Democracies and Mutual Respect

okie wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
So you would deny prosperity to a town by insisting they offer the same deal to everybody when they can only afford to offer it to one?

I would not deny anybody anything. Walmart can still come to town, and they probably will. I am just not going to bend over for them.

You're a hard man, Okie. And though I can't agree with you on this one, I love you for it.

I take the view that being free allows people, even a town, to invite whoever they want to come do business there. And if that means they make it attractive for a big business to move in and provide jobs and expand the commercial base, power to them. Then maybe let all the big businesses compete for the spot and let the lowest bidder win. Smile

The reality is though that towns compete for these big businesses, and the business would be nuts not to take the best deal offered. Make it too complicated and the business will go right on down the road leaving the community empty handed. I've seen that happen a lot more times than any issues with corporate welfare.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

You're a hard man, Okie. And though I can't agree with you on this one, I love you for it.

Thanks Foxfyre. I know we agree on many things, so please do not let this bother you. I've read all of your posts, and I agree that government could perhaps use some methods of competition to promote business. I think they are free to do that in the correct manner. For example, I believe Wyoming should be able to not have an income tax if they so desire, which I think they have chosen, and a city should be able to choose to have lower sales tax rates than neighboring cities, and a county should be able to lower all property tax rates to attract business, and so forth. The rub comes in when a county or government entity chooses to waive 2 or 3 years property tax for a large company like Walmart for example, for the sole purpose of attracting Walmart to the area. Meanwhile, you have another small store sitting there doing business for the last 25 years maybe, quietly serving the community and paying their property taxes like clockwork. Along comes Walmart and puts them out of business. That would be fine, except Walmart has an unfair advantage.

One case I ran across was Home Depot asked or demanded property tax breaks to move into a town. The town refused. Home Depot moved in anyway. That is the way it should work. An existing hardware store owned there had been dutifully paying taxes for many years, and fortunately the county and city commissioners refused to be browbeat by Home Depot.

Such practices of playing favoritism to businesses should be illegal.

The discussed practices are bad enough in my opinion, but now towns are going a step further and trying to condemn rundown properties so that other big businesses can move in, big businesses that generate alot more sales tax, property tax, etc. Unless we control government, it will control us. I think we must remember our country is founded on the idea of individual freedom and individual rights, not the will of the majority, or the good of the town, or whatever.

0 Replies

Quote:

One case I ran across was Home Depot asked or demanded property tax breaks to move into a town. The town refused. Home Depot moved in anyway. That is the way it should work. An existing hardware store owned there had been dutifully paying taxes for many years, and fortunately the county and city commissioners refused to be browbeat by Home Depot.

What town was that? It didn't happen that way in Tulsa where Home Depot demanded and received exceptions to the land use rules AND was compensated by the city to the tune of some $200,000 for the demolition of some old railroad tracks. Now all of this was happening about a mile and a half from Best Electric and Hardware, a mom and pop ACE hardware and paint store, which had increased it's sales figures for seventeen, count 'em, seventeen years in a row. Guess what happened to their sales once the poor needy Home Depot opened? Yeah, down some thirty per cent for the next three years.

But this story has a happy ending. Leroy Welborn, or as he likes to call himself, Old Man Best, is not the dumbest guy you've ever met. He trimmed some old inventory, re-configured some pricing and has his staff wait on customers better than anybody down at the orange aircraft hanger. Four lean years later Best was back to where it was before the giant landed.

Oh, and at some point, Leroy appeared before the City Commission to ask a question: since he had purchased and refurbished the old Shakey's Pizza building (damaged and virtually abandoned after tornado damage) and moved his small business to the larger place, he wondered if he would be eligible like his big brother Home Depot for a $200,000 check. The silence was deafening.

Quote:

The discussed practices are bad enough in my opinion, but now towns are going a step further and trying to condemn rundown properties so that other big businesses can move in, big businesses that generate alot more sales tax, property tax, etc. Unless we control government, it will control us. I think we must remember our country is founded on the idea of individual freedom and individual rights, not the will of the majority, or the good of the town, or whatever.

