Free state

[julonred]

http://www.freestateproject.org/

shall we?

[dragonfly]

Reductions in regulation? Sounds like a corporate polluter's wet dream.

[sidecross]

Some believe we are hardwired not to be in groups larger than about 45.

Personally, I do not even know well 45 people; the idea of connecting with 20,000 people is way beyond my capability or desire.

[PuristLove]

I'd rather be in a place where corporations can get away with polluting because government is small than a place where corporations can't pollute because government is big.

Ultimately, changes in the way we treat the earth have to come from individual's and their attitudes, and not from lawmakers.

[steve]

Deregulation, tax cuts, and less government are fast leading to oligarchy (and the rape of the environment). The idea that an individual can be more free in a system like that is a big illusion.

[PuristLove]

How is it, that big corporations can in any way threaten our choices as individuals? They cannot pass laws (and if we had a truly libertarian government in place, it would not matter how much they lobbied for such things) and we can buy our products from whomever we desire.

It is quite possible to use only small business if one desires, to buy products from environmentally friendly companies, etc.

Big government, however, can force us to use particular standards, etc (for example, the FCC had declared that all broadcasts must be High Definition by 2006, so we're all going to have to purchase new televisions or converters, or stop tuning into Discovery Science), can force us to make choices about lifestyle, etc. And, if it is law, and backed by the courts, then we can be sent to prison for not complying.

Big business, however, can not do that.

That is why an individual is more free with a small government.

[steve]

Deregulation leads to monopolization (witness Microsoft, Starbucks): no freedom if only one company. It leads to corruption (witness enron): no freedom if you don’t even know your money is others hands. Big capital is interested in one thing: the further increase of capital. Greed is what makes the capitalistic world go round, not some abstract idea of freedom.
The essence of free-market neo-liberalism, libertarianism is capitalism unhinged. The essence of capitalism is investment of capital, whether it be financial, social, educational, whatever. It means s/he who has, gets even more; s/he who has not loses what little s/he has. Already 20-30% of this country has nothing effectively to invest, and it is growing. The gap between rich and poor becomes wider, inevitably, inexorably. Corporations certainly do control your freedom, and certainly do pass laws. Indeed, they created the entirety of Cheney’s energy policy in closed door meetings which the Bush administration is going to ridiculous judicial ends to keep hidden from the public. When politics cozys up to corporations for funding, indeed cannot exist without them, corporations can buy not only the legislature but the public forum, limiting information available on the wide public circuits as to, for instance, what the true nature of deregulation and tax cuts is all about. When corporations in cahoots with its cronies in government are licking their chops over the prospects of Iraqi oil and rebuilding contracts it can convince everyone there’s a danger coming from there and war is necessary. Who won the war? Bechtel and Haliburton. All staffed with Republican officials. Its really ironic you mention the FCC where baby powell is doing everything he can to gut the agency he is supposed to lead. Individuals include the wolves, and in a deregulated society, money rules, and wolves are set to guard the sheep. I have to think the vision of ‘less government good’; ‘more government bad’ has a nice idealistic appeal. But it totally neglects how the world works.

[dragonfly]

Originally posted by PuristLove:
How is it, that big corporations can in any way threaten our choices as individuals? I invite you to visit the village in the Appalachian mountains of eastern Pennsylvania where I grew up. A lack of adequate regulation (PA has some of the laxest enviro enforcement in the nation) has enabled corporations to create waste dumps there so polluted that four of them have been declared Superfund sites, among the most toxic places in the nation. Four Superfund sites in a community of 1,000 people! And then there are the ongoing industrial operations in the area that spew literally millions of pounds of toxins into the community's air and water every year.

One of the Superfund sites is located uphill from the local drinking water reservoir. Another is located on the banks of a river near my old elementary school. Because the corporation responsible for that site lied to local residents, for many years we believed the place was safe. We played there as kids, since it's located in the woods adjacent to state gamelands and was not fenced in or posted with any kind of warning signs. It was only later that we learned the site is in fact badly contaminated with dioxins, furans, PCBs and lead, among the most poisonous substances known to science.

So you see, underregulated corporations have threatened not only my choice of where to hike or swim or live -- they have threatened my very life and well being, and that of my family and neighbors. Almost every home in the neighborhood where I grew up (including my family's) has been touched by cancer, endocrine disorders and/or autoimmune disease. The government (which of course is owned by the corporations because of the present campaign finance system) maintains that's just a coincidence. Ha.

So from my pissed-off and poisoned perspective, we need a lot more environmental regulation, not less. The only way I could possibly endorse any kind of libertarian vision would be if it allowed no corporate shield and held individual profiteers strictly liable for the environmental, public health and other problems they create.