quite there yet....still corporatism.

And it's not fascist, it's just good ol' socialist.

Our economic system has its flaws, but it bears no resemblance to that of Mussolini's Italy. Perhaps it would be better if it did -- or perhaps not; not even Mussolini could make the trains run on time. But the notion that all players in the economy, including both management and labor, organized by sector into corporate interest groups, should play a public role in shaping economic policy is not obviously ill-conceived.

 

[BotanyBoy]

And how do you know that is the case?

Because decades of perfect wins against family farms and small businesses by companies from Wal-Mart to Monsanto ONLY happen because of EPA regulations. FDA, USDA and all the other ABCA's.

Meanwhile megacorp gets to pollute all the fuck it wants and only ever gets a slap on the wrist when it's a big enough of a fuck up to cause a stink in the mainstream media.

Our economic system has its flaws, but it bears no resemblance to that of Mussolini's Italy.

I never said it did or that we in the USA were fascist.

But the notion that all players in the economy, including both management and labor, organized by sector into corporate interest groups, should play a public role in shaping economic policy is not obviously ill-conceived.

Didn't say it was.

I just said it wasn't neoliberalism, liberalism, libertarian or even capitalist.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Didn't say it was.

I just said it wasn't neoliberalism, liberalism, libertarian or even capitalist.

No, it is corporatism, and it is not what we have here.

 

[BotanyBoy]

No, it is corporatism,

Another flavor of socialism.

and it is not what we have here.

How do you figure?

 

[KingOrfeo]

How do you figure?

But the notion that all players in the economy, including both management and labor, organized by sector into corporate interest groups, should play a public role in shaping economic policy . . .

That's corporatism. How much of that do you see happening here? Labor has almost no power any more, and management's political influence is not applied in public.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Now, of course, today's global economy is very different from what it was in 1973, and the policies described above might not be entirely to blame for the dismal results, but obviously they haven't helped matters any. Neoliberalism or conservative economics or whatever you call it is a manifest failure. It accomplishes nothing besides its sole intended purpose, which is to make the rich richer, and screws everybody else. Isn't it time all of us, including conservatives and RWs, acknowledged that and looked for something better?

Never mind about the name; what Teixeira describes is at any rate significantly more economic-libertarian than the Keynesian economic policies that preceded it. Can we all agree it doesn't work (for anyone but the rich and the affluent)? And, can we all agree that doubling down and applying economic policies even more libertarian (which is what you always seem to want) would work even worse?

No one but Bot has addressed this. Does anyone care to?

 

[BotanyBoy]

How much of that do you see happening here?

It's all over the place...special interest groups of various types all over run the USA at every level.

Labor has almost no power any more,

Bullshit.

And even if that were true it still doesn't make it not corporatism. Nothing about corporatism says every special interest group gets an equal share in power or wealth.

and management's political influence is not applied in public.

LOL that's funny....

No one but Bot has addressed this. Does anyone care to?

Why? I've totally fucking wrecked your assertion that we live in a libertarian economy managed by a neoliberal government, it's demonstrable bullshit.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Why? I've totally fucking wrecked your assertion that we live in a libertarian economy managed by a neoliberal government, it's demonstrable bullshit.

It isn't, and an any case I meant the assertion that neoliberalism or conservative economics or whatever you call what we have now and since the 1980s is a failure that benefits nobody but the rich and affluent. Does anyone care to respond to that?

 

[KingOrfeo]

Bullshit.

Only 11% of the American workforce is unionized, only 7% if you leave out public employees. (Those figures are from Teixeira's book.)

Nothing about corporatism says every special interest group gets an equal share in power or wealth.

No, but it does say every interest group gets a real say. Labor doesn't any more.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It isn't, and an any case I meant the assertion that neoliberalism or conservative economics or whatever you call what we have now and since the 1980s is a failure that benefits nobody but the rich and affluent. Does anyone care to respond to that?

We have not moved right economically...we have moved left with more government control, more bureaucracy, more regulation and more policing.

Your basic premise that we have deregulated and that the economy is more free, is total, verifiable bullshit.

Only 11% of the American workforce is unionized, only 7% if you leave out public employees. (Those figures are from Teixeira's book.)

Irrelevant.

No, but it does say every interest group gets a real say.

No, it doesn't.

It doesn't say anything about everyone getting a real/equal say or otherwise.....it just says we all clan up with our special interest and play for our teams.

And we do...you love the 1%!!! You love them fucking the working class I've seen you say as much KO.

But only as long as it's your team who's doing the fucking......if it's your team then you're ok with it. Just like most people.

Labor doesn't any more.

Bullshit, some labor does, so much so they are or become a mafia, and organized crime ring.

Some don't...some at higher levels than others.

Doesn't change the fact that we aren't neoliberals, liberals, libertarian or capitalist.

We're corporatist, through and through....shit if you're not a corporation, organization, foundation, PAC, combine or something you're fucking up and probably poor as fuck.

Trying to be a real person in the USA? LOL stupid....that's how you get fucked.

We might be already but imo still early at best, transitioning to a corporatocracy. And most people support it.

 

[KingOrfeo]

We have not moved right economically...we have moved left with more government control, more bureaucracy, more regulation and more policing.

Your basic premise that we have deregulated and that the economy is more free, is total, verifiable bullshit.