Don't kid yourself that the towns are thinking all this up on their own. It is big business and their lobbyists who are are driving the effort on condemnation and who hope to crush any and all competition from the marketplace. The towns think they are finding ways not to raise property taxes, they are just putting all the little guys out of business to do it.

You're an Okie, right? Why aren't there any dress shops left in Skiatook?

Joe(I worked for 'old Man Best' for ten years)Nation

0 Replies

Okie writes

Quote:

One case I ran across was Home Depot asked or demanded property tax breaks to move into a town. The town refused. Home Depot moved in anyway. That is the way it should work. An existing hardware store owned there had been dutifully paying taxes for many years, and fortunately the county and city commissioners refused to be browbeat by Home Depot.

Such practices of playing favoritism to businesses should be illegal.

The discussed practices are bad enough in my opinion, but now towns are going a step further and trying to condemn rundown properties so that other big businesses can move in, big businesses that generate alot more sales tax, property tax, etc. Unless we control government, it will control us. I think we must remember our country is founded on the idea of individual freedom and

Here I agree with you and Joe Nation. Government should not be helping new business that competes with the business that received no help to get started. The difference between your scenario and mine are things like that Rio Rancho Intel plant. It was going to locate somewhere and it would be competing against nobody in 99% of the places where it could locate. To make it extremely attractive for a business like that to move to town is a win win for everybody including the Mom & Pop businesses.

Where we differ in the 'equal treatment under the law' issue is that probably no small town can afford to make such an offer to more than one or two big businesses. There is only so much land/resources to donate and I, like you, see the emminent domain cases like Kelo vs New London as both unConstitutional and unconscionable. Confiscating other people's property to donate to benefit private business just can't be allowed to happen. I have high hopes that the next such case that winds up at the Supreme Court will nip that sort of thing in the bud. Kelo squeaked by on a 5/4 vote and the makeup of the Court is different now.

So far as Wal-Mart, Home Depot, and the other huge chains go, I also deplore the decimation of the Mom & Pop businesses that generally happens when these move in. It makes the world a lot less personal, personable, and satisfying in many ways. Like Joe's example, I have a friend here in Albuquerque who runs a small office supply business and was really hurt when Office Max, Office Depot, Staples, etc. moved in. He did have to scale back and closed two of his three locations. But he has hung on fairly well by providing special service to his loyal customers.

But then again, in a free market you get ahead by giving people what they want. And people obviously want the better selection and/or lower prices offered by the big warehouse type businesses more than they want the Mom & Pop business in their neighborhoods. When we give the people a choice, we can't wring our hands too much when they choose something different than what we want. And choice is better than no choice if you have to have one or the other.

0 Replies

Oh and Joe, there are a lot of small and quite profitable dress shops in Albuquerque and they do it by offering a unique and quality product unavailable in the bargain outlets like Wal-Mart and K-Mart or even the more 'high class' chains like Sears and Penneys. Many women don't want the cookie cutter approach to fashion and the small shops give them what they do want.

Everybody is scrambling to compete against the internet trade however as on line shopping becomes more and more popular. Those who can't change and diversify with the times aren't going to do too well. There aren't any buggy whip factories left.

0 Replies

Quote:

But then again, in a free market you get ahead by giving people what they want. And people obviously want the better selection and/or lower prices offered by the big warehouse type businesses more than they want the Mom & Pop business in their neighborhoods.

Ask your friend in the office supply business if the difference between his business and a Staples isn't selection and/or price but impressions made by marketing.

I'm in another mom/pop vs Home Depot fight here in New York. (I think they are following me.) When we ask people why they went to the Home Depot three blocks away(it's three blocks away Exclamation

) before they came in to see us. (same location since 1912), in almost every case, it's because of the constant advertising that Home Depot does and does well, but, as one woman said "What I want to do is go to the Home Depot that's in the commercial."

