$640.00 to fill the tanks...

"Jose" wrote in message
om...

How is this =really= different from WalMart jumping in and crushing all
the local stores? Think for a moment.



It is plain and simple communism. The people (read government) owns the
means of production.

On the other hand, Wal-Mart was a little company that got big because it
provided something the buying public wanted. It did not start out the giant
that it is today.

It is plain and simple communism. The people (read government) owns the
means of production.

On the other hand, Wal-Mart was a little company that got big because it
provided something the buying public wanted. It did not start out the giant
that it is today.

But now that WalMart is big, it goes public, and the people once again
own the means of production (only this time it's a limited set of
people). And, when it gets big enough, it purchases influence in the
government.

Ultimately, if enough influence is purchased, we end up in the same
place, effectively, as what you call communism.

Also, I would say that another useful definition of communism is that
the people own the =only= means of production. This is where it gets
bad. Otherwise, it is just in competition with everything else.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
om...
It is plain and simple communism. The people (read government) owns the
means of production.

On the other hand, Wal-Mart was a little company that got big because it
provided something the buying public wanted. It did not start out the
giant that it is today.

But now that WalMart is big, it goes public, and the people once again own
the means of production (only this time it's a limited set of people).
And, when it gets big enough, it purchases influence in the government.

Ultimately, if enough influence is purchased, we end up in the same place,
effectively, as what you call communism.

Also, I would say that another useful definition of communism is that the
people own the =only= means of production. This is where it gets bad.
Otherwise, it is just in competition with everything else.



So business are OK unless they are successful? That's a nice thought.

So business are OK unless they are successful? That's a nice thought.

I'm not saying anything is OK or not OK. I'm saying that a business
that is too successful (gets too big) becomes relatively more powerful
than its customers. This has upsides and downsides. Sometimes, the
public benefits by some restraint on the larger companies. Sometimes not.

But "unrestrained capitalsim" is not the unmitigated good that the OP
implied.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...

"Jose" wrote in message
om...
It is plain and simple communism. The people (read government) owns the
means of production.

On the other hand, Wal-Mart was a little company that got big because it
provided something the buying public wanted. It did not start out the
giant that it is today.

But now that WalMart is big, it goes public, and the people once again
own the means of production (only this time it's a limited set of
people). And, when it gets big enough, it purchases influence in the
government.

Ultimately, if enough influence is purchased, we end up in the same
place, effectively, as what you call communism.

Also, I would say that another useful definition of communism is that the
people own the =only= means of production. This is where it gets bad.
Otherwise, it is just in competition with everything else.



So business are OK unless they are successful? That's a nice thought.

It's called envy, the same problem the Arab/Islamic world operates under.

Michelle

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:48:25 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote:


"Jose" wrote in message
. com...

How is this =really= different from WalMart jumping in and crushing all
the local stores? Think for a moment.



It is plain and simple communism. The people (read government) owns the
means of production.

Communism is an economic system, not a governmental system.
Theoretically In Communism the wealth is shared equally among the
people. However Communism (read commune ism) has only been able to
sorta work under a totalitarian system.

City owned convention centers are certainly nothing new. OTOH when
they start getting into business such as hotels and stores which are
in direct competition with businesses they may be running afoul of
state and federal laws. It's going to take someone with more
knowledge of the laws than I have to figure that one out.


On the other hand, Wal-Mart was a little company that got big because it
provided something the buying public wanted. It did not start out the giant
that it is today.

Which is a prime example of Capitalism. Unfortunately when companies
get too big there are lots of downsides.

They provided what the public wanted and the small stores couldn't.
The public went for cheap and low price, then they complain about the
chains taking over the market.





Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com