I won't give any analogy, because I don't want to sway an answer either way.

In a worst case scenario, which power base would you prefer to live under, a socialist one, or one where corporations run the country?

It would be a sad situation indeed if those were the only two possible choices. 

However, if those are the only two possible choices, I'd have to go with corporations, if only because their motives are much more transparent. In the nineteenth century, mainly after the Civil War, the US wasn't too far from that, and it turned out pretty well, I think.

Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2012, 11:33:38 AM
I won't give any analogy, because I don't want to sway an answer either way.

In a worst case scenario, which power base would you prefer to live under, a socialist one, or one where corporations run the country?

Corporate Society...At least then, you can advance and improve your lot  based upon MERIT.  Socialism is an "all boats rise" philosophy...the ant gets no credit for his industry while the ne'er do well grasshoppers get just as much.

Quote from: tbone0106 on June 20, 2012, 11:40:23 AM
It would be a sad situation indeed if those were the only two possible choices. 

However, if those are the only two possible choices, I'd have to go with corporations, if only because their motives are much more transparent. In the nineteenth century, mainly after the Civil War, the US wasn't too far from that, and it turned out pretty well, I think.

I agree, at least under corporatism, we'd still be a Capitalist economy where people would still have freedoms.
Under socialism?

I ask only because with our current administration, the lines became blurred, GE for example.

Corporate. At least we could still start a lemonade stand and build it into an empire.

Quote from: kramarat on June 20, 2012, 01:56:36 PM
Corporate. At least we could still start a lemonade stand and build it into an empire.

Good point.
Under socialism, you couldn't afford the environmental impact study or license fee to follow.

I'd choose corporations.

I can live in a world of "haves" and "have nots." Even if I'm dirt poor, I'd rather be poor than equal with everybody. Socialism sucks.

Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2012, 11:45:06 AM
I agree, at least under corporatism, we'd still be a Capitalist economy where people would still have freedoms.
Under socialism?

I ask only because with our current administration, the lines became blurred, GE for example.

In entities like GE only the upper eschelon have a chance to rise...unions within the company keep the rest wallowing in equality.

Quote from: bluelieu on June 20, 2012, 02:29:08 PM
 

In entities like GE only the upper eschelon have a chance to rise...unions within the company keep the rest wallowing in equality.

Under a pure "corporations run" country, there wouldn't be any unions.

Quote from: rich_t on June 20, 2012, 02:47:38 PM
Under a pure "corporations run" country, there wouldn't be any unions.

There also would be no corrupt government feeding GE, tax dollars, and, drumroll please...........................................there would lots more competition, therefore, it would be unlikely that mega corporations would exist.

Quote from: Jasmine on June 20, 2012, 02:13:16 PM
I'd choose corporations.

I can live in a world of "haves" and "have nots." Even if I'm dirt poor, I'd rather be poor than equal with everybody. Socialism sucks.

Agreed. Socialist initiative is an oxymoron.

Quote from: rich_t on June 20, 2012, 02:47:38 PM
Under a pure "corporations run" country, there wouldn't be any unions.

I think "boutique companies" owned by the leeches would operate at the artisan or small job shop level. Their fees of course would be wildly overpriced, and if they do make money a larger union will probably try muscling-in on dues money. One can hope, anyway.

What tbone said?  Ditto.

Quote from: Solar on June 20, 2012, 11:33:38 AM
I won't give any analogy, because I don't want to sway an answer either way.

In a worst case scenario, which power base would you prefer to live under, a socialist one, or one where corporations run the country?

I'm going to presume that by a socialist power base, you mean a dictatorial socialist regime, as opposed to a nation were corporations have pretty much free reign with little, or no interference from the government.

I think I would go for the socialist regime. History has shown that socialist societies are by their very  nature, unstable. Even without external prodding, then tend to collapse under their own weight.

A corporate society, although preferable to a socialist society, is more stable. If things are fine, this is not a problem, but in a bad corporate society, things are going to stay "bad" for quite a while.

-Dr Watt

Quote from: Charliemyboy on June 20, 2012, 05:12:37 PM
What tbone said?  Ditto.

I will take that as your commitment to vote for me for Corporate Czar of the Newnited Skates of America!