On tv, it's a wonderful, fun experience, in reality it's a trip to a crowded aircraft hanger where it takes you fifty minutes to find what you want and forty minutes to check out.

So what we try to do is give them the experience in the commercial (We've got it or know where you can get it fast.) and have the stuff that New York apartment dwellers need, like the weird little canopy extension for putting a light fixture where an old gas pipe was, the air conditioner brackets and the ten foot section of anti-pigeon spikes. (You haven't seen those in the Home Depot commercials... .) We also stock about 112,000 SKUs of paint, plumbing, hardware and housewares, the regular stuff of life. You should come see it, it's real New York.

So when people talk about the giant down the street, we say "Why bother?
It's right here, bubie. Always has been, always will."

====

Tain't easy though, and Yes, the city of New York assisted the Home Depot Corporation in their move to New York, allowing them to alter an historical building in an historic neighborhood, allows them an apparently ticket-free zone of parking even during rush hour and rushed through several other exceptions to the zoning rules so the giant could squeeze his big feet (trucks) onto 22nd Street for loading/unloading.

Joe( What can you do but shrug and go back to work.)Nation

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Quote:
But then again, in a free market you get ahead by giving people what they want. And people obviously want the better selection and/or lower prices offered by the big warehouse type businesses more than they want the Mom & Pop business in their neighborhoods.

Ask your friend in the office supply business if the difference between his business and a Staples isn't selection and/or price but impressions made by marketing.

I'm in another mom/pop vs Home Depot fight here in New York. (I think they are following me.) When we ask people why they went to the Home Depot three blocks away(it's three blocks away ) before they came in to see us. (same location since 1912), in almost every case, it's because of the constant advertising that Home Depot does and does well, but, as one woman said "What I want to do is go to the Home Depot that's in the commercial."

On tv, it's a wonderful, fun experience, in reality it's a trip to a crowded aircraft hanger where it takes you fifty minutes to find what you want and forty minutes to check out.

So what we try to do is give them the experience in the commercial (We've got it or know where you can get it fast.) and have the stuff that New York apartment dwellers need, like the weird little canopy extension for putting a light fixture where an old gas pipe was, the air conditioner brackets and the ten foot section of anti-pigeon spikes. (You haven't seen those in the Home Depot commercials... .) We also stock about 112,000 SKUs of paint, plumbing, hardware and housewares, the regular stuff of life. You should come see it, it's real New York.

So when people talk about the giant down the street, we say "Why bother?
It's right here, bubie. Always has been, always will."

====

Tain't easy though, and Yes, the city of New York assisted the Home Depot Corporation in their move to New York, allowing them to alter an historical building in an historic neighborhood, allows them an apparently ticket-free zone of parking even during rush hour and rushed through several other exceptions to the zoning rules so the giant could squeeze his big feet (trucks) onto 22nd Street for loading/unloading.

Joe( What can you do but shrug and go back to work.)Nation

You're right that my friend cannot match Office Max (etc) advertising budgets, nor can he compete with them on several prices and selections. All he can offer is the personal touch, superb customer relations, and a few special services not available in the big chains. It is enough to keep him in business for now. Do I prefer shopping in his store rather than the big mega stores? Of course I do. And for special items I do.

Do I still go to the mega stores when I have to buy in bulk and price and/or selection is a serious consideration? Alas, yes I do.

I think those who give the customer what the customer wants prosper. Those who don't when competing with those who do will not prosper at least as well. It's as simple as that.

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

What town was that? ....

But this story has a happy ending. Leroy Welborn, or as he likes to call himself, Old Man Best, is not the dumbest guy you've ever met. ....

You're an Okie, right? Why aren't there any dress shops left in Skiatook?

