Internet Censorship.

[Michchamp]

there are better ways at preventing Facebook, google, etc. from having so much power: breaking them using the existing anti-trust laws on the books that the extremely pro-business FTC never bothers to enforce.

 

[Michchamp]

...

Gohmert is either dumb, or this is power grab by government censors.

poorly written rhetorical question. Gohmert is pretty dumb, so... yeah.

 

[tigermud]

there are better ways at preventing Facebook, google, etc. from having so much power: breaking them using the existing anti-trust laws on the books that the extremely pro-business FTC never bothers to enforce.

I can agree with that, trump has hinted at breaking up a few companies I wish he would

 

[tinselwolverine]

there are better ways at preventing Facebook, google, etc. from having so much power: breaking them using the existing anti-trust laws on the books that the extremely pro-business FTC never bothers to enforce.

Neither Facebook nor Google has any power over me.

I set up a Facebook page years ago to keep track of a high school reunion and the events surrounding them that I didn’t attend; I guess I was attending vicariously that way. That’s the only thing I’ve ever used Facebook for.

I have icons for all the websites I go to frequently linking me directly to the site. When I want to look up factoids I guess I use Google as a default search engine but I could just as easily use any other one.

 

[Michchamp]

Neither Facebook nor Google has any power over me.

I set up a Facebook page years ago to keep track of a high school reunion and the events surrounding them that I didn’t attend; I guess I was attending vicariously that way. That’s the only thing I’ve ever used Facebook for.

I have icons for all the websites I go to frequently linking me directly to the site. When I want to look up factoids I guess I use Google as a default search engine but I could just as easily use any other one.

good for you! I don't have a FB page either anymore!

yeah, if you're not on their site, and to a lesser extent, never downloaded their app, they're not benefitting from you, and you're immune to their "poison"

Google has its tentacles in more places beyond search: if you have an android phone, if you click on third party ads, etc. on websites. Google AdSense has a huge presence all over the internet.

Google shopping... adwords... product listing ads, etc. Tough not to use google. And most of the alternatives aren't much better.

 

[Michchamp]

another alternative is to make FB and google into public utilities and regulate them as such.

the idea isn't that crazy, and would be more palatable to private property extremists, who place billionaires' rights to profit above all else.

 

[turok]

No one on the right supports that because we're not dumb enough to think socialism or communism works. And it's not democracy, it's property rights - did they teach you about property rights in law school? It's a basic founding principle of this great nation. They took the risks, they buit it, they own it - it's not yours to take because you think the government should run everything and there's some greater public interest in the government confiscating something because you think someone makes too much money.

Not everyone built that of which they currently own. In many, if not most cases, it was inherited, absorbed, merged, purchased, spun off, copied, or even hostile takenover. As well as IPOed and operated by CEO and board of directors, who have absolutely no connection to whoever did design, invent, create, or built their product(s) and/or services.

I find it interesting that conservatives equate communism with socialism, when there aren't any nations which are totally capitalist, and utterly devoid of any socialist government rules, regulations, and programs. In fact, those who are the most adamantly opposed to socialism, most likely ignore, or are ignorant of the fact that they were probably only born because of its existence.

Had the nation been created purely capitalist, that would have required private ownership of everything. For example, roads, bridges, and waterways would not be navigable or passable, absent the owner's permission and most likely, a toll surcharge to do so (variable upon the cost of keeping them clear and open b/c of seasonal weather) . No local or state police protection, so property owners would need to hire and fund their own. Of course, there wouldn't be any commie socialist rules or regulations "governing" how these private goon squads are to treat trespassers or travelers who paid for passage, and no one obligated to carry insurance, but could open-carry unregistered firearms as protection, so the heightened risk is inherent everywhere that everyone needs or wants to go.

And ownership would be subject to change w/o notice, and owners who have a relatively small portion of the passage pie, still could charge as much or more than owners with larger sizes. The hours and days being open for use being dependent upon the owners' whims. This also presumes that every property owner will cooperate with other competing property owners, whose properties bisect, intersect, or abut each other, and wouldn't try to screw or inhibit each others' efforts to grow and prosper...nah...that would never happen under our wonderful free-market principles!!

