Originally Posted by deverhart If that makes google evil then berkshire is lucifer himself Ticker: BRK.A 89000.10 Market Cap. 112.2 Bil

Wow; that is pretty high :P I didn't even insinuate that Google was evil because it has high share prices, I said basically that it enjoys showing off, an has kept its share price high like that so that it can.

Originally Posted by bexil So basically you are disagreeing with the entire idealism that this country was based on? Are you saying the the Free Enterprise System that has brought this country to be the most powerful in the world.. is just.. "pig-doggery"? You feel that a cooperation, selling stocks to keep it going, to keep funding going, is unjust? Are you saying that the Market Economy that this entire country as a whole is based on, the economy that has kept this country going, that has helped this country flourish.. is just.. skat? Stocks are not "Pig-Doggery", stocks are what keep this country moving.. Market Economy is an econom based on private ownership of bussiness.. It's what seperates us from the Socialists.. and Communists.. Private Ownership of Bussiness. Thats all a stock represents..

If we're going into Basically, then yes, yes I do I am saying that the Free Enterprise System that has brought your country to the most powerful in the world is just 'pig-doggery'. I would say that buying stocks is an unjust excuse to make money without talent. I cannot admit to knowing what Skat is, although it does sound pleasantly humourous, but I would say the Market Economy is almost certainly not the most honourable fashion to run a country. It keeps people with no talent in power while those with it can go their whole lives without it being realised. It promotes those with connections while leaving those without, it pays people based on position rather than work done. It allows companies to open and close at will without reason, or repercussions.

Why should companies be privately owned? The people who start companies and make them big and drive competition should be rewarded it is true; but why does that person have to own that new company in order for him or her to be rewarded for that genius? The market economy is the most hypocritical system ever invented; it is the only system in the world whose Holy Grail is outlawed; Monopoly.

Your only theories of Socialists and Communists are what? Stalin? The Cold War? The Command Economy in those systems is what you point at; but you direct the words at the system that uses it instead. Why? To bring up images of things that Socialists and Communists have done; few of which are a representation of what a Command Economy does, and none that anybody here is going to think about when reading the words. Socialists and Communists use the Command Economy; Communism and Socialism are not the only systems which can use it.

You don't need to be oppressive and dictatorial in order to make a command economy work as it did for the Soviets in turning them from the most backward country in the western world to a country second only to the United States in only ten years. Had Nazism and its privately owned businesses not intervened the next two five year plans would have almost certainly have brought living conditions up to levels even Americans of the time would be pleased with, through a command economy. There is evidence of this in the five year plan started just before Germany Attacked. Without that economy that managed to organised a resource level no other country will ever control Hitler would have turned Moscow into a rubble pit in a year and given Germany the resources and cities to help us all learn German.

Privately owned business is just a way for the rich to stay rich long after they have stopped using the talent that made them rich; if indeed they were ever talented. The is nothing good a Market Economy does that a Command Economy doesn't twice as fast and three times as organised.