Joe(I worked for 'old Man Best' for ten years)Nation

Joe, I hope you don't mind I trimmed your post to the key statements to answer. I agree with all of your points and good for Leroy. We need alot more people to take notice of this practice, to stand up to the bullies. And we need ethical politicians locally, which seems harder to find these days.

The town was Canon City, Colorado, and by the way, I am told the existing hardware store is doing just fine there, thank you. Their business seems to be as good as ever I am told.

In regard to Skiatook, I used to go through there, I think before the Cimmaron Turnpike was built. I don't know about the dress shops there. I'm guessing because theres a Walmart now?

Foxfyre, I understand your distinction between an Intel plant and a Home Depot, wherein the Intel plant is the only one of its kind. That is a bit more of a gray area. I'm not sure how to answer that one for sure, but my basic belief is that if a manufacturing plant receives tax breaks, then all manufacturing plants should receive tax breaks, whether they compete directly or not. At least all manufacturing roughly within a broad category should be treated equally. I just think citizens and the companies they own should be treated equally and fairly by their government. If an entity chooses to give tax breaks to all manufacturing, then I think that is probably okay as a policy. They have a right to do that, but to pick and choose which company to bestow some special treatment upon, I still think is unethical. Even though direct competition perhaps does not apply in your Intel example, let us consider other existing manufacturers in the area that may have to compete with Intel in terms of expanding, buying land, building, and hiring employees. Intel has an unfair advantage and may be able to obtain choice real estate cheaper or easier, and may be able to hire away skilled workers from existing businesses at a lower rate because they are being given a free lunch by government.

I am not against big business. We all probably benefit by the economy of scale, but I think the free market will still dictate the healthy success of small service oriented retailers. What we don't need to do is give the large businesses an unfair advantage. If they win in the market, fair and square, so be it. Open and fair competition is the ultimate arbitor of the most efficient methods to bring goods and services to the consumer.

0 Replies

Quote:

Do I still go to the mega stores when I have to buy in bulk and price and/or selection is a serious consideration? Alas, yes I do.

But do you ask him first what his price is on it? Surprise, surprise.

We play price poker all the time. I tell people to get a price, then without telling me that price, ask me for mine. Seven out of ten times, I'm at or below the big boys, two out of the last three I'm within ten percent or less.

We know what their margins are.

Joe(this ain't a game)Nation

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Quote:
I tell people to get a price, then without telling me that price, ask me for mine. Seven out of ten times, I'm at or below the big boys, two out of the last three I'm within ten percent or less.

We know what their margins are.

Joe(this ain't a game)Nation

I really do think that you are fully correct, Joe (and not only here).

When I got my new Nikon D200 from my local, small photo shop (she sells tobaccom cigarettes, newspapers as well as frames and does passportphotos, photos on weddings etc), I got it for a price beating all big chaines and all (reputable) internet shops. And faster.

Plus free advice and some nice chats.

0 Replies

Small stores serve a real purpose and I think are here to stay. Example: convenience stores. Look at the success of Walgreens and Ace Hardwares vs Walmart and Home Depot. I personally do not always like to walk a mile into a Walmart to buy a battery for example. I will pay more to be able to park within 50 feet of the door and walk a few feet to pick up the item and not have to wait in the checkout. As Joe points out, prices are often better at small hardware stores and sometimes the selection is better.

0 Replies

Big-box stores like Walmart and Home Depot very rarely have the lowest prices on items; something like 10% of the items at Walmart are the lowest you can find, and they act as loss leaders, so people will stay and buy many more items which are slightly higher or somewhat higher than other places in town.

Walmart actually got sued over their 'always the lowest prices' slogan several years ago, because they most certainly didn't always have the lowest prices. They were forced to change it to their current slogan 'always low prices, always' due to the lawsuit.

Huge advertising budgets help to put small stores out of business; once the competition is gone in town, the prices inevitably begin to rise. Because of the volume involved, pressure is put on manufacturers and growers to not even do business with smaller stores; there are many stories about Walmart cutting off the supply chains of their competitors in order to drive them out of business.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Quote:
Do I still go to the mega stores when I have to buy in bulk and price and/or selection is a serious consideration? Alas, yes I do.