Moving right economically is what Teixeira describes in the OP, and everything he says really happened.

Irrelevant.

How could the level of unionization be irrelevant to the question of labor power? Labor has no other means to wield any.

No, it doesn't.

It doesn't say anything about everyone getting a real/equal say or otherwise.....it just says we all clan up with our special interest and play for out teams.

Corporatism, also known as corporativism,[1] is the sociopolitical organization of a society by major interest groups, known as corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labour, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of their common interests.[2] It is theoretically based on the interpretation of a community as an organic body.[3] The term corporatism is based on the Latin root word "corpus" (plural – "corpora") meaning "body".[4]

<snip>

Fascism's theory of economic corporatism involved management of sectors of the economy by government- or privately- controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would, theoretically, represent its professional concerns, especially by negotiation of labour contracts and the like. This method, it was theorized, could result in harmony amongst social classes.[31] Authors have noted, however, that de facto economic corporatism was also used to reduce opposition and reward political loyalty.[32]

In Italy from 1922 until 1943, corporatism became influential amongst Italian nationalists led by Benito Mussolini. The Charter of Carnaro gained much popularity as the prototype of a "corporative state", having displayed much within its tenets as a guild system combining the concepts of autonomy and authority in a special synthesis.[33] Alfredo Rocco spoke of a corporative state and declared corporatist ideology in detail. Rocco would later become a member of the Italian Fascist regime Fascismo.[34]

Italian Fascism involved a corporatist political system in which the economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level.[35] This non-elected form of state officializing of every interest into the state was professed to reduce the marginalization of singular interests (as would allegedly happen by the unilateral end condition inherent in the democratic voting process). Corporatism would instead better recognize or "incorporate" every divergent interest into the state organically, according to its supporters, thus being the inspiration for their use of the term totalitarian, perceivable to them as not meaning a coercive system but described distinctly as without coercion in the 1932 Doctrine of Fascism as thus:

Which means nothing unless every group gets a say.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Moving right economically is what Teixeira describes in the OP, and everything he says really happened.

So once again explain to me what is libertarian/liberal/right about increased government regulation, enforcement and bureaucracy? Because that's what has really happened.

How could the level of unionization be irrelevant to the question of labor power? Labor has no other means to wield any.

Because unionization is not the measure of labor power.

Bullshit, they have lawyers and the law.

What the fuck do I need a union for? Let corporation X do some fucked up shit, I'll put it on youtube and own those mother fuckers souls, no union needed.

Which means nothing unless every group gets a say.

That's just made up fantasy rules .....pull your fingers out of your ears like an adult for once.

Not every group gets the same say, and labor gets their say.

Some places they run things....kiddy fucking teachers drawing pay and benefits for YEARS and YEARS after they get out of prison for being kiddy fuckers.

But you're going to sit here and tell me labor doesn't have a voice? LOL get tha' fuck oudda heaaaa!!!!

 

[KingOrfeo]

Because unionization is not the measure of labor power.

Bullshit, they have lawyers and the law.

Workers can use lawyers to enforce OSHA regs, but not to win the things unions strike for -- higher pay, better working conditions, benefits, job security.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Workers can use lawyers to enforce OSHA regs, but not to win the things unions strike for -- higher pay, better working conditions, benefits, job security.

Not just OSHA, but EO, discrimination laws, benefits now, all sorts of shit....

Higher pay?Benefits?

Labor is already hugely overpriced here by force of law.

Better working conditions? LOL They are already at 11 bro...they don't get better. We got all the safety shit, all of it and then some, plus coffee/smoke/jerk off breaks, paid leave all sorts of fuckin' shit.

Job security? Isn't a right or something anyone can guarantee, not even the government can do that. The best job security anyone has is to do a good ass job and support the right thug in whatever legislature is pimping their industry/market out.

That's it. If you have a good product/company that people like, and the fucking gubbmint doesn't shut you down? You have job security.

 

[LadyVer]

Neo-liberalism: conservative bullshit

 

[BotanyBoy]

Neo-liberalism: conservative bullshit

Actually it's liberal bullshit.

You're just a socialist who doesn't care to note the distinction because it would shit all over your pretend 'liberalism'.....that is anything but liberal.

 

[LadyVer]

You're still on ig.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You're still on ig.

Then you're still a cowardly little bitch like I always thought you were.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

And THIS!

Is more proof that Progressive Liberalism is a true mental disorder:


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/she...e-to-deny-white-men-the-franchise_a_22036640/

 

[BotanyBoy]

Is more proof that Progressive Liberalism is a true mental disorder:


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/she...e-to-deny-white-men-the-franchise_a_22036640/

Another fine Huff Post article by a completely racist and sexist psychopath from the "progressive/justice" left.

 

[LadyVer]

Then you're still a cowardly little bitch like I always thought you were.

Poor little snowflake. Sad! Seriously, you aren't worth the time to respond to as your current comment shows. Sad!

 

[BotanyBoy]

Poor little snowflake. Sad! Seriously, you aren't worth the time to respond to as your current comment shows. Sad!

Yet here you are responding.

To something you allegedly have on ignore and isn't worth your time.

Proving you're a liar, and then you tried to be all smug about it.

THAT, is sad.

LOL, you belong in Texas.