 

[tinselwolverine]

another alternative is to make FB and google into public utilities and regulate them as such.

the idea isn't that crazy, and would be more palatable to private property extremists, who place billionaires' rights to profit above all else.

Water and power are irreplaceable necessities; water, especially has been managed and regulated by publicly at least going back to the Romans and before.

I?ve kind of viewed Facebook as mostly like an old party phone line; the users provide the content.

But Facebook could go away tomorrow if something people liked better came along. I guess young people are going more and more to Instagram. I hear people joking that Facebook?s days are numbered now that everybody?s parents are getting on it.

 

[Spartanmack]

Not everyone built that of which they currently own. In many, if not most cases, it was inherited, absorbed, merged, purchased, spun off, copied, or even hostile takenover. As well as IPOed and operated by CEO and board of directors, who have absolutely no connection to whoever did design, invent, create, or built their product(s) and/or services.

I find it interesting that conservatives equate communism with socialism, when there aren't any nations which are totally capitalist, and utterly devoid of any socialist government rules, regulations, and programs. In fact, those who are the most adamantly opposed to socialism, most likely ignore, or are ignorant of the fact that they were probably only born because of its existence.

Had the nation been created purely capitalist, that would have required private ownership of everything. For example, roads, bridges, and waterways would not be navigable or passable, absent the owner's permission and most likely, a toll surcharge to do so (variable upon the cost of keeping them clear and open b/c of seasonal weather) . No local or state police protection, so property owners would need to hire and fund their own. Of course, there wouldn't be any commie socialist rules or regulations "governing" how these private goon squads are to treat trespassers or travelers who paid for passage, and no one obligated to carry insurance, but could open-carry unregistered firearms as protection, so the heightened risk is inherent everywhere that everyone needs or wants to go.

And ownership would be subject to change w/o notice, and owners who have a relatively small portion of the passage pie, still could charge as much or more than owners with larger sizes. The hours and days being open for use being dependent upon the owners' whims. This also presumes that every property owner will cooperate with other competing property owners, whose properties bisect, intersect, or abut each other, and wouldn't try to screw or inhibit each others' efforts to grow and prosper...nah...that would never happen under our wonderful free-market principles!!

i find it interesting that lefties equate public services with socialism that everyone contributes to and benefits from. socialism is an economic system which attempts to redistibute the excess production fro. profitabl e industries. Collecting taxes to pay for public services is not socialist. Every modern country has roads, public schools and police officers, that doesn't make them inherently or even "at least a little bit" socialist. not all government actions with a public benefit are socialist.

the "public services = socialism" trope is just a lie heard on whack job sites like the young turks and often repeated by lefties who dont know what socialism is.

 

[turok]

i find it interesting that lefties equate public services with socialism that everyone contributes to and benefits from. socialism is an economic system which attempts to redistibute the excess production fro. profitabl e industries. Collecting taxes to pay for public services is not socialist. Every modern country has roads, public schools and police officers, that doesn't make them inherently or even "at least a little bit" socialist. not all government actions with a public benefit are socialist.

the "public services = socialism" trope is just a lie heard on whack job sites like the young turks and often repeated by lefties who dont know what socialism is.

I didn't get that from anyone else, and I don't follow TYT, or any other YT channels or specific social media accounts. I get my info from a wide variety of sources globally, and spent more than 25 years of my adult life w/o electronic access to any of them. My worldview was formed from reading books, periodicals, newspapers, magazines, and especially from personal experience, including growing up and working in an urban environment which was richly comprised of many races and ethnic groups. I also volunteered to work in downtown Detroit on summer weekends at the many ethnic festivals that were held in the 70s and 80s.

Your Randian dystopian fantasy world is of global corporate capitalism run amok, holding the financial and political reins of control along with the privately wealthy, yet unconstrained by taxes, rules, regulations, and most laws, but of which labor still is, like criminal prosecution, paying taxes to support our federal, state, and local infrastructure, military/defense, and the wages, and benefits of locai, state, and federal
(conservative operated and controlled) government of law enforcement, security, courts, and elected officials.