But do you ask him first what his price is on it? Surprise, surprise.

We play price poker all the time. I tell people to get a price, then without telling me that price, ask me for mine. Seven out of ten times, I'm at or below the big boys, two out of the last three I'm within ten percent or less.

We know what their margins are.

Joe(this ain't a game)Nation

Well not exactly. I know his merchandise so well I really don't have to. I know that a certain kind of 3-ring binder that I need for a presentation will cost X at his store and his supply will be limited. If I need one or two, I'll buy them from him. If I need say 30 or 40 of these for a workshop or seminar presentation, I automatically go to Office Max to get them because I know they'll have them in sufficient quantity at a fair price that very day and I can save $50 to $100 in the process.

It really comes down to a) practicality and b) time.

When it comes to hardware, I would go to Ace however because they would not only likely have the one item I needed, but would have personnel there to tell me which one I needed and what to do with it. I couldn't count on that at Home Depot. Ditto if I need lumber I go to the hometown lumberyard where they have people that can tell me what I need, why I need it, and how much of it to get. Home Depot rarely has people with that kind of expertise.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

As usual no answer to my question about corporations.

Concerning education, we are spending more on it than at any time in our history. How much more should we spend on it? Education is virtually free to anyone that cares to go the library or study. All it takes is the desire. No amount of money will educate someone that isn't interested.

Plainoldme, I don't know why you can't simply answer a question. If corporations were not around to provide goods and services, who do you propose do it? Can you answer the question? A simple one. An education is not even necessary to answer it, and you supposedly are very educated, so surely you could have an answer?

EARTH TO OKIE! YOU NEVER UNDERSTAND THE ANSWERS!!!

BTW, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT EDUCATION COSTS MORE BECAUSE EVERYTHING COSTS MORE? THAT PART OF THE BILL FOR SCHOOLS INCLUDES HEATING THE BUILDINGS?

When my friend of high school and college graduated (she is a year older than me), we asked whether she thought college was necessary. She said if she knew what books to read, she could have done it herself.

The interesting thing is, Okie, since you deny global warming and obviously don't read the labels on the chemical soup you eat, I suspect you would favor censorship at the library.

All of your questions have been answered.

Now, I have to answer one posed by Light Wizard on another thread.

Your reading level is not sufficient for you to be an autodidact.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Small stores serve a real purpose and I think are here to stay. Example: convenience stores. Look at the success of Walgreens and Ace Hardwares vs Walmart and Home Depot. I personally do not always like to walk a mile into a Walmart to buy a battery for example. I will pay more to be able to park within 50 feet of the door and walk a few feet to pick up the item and not have to wait in the checkout. As Joe points out, prices are often better at small hardware stores and sometimes the selection is better.

What about real stores the offer creative, original and well-made merchandise?

The last two days, I've worn dresses that I made and the compliments were constant.

The town where I work has three shops offering women's clothes. In the 1940s through the 1960s, this same town had about 20. It abuts Cambridge, MA, which was a long time emporium town, now sadly diminished.

If you buy at convenience stores, it's probably your fault.

0 Replies

plainoldme wrote:

okie wrote:
As usual no answer to my question about corporations.

Concerning education, we are spending more on it than at any time in our history. How much more should we spend on it? Education is virtually free to anyone that cares to go the library or study. All it takes is the desire. No amount of money will educate someone that isn't interested.

Plainoldme, I don't know why you can't simply answer a question. If corporations were not around to provide goods and services, who do you propose do it? Can you answer the question? A simple one. An education is not even necessary to answer it, and you supposedly are very educated, so surely you could have an answer?

EARTH TO OKIE! YOU NEVER UNDERSTAND THE ANSWERS!!!

