|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: EdEd Date: Sep 6, 2008 07:41
On Sep 6, 6:35 am, "Sean" now.com.au> wrote:> Halliburton Ex-Official
> Pleads Guilty in Bribe Case
> By RUSSELL GOLD
> September 4, 2008; Page A1
>
> In a wide-ranging foreign-corruption investigation, fired former Halliburton
> Co. executive Albert J. "Jack" Stanley pleaded guilty to orchestrating more
> than $180 million in bribes to senior Nigerian government officials. The
> bribes were used to win a contract to build a liquefied-natural-gas plant in
> Nigeria.
>
> Under a plea agreement entered Wednesday in a Houston federal court, Mr.
> Stanley faces seven years in prison and a $10.8 million restitution payment.
> His lawyer, Lee Kaplan, said, "We're hopeful the government finds his
> cooperation merits" a reduction in his prison sentence.
>
> Mr. Stanley's agreement to cooperate could breathe new life into the
> five-year federal investigation, and additional charges of executives are
> possible. Various current and former executives of KBR, once a unit of ...
|
| Show full article (4.33Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Fred WeissFred Weiss Date: Sep 6, 2008 08:10
On Sep 6, 10:41 am, Ed earthlink.net> wrote:
> ...What system that has actually been implemented do you advocate as superior?
Sean's clear preference is the regulatory welfare state...which
parasitizes on the wealth created by capitalism while at the same time
strangling it...and then runs in place as fast as it can shuffling
numbers back and forth from one column to the next and then back again
hoping to stave off the inevitable economic collapse as long as
possible.
That of course is exactly what is happening in the US right now in
response to the financial crisis, the latest effort being to bail out
their "Fannies" (which of course was a prime cause of the crisis in
the first place). Afterall, it's a prime directive that we have to
make cheap mortgages available to anyone who wants one. Right?
A graphic description of this process has already been written, over
50 years ago. It was "Atlas Shrugged".
Fred Weiss
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: PubliusPublius Date: Sep 6, 2008 10:01
>>> A person who provides loans or financing is well a lender, a
>>> financier, or maybe even a banker. Plonking the label of capitalist
>>> on any of those is meaningless.
>>
>> Sorry, but that is one of the dictionary definitions.
>>
>> http://www.bartleby.com/61/62/C0086200.html
>>
>> A "capitalist" is anyone who supplies capital --- money --- to a
>> business or other constructive endeavor, usually with an expectation
>> of a return, or profit. Lenders and investors are both capitalists. > You are playing sophistry with words, and leaning on a dictionary on
> an appeal to authority. You have no authority here. I know what I
> meant, and I know it is accurate and true. Attempt to spin out any way
> you wish will not change the reality and truth of my statements.
|
| Show full article (4.70Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PubliusPublius Date: Sep 6, 2008 10:15
>> To which "scarcities" would you be referring there? Which
>> commodities, or manufactured products, for that matter, have become
>> "scarcer" in the last, say, 50 years?
>
> If I need to point out such matters, this conversation is obviously
> beyond your mental capacity and knowledge base.
>
>> Paul Ehrlich made that bet with Julian Simon back in the
>> 70s, and lost.
> Another appeal to authority. I prefer reality, don't you?
You have a difficult time producing evidence supporting your claims, don't
you?
|
| Show full article (1.91Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PubliusPublius Date: Sep 6, 2008 10:18
> But capitalist and capitalism are two separate things/ideas. The
> former is as you define, but the later is a means to decision of last
> resort. Its like the political science debate about what should be the
> final arbiter in a dispute between rights; a monarch, a representative
> body or individual rights.
>
> Capitalism is the economic system in which the means of production are
> owned by private persons, and operated for profit and where
> investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and
> services are predominantly determined through the operation of a free
> market.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
Thanks, Immort. But I doubt that Sean will like Wiki any more than he likes
dictionaries.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PubliusPublius Date: Sep 6, 2008 10:34
> Publius nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >> A capitalist in the second sense provides the financing which allow
>> the farmers to buy seed, machinery, and fertilizers, the carpenter to
>> buy tools, vehicles, lumber, and other supplies, and the carpenter to
>> buy an inventory of fabrics and sewing machines.
>
> Where does he get that capital from initially?
That is actually a worthwhile question, given that the preposterous Marxist
"exploitation theory" has gained so much currency (everybody wants a free
lunch, and needs some rationale to justify it).
|
| Show full article (1.45Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PubliusPublius Date: Sep 6, 2008 11:23
ZerkonX X.net> wrote in news:pan.2008.09.06.11.59.41@X.net:
> On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:18:00 -0700, Fred Weiss wrote:
>
>> So what does capitalism do.
>>
>> It invents television.
>
> IOW, science = capitalism, or no capitalism, no science.
That is essentially correct. All of the theoretical foundations of modern
science and technology were laid in free-market economies during the 19th
and early 20th centuries, from the theory of relativity, quantum theory,
the theoretical foundations of atomic energy, to the discoveries of DNA and
the development of digital computers. There was no gummint involvement to
speak of. Those discoveries were later exploited by gummints, of course.
> Bell Labs, who built upon work that had been started in the late 1800's
> in Germany, was heavily funded by the US government.
|
| Show full article (2.03Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: tgtg Date: Sep 6, 2008 12:21
On Sep 6, 2:54 am, "Sean" now.com.au> wrote:> "Publius" nospam.comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9B10E6B261EC6mpubliusnospamcomcas@216.196.97.136...
>
>
>>
>>>> "Capitalist" has two senses. It may refer to an adherent or advocate
>>>> of natural economics (a free market economy), or it may refer to a
>>>> person who provides financing for a productive endeavor or
>>>> enterprise.
>
>>>> A capitalist in the second sense provides the financing which allow
>>>> the farmers to buy seed, machinery, and fertilizers, the carpenter to
>>>> buy tools, vehicles, lumber, and other supplies, and the carpenter to
>>>> buy an inventory of fabrics and sewing machines.
> ...
|
| Show full article (6.86Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Fred WeissFred Weiss Date: Sep 6, 2008 17:01
On Sep 6, 3:21 pm, tg earthlink.net> wrote:
> ...The really really basic fallacy with saying that capitalism
> cures scarcity is that you don't reduce the scarcity of the product in
> question but you replace it. Watching sports on tv is not watching
> sports in person.
True, it's not. It's watching it instead from the comfort of your own
living room and - if you have Tivo - at your own convenience with the
ability to pause and replay it to your heart's desire. But even for
those who might have preferred being present at the live event for
many of those it would either be impractical or too expensive.
God forbid we should have a good, viable, and inexpensive substitute
readily accessible to 100's of millions, even billions around the
world - and today, thanks to continued capitalist innovation, on large
high-definition screens that are so vivid it's "almost like being
there".
> Cardboard-textured tomatoes are not fresh tomatoes.
True, but the point of (supposedly) "cardboard-textured" tomatoes is
to make them easier to ship long distances and to last longer - thus
making them available year round and at far lower cost.
|
| Show full article (1.90Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Daniel T.Daniel T. Date: Sep 6, 2008 17:27
> The really really basic fallacy with saying that capitalism
> cures scarcity is that you don't reduce the scarcity of the product in
> question but you replace it.
Of course scarcity isn't reduced by capitalism.
It seems to me that capitalist societies are more likely to *create*
scarcity where none exists in order to allow a price to be put on a
"product" (hence, for example, the prevalence and enforcement of
copyright laws.)
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
