The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

[Ingomike]

I think it’s important to say what we mean by free markets. Because plenty of people mean it one of two ways. One is laissez faire free markets with zero regulation. The other is a market kept free of manipulation through some regulation. The latter seems quite compatible with the idea of preventing “take it or leave it” markets. And this is what we have now with social media companies.

I think it’s good for free markets to make media companies decide which market they’re in. Are they in the platform business, where they’re not responsible for content? Or are they publishers who are responsible for their content.

To keep the market free for all players, media companies shouldn’t be able to straddle the line to get the benefits of one without the consequences of the other. Pick your market. And if facebook decides it’s a publishing company, let the lawsuits flow freely.

It is disappointing to me, it appears anyway, that most of the people that say, their company, their rules, do not realize we have given them special treatment under the law that no one else enjoys. Usually, when I point it out there are no further replies.

 

[Ingomike]

What if that ship has already sailed? Their physical plant and corporate headquarters can be anywhere, say tax friendly Ireland and they will be beyond the reach of US law. Luckily, the EU is even more interventionist than we are, but it could still be Google.pl or Google.bg

They can still be sued no matter where they are unless they want to run FB like an illegal casino...

 

[jamil]

It is disappointing to me, it appears anyway, that most of the people that say, their company, their rules, do not realize we have given them special treatment under the law that no one else enjoys. Usually, when I point it out there are no further replies.

I think sometimes the people who lean more left and more regulatory minded, think that they’re talking to the laissez faire capitalists, when they’re talking to conservative leaning people. And I admit that even just a few years ago I was that. While I don’t think we should be anywhere near as regulated as we are, regulation which prevents market manipulation, as well as regulation which prevents destructive positive feedback loops in the market, is appropriate.

As much as the Laissez faire capitalists want to believe it is, completely free markets aren’t capable of correcting everything bad.

 

[jamil]

Because other entities are free to enter the market, and if there is only one company, consumers have the option to consume that product or not.

That’s a “take-it-or-leave-it” choice, which isn’t a choice at all. You can have individuals choose not to participate in such a market and just do without. But that doesn’t actually work to correct such a market, because human nature doesn’t work that way. There are not enough people who have the programming to resist, or have the ability to override the programming not to resist, such that the demand side forces a change in the supply side.

For example, I tend to avoid businesses which choose to take political sides on hot button issues. Dick’s no longer exists as far as I’m concerned. I’m not deluded to think they give a flying **** that I don’t give them my business. Same thing would apply to Facebook. They don’t care that I don’t use it. They already have some of what they want out of me anyway, from the friends, colleagues, and family whose contact lists I’m on. It doesn’t matter how much I don’t use their platform, they don’t care because there aren’t enough people like me to make a difference.

 

[Kutnupe14]

That’s a “take-it-or-leave-it” choice, which isn’t a choice at all. You can have individuals choose not to participate in such a market and just do without. But that doesn’t actually work to correct such a market, because human nature doesn’t work that way. There are not enough people who have the programming to resist, or have the ability to override the programming not to resist, such that the demand side forces a change in the supply side.

For example, I tend to avoid businesses which choose to take political sides on hot button issues. Dick’s no longer exists as far as I’m concerned. I’m not deluded to think they give a flying **** that I don’t give them my business. Same thing would apply to Facebook. They don’t care that I don’t use it. They already have some of what they want out of me anyway, from the friends, colleagues, and family whose contact lists I’m on. It doesn’t matter how much I don’t use their platform, they don’t care because there aren’t enough people like me to make a difference.

Montgomery Bus Boycott seems to be an outlier to human nature then.

 

[nonobaddog]

And now it must be explained to him.

 

[jamil]

Montgomery Bus Boycott seems to be an outlier to human nature then.

Yes. That’s was an outlier. Count for me all the Hobson’s choices and then check off which ones were reacted to like that one.

No cherry-picking.