BTW, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT EDUCATION COSTS MORE BECAUSE EVERYTHING COSTS MORE? THAT PART OF THE BILL FOR SCHOOLS INCLUDES HEATING THE BUILDINGS?

When my friend of high school and college graduated (she is a year older than me), we asked whether she thought college was necessary. She said if she knew what books to read, she could have done it herself.

The interesting thing is, Okie, since you deny global warming and obviously don't read the labels on the chemical soup you eat, I suspect you would favor censorship at the library.

All of your questions have been answered.

Now, I have to answer one posed by Light Wizard on another thread.

Your reading level is not sufficient for you to be an autodidact.

As to all of my questions having been answered, I will try again. If corporations do not produce the goods and services they now produce, who do you propose to do it? Earth to Plainoldme, as a very educated college professor, I would think that question should be easily answered. Go for it. It won't hurt. Honesty is good medicine. Take a dose.

I never said I denied global warming. You need better reading comprehension. I simply doubt that whatever temperature fluctuations are occuring around the world are mainly man caused.

Quote:

Quote:
okie wrote:
Small stores serve a real purpose and I think are here to stay. Example: convenience stores. Look at the success of Walgreens and Ace Hardwares vs Walmart and Home Depot. I personally do not always like to walk a mile into a Walmart to buy a battery for example. I will pay more to be able to park within 50 feet of the door and walk a few feet to pick up the item and not have to wait in the checkout. As Joe points out, prices are often better at small hardware stores and sometimes the selection is better.

What about real stores the offer creative, original and well-made merchandise?

The last two days, I've worn dresses that I made and the compliments were constant.

The town where I work has three shops offering women's clothes. In the 1940s through the 1960s, this same town had about 20. It abuts Cambridge, MA, which was a long time emporium town, now sadly diminished.

If you buy at convenience stores, it's probably your fault.

You are humorous plainoldme. Surely you would have sometime darkened the door of a convenience store?. Admit you have. It won't hurt. Honesty is always best.

I am proud that you've gotten compliments for your home made garments. See, you must have found good material after all. You claimed there was none available. If the material was no good, you would not have gotten the complements.

I will take the blame for buying at convenience stores. I know its criminal. String me up.

0 Replies

OKIE WROTE:

If corporations do not produce the goods and services they now produce, who do you propose to do it? Earth to Plainoldme, as a very educated college professor, I would think that question should be easily answered. Go for it. It won't hurt. Honesty is good medicine. Take a dose.

I am holding my breath but all 115 pounds of me wish you were here. To say that I am dishonest is beyond the pale. It would be sooooooo nice if you could just mutter the word, "a$$$$$hole" at people and have them wither, like the wicked witch of the west.

You have no basis for that statement.

----------------

Now, where did you get the impression that I am a college prof? You raised that before and I was waiting for someone who knows me to correct you. You made it up. That's nice! I was certain you lacked the imagination. I underestimated you on that point.

--------------------

Finally, because I am a nicer person than you and because you missed the point time and time and time and time again.

THESE CORPORATIONS AS THEY EXIST TODAY RUN OUR LIVES. EVERYTHING WE WANTED AS HUMAN BEINGS FROM THE ENLIGHTENMENT ON IS BEING DESTROYED BY CORPORATIONS.

Capiche?

Now, many, many years ago, when I was in elementary school in Dearborn, Michigan, around the time Khruschev visited American and drove down the street in front of our school on the way from Detroit Metro Airport to the Henry Ford Museum, someone came to our school to speak of the dangers of Communism.

One of the points he made -- I have an excellent memory -- was that while in America the people ultimately decide what is to be manufactured, in Russia, the government makes that decision. The example he used was pink Easter bonnets. The government decides how many pink Easter bonnets will be manufactured.

I went home and told me mother who said it was a ridiculous example because the Russian government did not allow people to go to church and, therefore, no one needed an Easter bonnet.

Well, because one did not contradict my mother, I thought it was ridiculous because all Russian women seemed to wear babushkas. Later, I would think of more sophisticated reasons to tear down his argument.