The so-called "smaller government" that you and your White Nationalist ilk crave, is only to eliminate that part of which assists and provides for the general welfare of ordinary US citizens and those brown and black immigrant or asylum-seeking minorities who wish to become as such. The recent SCOTUS decision in favor of Citizens United [a true oxymoron] is a big step in the direction of establishing Oligarchy control over candidates and incumbent elected officials who hypocritically still must swear out an oath to become "public" servants.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I didn't get that from anyone else, and I don't follow TYT, or any other YT channels or specific social media accounts. I get my info from a wide variety of sources globally, and spent more than 25 years of my adult life w/o electronic access to any of them. My worldview was formed from reading books, periodicals, newspapers, magazines, and especially from personal experience, including growing up and working in an urban environment which was richly comprised of many races and ethnic groups. I also volunteered to work in downtown Detroit on summer weekends at the many ethnic festivals that were held in the 70s and 80s.

Your Randian dystopian fantasy world is of global corporate capitalism run amok, holding the financial and political reins of control along with the privately wealthy, yet unconstrained by taxes, rules, regulations, and most laws, but of which labor still is, like criminal prosecution, paying taxes to support our federal, state, and local infrastructure, military/defense, and the wages, and benefits of locai, state, and federal
(conservative operated and controlled) government of law enforcement, security, courts, and elected officials.

The so-called "smaller government" that you and your White Nationalist ilk crave, is only to eliminate that part of which assists and provides for the general welfare of ordinary US citizens and those brown and black immigrant or asylum-seeking minorities who wish to become as such. The recent SCOTUS decision in favor of Citizens United [a true oxymoron] is a big step in the direction of establishing Oligarchy control over candidates and incumbent elected officials who hypocritically still must swear out an oath to become "public" servants.

Not to get into the middle of this, but? All of this is really a bit far a field of what you quoted, from my friend Spartan Mack, that of course, everybody pays taxes for things that have been indemnically part of all of human societies going back to beginning of time such as the roadways and waterways and such.

Earlier on this thread, I discussed with my friend MichChamp these topics and including what is a public utility and isn?t.

I really am completely missing the point you?re trying to make here.

 

[turok]

Not to get into the middle of this, but… All of this is really a bit far a field of what you quoted, from my friend Spartan Mack, that of course, everybody pays taxes for things that have been indemnically part of all of human societies going back to beginning of time such as the roadways and waterways and such.

Earlier on this thread, I discussed with my friend MichChamp these topics and including what is a public utility and isn’t.

I really am completely missing the point you’re trying to make here.

Well ya went and did so anyway, but likely also that SM would see it and be reassured that he has you on his side, at the very least. Maybe you could even make it official, and put in a request to befriend him on his DSF profile page.

If you read my reply, you should have noticed that I posted hypothetically, as if the US had begun as an entirely capitalist nation, w/o any public services.

I am actually a little surprised that you didn't quote one of my replies sooner, especially since I am obviously not part of your major college alum circle of virtual buddies here. But that's okay with me, I don't need or want anyone coming to my defense, and "your friend" SM didn't just start posting on this forum this week, so my replies to him had our past experience included. And although you consider MC to also be one of your friends, I kinda doubt that he counts SM as being one of his here.

But I do have one thing in common with you, in that I often don't understand the points that you are attempting to make in your posts, since you have claimed that you are mostly posting in "jest" and not seriously, which also can conveniently be used as an excuse, or in defense, if someone was to "misunderstand" what you posted.

 

[Spartanmack]

I didn't get that from anyone else, and I don't follow TYT, or any other YT channels or specific social media accounts. I get my info from a wide variety of sources globally, and spent more than 25 years of my adult life w/o electronic access to any of them. My worldview was formed from reading books, periodicals, newspapers, magazines, and especially from personal experience, including growing up and working in an urban environment which was richly comprised of many races and ethnic groups. I also volunteered to work in downtown Detroit on summer weekends at the many ethnic festivals that were held in the 70s and 80s.

