It wouldn't be 4.00 a gallon if there were no taxes. There is way to much regulation in the business world from minimum wage to anti-trust laws.

If a business wants to succeed it should actually cater to a certain extent to the populace.

That's not greed Oxford and these businesses (e.g. the auto industry) haven't been making money; in fact they've been losing it. Bush has been giving tax cut to big business anyway. A good deal of Democrats in Wasington (Kucinich for instance) have been strongly against the bail outs and even Clinton's been saying they're going about this wrong and if they are going to do bail out companies they need to (and they only did this with AIG) buy the majority of the stocks and collect enough interest so the tax payers actually make money in the long run.

Once again if a business doesn't even try and cater to a populace it's not going to sell anything. This is basic supply and demand here.

Wrong. For one these bail outs ARE the government meddling with the economy. The causes of these businesses needing the bail outs is do to their own stupidity. In the case of the auto industry it had nothing to do with the government meddling with their business model it has to do with them making shitty cars. In fact if the government had stepped in like the rest of the world is and told the auto industry to start making smart cars a decade ago they'd be in much better shape. As for the financial industry if During the Clinton years they hadn't repealed Glass-Steagall all these facets of that industry wouldn't be effected. Lack of government regulation and intervention has more do with this then not.

I understand you libertarians want to blame everything on the government being too big but that's simply stupid in this case. Clinton and Bush and the Congress and Senate under them have been getting rid of things set up during the Great Depression for the past ten years as well as deregulating businesses (though this part was more Bush than Clinton.) It clearly hasn't been a good thing. I don't know how you can honestly say these bail outs are the cause of the government meddling with the economy seeing as everything that's happened points to the opposite.

Yeah the taxes on gas hasent really changed since you bought your first gallon at 99 cents or less for some of you.

I actually believe it has more to do with all the shartty loans that were givin out. Ok now you have a person that 2 years ago could apply for a loan and now they cant. Which might not be a bad thing!!! Now the 55 about to retire man that made an honest living is losing his job because his company made cuts. Shart...

I agree. What you want to do is hold a gun to a business man's head and tell him to cater. I say that the man should cater and succeed if he wants to. If he doesn't then he doesn't succeed.


This is attacking a point that I am pretty sure I didn't make. The points I made were:

• The government is forcing taxpayers to pay for a failed business that has nothing to do with me (the individual).
• American liberalism is hypocritical because they don't want to bail out companies that pay taxes to their welfare.

Number two was a generalization, but it is true for a lot of people.

Again, I don't want to force businesses into catering to anyone. That is slavery.

Nobody would have to bail out anybody if there was no welfare. The thing is, America runs on the taxes of the upper class/middle class. If the only people who were going to lose out were stockholders/people related to the business then this wouldn't have happened. However, we have entangled each other into our lives with welfare. A lot of people are now depending on other people to work for them. It isn't like it is voluntary either. It is at gun point.

Secondly, freer economies bring more successful businesses. Our economy has never been a completely free economy. In fact, what we live under right now is VERY restricted capitalism. So the notion that businesses fail under capitalism is false because we operate under the absolute worst economic system, moderated capitalism or mixed economy.

They are not deregulating enough. Moderated capitalism is worse than socialism.

Man we should go back to how things were in the '20s. Yea.

this thread = ethan vs inuzuka

may i have this dance, my lovely flapper?

Okay Ayn Rand.

The U.S.???
And what does "moderated capitalism is worse than socialism" even mean?

Is socialism an inherently bad idea?

Definition:
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Sounds like your only beef is wanting to have Adam Smith's children.

Good lord...

Your right, the conservative view is perfect. Who would want the government raising minimum wage, staying out of wars we shouldn't be in, and giving the people health care. That would just be stupid.

Almost every big recession and war has happened on a Republicans watch. Just look at the 3 depressions this country has been in. Big business is the newest for a capitalism in the United States. If you actually think they should not cater to the public thats absurd. When there working conditions are **** and they pay less than the rising cost of living I would say that's a bad thing. As Wayfarer said, they have proven themselves incompetent and unable to run things on there own because of corporate greed and bad decision making.

Agreed, however the same amount of tax is applied as it was when gas was below a dollar. Yes they are making more of course as crude oil prices rise but its still the same amount which is why gas is now lower than it has been in about 3 to 4 years.

Of course the rising number of jobs lost and cars repo'ed probably has ppl doing a f ton of walking. that in its own right snuffs the demand.