Well, the problem in the US is that the people are not making up their minds how their kitchens should be laid out and faced. The people are not making up their minds what they should wear and where they should shop (believe me, most women my age detest malls). They are not making up their minds what they should eat or how many children they should have.

CORPORATE AMERICA IS DECIDING FOR THEM.

Surely, you must have heard social critics speaking out, not against capitalism, but against capitalism run amok, which is what has happened in the US.

Capitalism run amok has destroyed the free market because the cancerous beast that capitalism has become could not exist in a free market.

Now, I have said this to you before, but in simpler words. Others have said it to you as well. I hope that you finally understand that there is no free market; that the bloated system dictating how many pink Easter bonnets will be made is not the free market and that people are being deprived of their thoughts.

But, hey, you just advised a kid not to believe his teachers. Look who's poisoning the well.

0 Replies

Okie -- The dress is 25 years old.

Besides, I'm smart enough to only buy what is good and have the taste to be admired. Which is why I don't shop at Macy's, soon to become The Store!

0 Replies

plainoldme wrote:

Now, where did you get the impression that I am a college prof? You raised that before and I was waiting for someone who knows me to correct you. You made it up. That's nice! I was certain you lacked the imagination. I underestimated you on that point.

My sincere apologies. Way back somewhere in the earlier stages of this thread, I got that impression. I will take your word for it that you aren't, but anyway it makes no difference in this debate.

plainoldme, I feel sorry for you that you apparently actually believe
"THESE CORPORATIONS AS THEY EXIST TODAY RUN OUR LIVES. EVERYTHING WE WANTED AS HUMAN BEINGS FROM THE ENLIGHTENMENT ON IS BEING DESTROYED BY CORPORATIONS." and that in regard to many of the decisions you have available in your life you apparently believe "CORPORATE AMERICA IS DECIDING FOR THEM."

I would not have believed it if I had not read it myself. Are you delusional? You must be an example of a really mis-guided liberal. Therefore I find your beliefs fascinating from a human interest and political standpoint, but otherwise I guess I am pretty much ready to throw up my hands and give up on you. Are you really that unhappy and convinced that corporations are making your life miserable? I asked you once before, but I have to ask again. ARE YOU SERIOUS?

By the way, you still have not answered the question about who would replace corporations to produce the goods and services. I've asked you several times. Is it really that hard to comprehend the question?

0 Replies

okie wrote:

plainoldme wrote:

Now, where did you get the impression that I am a college prof? You raised that before and I was waiting for someone who knows me to correct you. You made it up. That's nice! I was certain you lacked the imagination. I underestimated you on that point.

My sincere apologies. Way back somewhere in the earlier stages of this thread, I got that impression. I will take your word for it that you aren't, but anyway it makes no difference in this debate.

plainoldme, I feel sorry for you that you apparently actually believe
"THESE CORPORATIONS AS THEY EXIST TODAY RUN OUR LIVES. EVERYTHING WE WANTED AS HUMAN BEINGS FROM THE ENLIGHTENMENT ON IS BEING DESTROYED BY CORPORATIONS." and that in regard to many of the decisions you have available in your life you apparently believe "CORPORATE AMERICA IS DECIDING FOR THEM."

I would not have believed it if I had not read it myself. Are you delusional? You must be an example of a really mis-guided liberal. Therefore I find your beliefs fascinating from a human interest and political standpoint, but otherwise I guess I am pretty much ready to throw up my hands and give up on you. Are you really that unhappy and convinced that corporations are making your life miserable? I asked you once before, but I have to ask again. ARE YOU SERIOUS?

By the way, you still have not answered the question about who would replace corporations to produce the goods and services. I've asked you several times. Is it really that hard to comprehend the question?

Where did you get that technique? Something left over from fifth grade?

Apparently, you've never been outside of your house!

0 Replies

Democracies and Mutual Respect

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know