Your Randian dystopian fantasy world is of global corporate capitalism run amok, holding the financial and political reins of control along with the privately wealthy, yet unconstrained by taxes, rules, regulations, and most laws, but of which labor still is, like criminal prosecution, paying taxes to support our federal, state, and local infrastructure, military/defense, and the wages, and benefits of locai, state, and federal
(conservative operated and controlled) government of law enforcement, security, courts, and elected officials.

The so-called "smaller government" that you and your White Nationalist ilk crave, is only to eliminate that part of which assists and provides for the general welfare of ordinary US citizens and those brown and black immigrant or asylum-seeking minorities who wish to become as such. The recent SCOTUS decision in favor of Citizens United [a true oxymoron] is a big step in the direction of establishing Oligarchy control over candidates and incumbent elected officials who hypocritically still must swear out an oath to become "public" servants.

First of all, I don't think I've heard anyone on DSF ever argue in favor of corporate subsidies. And second, if you think this math is even remotely correct, you're a moron. Corporate subsidies are nowhere near 10x defense and medicare spending combined. That's simply not true and should be obvious to anyone who has ever paid any attention to government revenue and spending. Either you can't argue facts and have to make shit up or you're so dumb you can't spot an obvious "alternative fact" so you just run with it because it suits your agenda. And to top it off, you accuse the opposition of being racist to falsely claim the moral high ground. That is so weak. You are one pathetic loser.

 

[tigermud]

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/facebook-temporarily-suspends-franklin-graham-over-post-from-2016/

 

[Gulo Blue]

First of all, I don't think I've heard anyone on DSF ever argue in favor of corporate subsidies.

I'm willing to make this argument in principle (not to imply that you or anyone specifically needs to hear this.) If we've got our free markets operating as Adam Smith intended, industries converge on the level of supply that's ideal for our economy. If conditions change, market forces will motivate producers to ramp up production. This requires investing capital into more machines, buildings, manpower, or whatever it is that industry requires to produce whatever it is it produces. It takes time.


Some industries are of strategic importance and/or having a period of adjustment where we endure under supply is not tolerable. Oils is a good example. Food is a good example. If there's a food shortage, we can't wait for prices to rise, producers to see the opportunity to make more money and invest in more equipment, plant more fields and grow more food...all while the poorest starve. Instead, we need overcapacity. We need to produce more food than the invisible hand of free markets will guide us to so that in the event of changing conditions (which can be huge and sudden, like war cutting off an import source) we still have enough. If you want to get an industry to produce goods above the amount people will buy, you need to subsidize.


Whether or not we subsidize too much or too little, that's an entirely different issue requiring some understanding of the risk management our subsidies are intended to address and the strategic advantage we think we want maintaining capability in comparison to our trade allies/competitors (if "they" subsidize a strategic industry to a high degree, and trade with us enough, we can come to depend on them if we don't match their subsidy. That strategic dependence becomes a liability.)

 

[tomdalton22]

this is interesting. What I take from this is we spend 16 times our defense budget on corporate subsidies. That would mean we spend about $9.7 trillion on corporate subsidies. That seems a bit high since the entire US budget was $4.1 trillion.

 

[tinselwolverine]

this is interesting. What I take from this is we spend 16 times our defense budget on corporate subsidies. That would mean we spend about $9.7 trillion on corporate subsidies. That seems a bit high since the entire US budget was $4.1 trillion.

So? You?re suggesting that the representation may not be entirely accurate?

 

[tomdalton22]

So? You?re suggesting that the representation may not be entirely accurate?

that's my take. But who am I to question someone's little picture that they cut and pasted on a message board?

 

[sggatecl]

that's my take. But who am I to question someone's little picture that they cut and pasted on a message board?

When I see these picture/meme graphics, whether they support my argument or not, I dismiss them almost immediately since they rarely, ever have a source. And the vast majority of the time if I do the research myself I find that it was bullshit or skewed.

 

[tigermud]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...ix-pulls-comedy-show-criticising-saudi-arabia


corporate censorship continues to intensify
even the crazy shape shifting lizard guy gets it


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p40r9Gv0Hvg