 

[jamil]

Boycotts work when enough people are mobilized to scare companies into capitulation. That’s not always good, like when the angry mov gets invoked. The left has weaponized the angry mob to shame them into threatening companies. So it can work. But it’s a ****ty tactic. The board of Papa John’s used it to oust John Schnatter from his own company. There seems to be evidence that they didn’t like the way he was running the company, and his ousting may have had nothing to do with SJW’s other than they used them as a tool to get rid of schnatter.

But this conversation is about social media and the necessity of reigning in the power of a few to manipulate society, especially since the world they propose is unlivable.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Trump driving onto the Daytona track....

Journalists: "This is a violation of the constitution and an abuse of power for using government apparatus for a campaign event... (15 pages of whining)"

 

[Ingomike]

I have long believed Lindsay Graham a RINO, and still question his devotion to conservative principles but in the aftermath of the Kavanaugh confirmation my opinion of him increased significantly, this interview only enhances those thoughts.

I didn’t vote for him,” Graham said onSiriusXM’s “Michelangelo Signorile Show.” “But I accepted my defeat once he became president. I decided it’s best for me to try to help him… I think he’s been a very good president.”

He could have just been another never Trumper.

I didn’t like his campaign. Didn’t vote for him, but accepted my defeat and I don’t think the Republican Party has been more united than it is right now. If you’re a social conservative, he’s been a good pro-life president. If you like conservative judges, we have them in abundance. If you wanted to cut taxes, we did, and if you want a strong military, you’ve got it, best since Reagan, and I like taking the fight to the terrorists so I’m here to say that I was wrong and he’s proven to be a good president

I can respect a man that can make that statement. I may have been wrong in my assessment of him as a Senator, time will tell, but it looks good and I am good to say I was wrong too. I wish some others I once respected their thoughts, could get past the BS like Cruz and Graham.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/1...eart-on-trump-hes-been-a-very-good-president/

All the quotes are at the link...

 

[Ingomike]

I have long believed Lindsay Graham a RINO, and still question his devotion to conservative principles but in the aftermath of the Kavanaugh confirmation my opinion of him increased significantly, this interview only enhances those thoughts.



He could have just been another never Trumper.



I can respect a man that can make that statement. I may have been wrong in my assessment of him as a Senator, time will tell, but it looks good and I am good to say I was wrong too. I wish some others I once respected their thoughts, could get past the BS like Cruz and Graham.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/1...eart-on-trump-hes-been-a-very-good-president/

All the quotes are at the link...

With all the threads on here bashing Lindsay Graham no one has any comment on this seeming about face? Think he may see this as an opportunity to burnish his conservative cred to run for president in 2024?

 

[BugI02]

Change of heart or well oiled weather vane sensing which way the winds are blowing? If Romney evinced a similar public epiphany, would you believe him? Think I'll wait a while on judging the new Mr Graham, though I welcome what support he is able to give

 

[nonobaddog]

Change of heart or well oiled weather vane sensing which way the winds are blowing? If Romney evinced a similar public epiphany, would you believe him? Think I'll wait a while on judging the new Mr Graham, though I welcome what support he is able to give

Exactly this. You really can't judge a politician by the words they mutter, you have to judge by the actions.

 

[Ingomike]

Change of heart or well oiled weather vane sensing which way the winds are blowing? If Romney evinced a similar public epiphany, would you believe him? Think I'll wait a while on judging the new Mr Graham, though I welcome what support he is able to give

Exactly this. You really can't judge a politician by the words they mutter, you have to judge by the actions.

To be sure I am not jumping on his band wagon, but the directness of the words coupled with his actions are encouraging.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I can't tell if this is a parody account. If not... holy ****.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Shot:

Chaser:

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The Washington Post

 

[KLB]

How can it get bigger?

 

[nonobaddog]

How can it get bigger?

No more silly voting - just put the Presidency up for sale.

 

[Alpo]

No more silly voting - just put the Presidency up for sale.

Already accomplished.

It's called Citizen's United