August1991 Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) While working at home this afternoon, and every so often flipping over to see how the CBC was presenting the NDP leadership results, it dawned on me that choice is good. The CBC invariably described the leadership race as a debate among family members - but the fact is that NDP party members had a choice. Without a leadership race, how would the NDP choose its next leader? Well, imagine a society where there is no choice. Huh? In general, the NDP (and other leftists) want to restrict choice. They want people to send their children to specific schools with teachers chosen by the State. You are not free to see the doctor of your choice. ---- Leftists often argue that Crest is really no different from Colgate. And Pepsi no different from Coke. In the case of pharmaceutical drugs, some argue (NDP leadership candidate Martin Singh, for example) that it would be better if we had a single buyer - to enjoy the economies of scale. Coke and Pepsi are "wasteful" competition, rent seeking. We can call this the Walmart or Costco approach to life and economics. There are economies of scale, and it makes no sense to duplicate what is the best way. A single way is better - and a democratic State should organize this best way for the benefit of all. Yet, this NDP leadership race offered choice. Was it wasteful rent seeking? Were the NDP candidates really different? Frankly, they all seemed identical to me. It seemed to me that Topp and Nash, for example, were very similar: both were union/political activists. Yet I realized that even if the leadership candidates were "identical" Coke/Pepsi candidates, the simple fact that NDP party members could choose between different candidates matters. It changed the dynamic of the leadership race, and changed the party. For example, why have both a federal department of health, and a provincial ministry of health? Why even have two levels of government? Why have different brands of toothpaste? It would be cheaper if we had a single, well made toothpaste. ---- IMHO, the simple fact that we have the choice between even two identical products, or identical candidates, changes entirely the rapport de force. Milton Friedman (with his wife Rose) wrote a book entitled Freedom to Choose. In a sense, the NDP party members understood this idea when they were free to choose among seven or so leadership candidates. Vive la liberté de choix ! Edited March 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 While working at home this afternoon, and every so often flipping over to see how the CBC was presenting the NDP leadership results, it dawned on me that choice is good. The CBC invariably described the leadership race as a debate among family members - but the fact is that NDP party members had a choice. Without a leadership race, how would the NDP choose its next leader? Well, imagine a society where there is no choice. Huh? In general, the NDP (and other leftists) want to restrict choice. They want people to send their children to specific schools with teachers chosen by the State. You are not free to see the doctor of your choice. ---- Leftists often argue that Crest is really no different from Colgate. And Pepsi no different from Coke. In the case of pharmaceutical drugs, some argue (NDP leadership candidate Martin Singh, for example) that it would be better if we had a single buyer - to enjoy the economies of scale. Coke and Pepsi are "wasteful" competition, rent seeking. We can call this the Walmart or Costco approach to life and economics. There are economies of scale, and it makes no sense to duplicate what is the best way. A single way is better - and a democratic State should organize this best way for the benefit of all. Yet, this NDP leadership race offered choice. Was it wasteful rent seeking? Were the NDP candidates really different? Frankly, they all seemed identical to me. It seemed to me that Topp and Nash, for example, were very similar: both were union/political activists. Yet I realized that even if the leadership candidates were "identical" Coke/Pepsi candidates, the simple fact that NDP party members could choose between different candidates matters. It changed the dynamic of the leadership race, and changed the party. For example, why have both a federal department of health, and a provincial ministry of health? Why even have two levels of government? Why have different brands of toothpaste? It would be cheaper if we had a single, well made toothpaste. ---- IMHO, the simple fact that we have the choice between even two identical products, or identical candidates, changes entirely the rapport de force. Milton Friedman (with his wife Rose) wrote a book entitled Freedom to Choose. In a sense, the NDP party members understood this idea when they were free to choose among seven or so leadership candidates. Vive la liberté de choix ! None other than General Augusto Pinochet thought highly of Friedman.... Pinochet famously said that democracy,"was the incubator of Communism!"... I would'nt be so quick to extole (sp) the wonderfulness of Uncle Milty... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) None other than General Augusto Pinochet thought highly of Friedman....Pinochet famously said that democracy,"was the incubator of Communism!"... I would'nt be so quick to extole (sp) the wonderfulness of Uncle Milty... I think that wikipedia refers to your post as an Ad Hominem argument. But more fundamentally Jack, is choice bad?Federal NDP party members were free to choose their party leader; and yet socialists (NDP/BQ/QS) want to restrict choice elsewhere, for teachers/doctors for example. Edited March 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 thought this was going to be an abortion thread me disappoint Quote Don't ban me bro. Oh behave, I'll behave. I'll be a good little boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 I think that wikipedia refers to your post as an Ad Hominem argument. But more fundamentally Jack, is choice bad? Choice is'nt bad... But when that "freedom" turns into tyrrany,choice is'nt good. Did the people of Chile have a choice under the "freedom" Pinochet was ostensibly there to uphold? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) But when that "freedom" turns into tyrrany,choice is'nt good.How does individual freedom turn into tyranny?Between the two, I prefer individual freedom. What about you? ---- I simply admire the thousands of federal NDP members who are free to choose their next leader. And I am astonished that they advocate a system that forces people to have no choice for a doctor/teacher. Edited March 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 How does individual freedom turn into tyranny? Between the two, I prefer individual freedom. What about you? Sounds great... But you avoided the question... People like Kevin O'Leary talk all the time about the sanctity of the "Free Market" and the "freedom" it provides...Then openly look at a place like China as the perfect model for "Capitalism"... Incongruous,don't you think? Or is it that the purveyors of "individual freedom" are only using that idea as means to an end in a never ending struggle for power and control? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 People like Kevin O'Leary talk all the time about the sanctity of the "Free Market" and the "freedom" it provides...Then openly look at a place like China as the perfect model for "Capitalism"...Incongruous,don't you think? Or is it that the purveyors of "individual freedom" are only using that idea as means to an end in a never ending struggle for power and control? WTF?China? Freedom to choose? I'm sorry, I don't know who Kevin O'Leary is. With such a name, I suspect that he's Irish Catholic and probably on the English CBC. Jack Weber, what's your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) WTF? China? Freedom to choose? I'm sorry, I don't know who Kevin O'Leary is. With such a name, I suspect that he's Irish Catholic and probably on the English CBC. Jack Weber, what's your point? You really need to get out more... Kevin O'Leary is a Vulture...er Venture Capitalist on the Lang and O'Leary exchange on the dreaded CBC... Blathers on all the time about "personal freedom"...Thinks the Chinese model is great because if you don't meet the numbers,you get shot! Ah...The freedom of Chinese authoritarian Capitalism!!! My point is,that those who hold infantile ideas on individual freedom are many times unwitting pawns in a power and control struggle by those who use that rhetoric to entrench their own power and control... Edited March 25, 2012 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) Ah...The freedom of Chinese authoritarian Capitalism!!!My point is,that those who hold infantile ideas on individual freedom are many times unwitting pawns in a power and control struggle by those who use that rhetoric to entrench their own power and control... WTF?Pepsi or Coke, Colgate or Crest. What's the difference? Jack Weber, you don't get it. The simple freedom to choose gives power to individuals. Yet, socialists want to create social systems (education, health) that restrict individual choice. For socialists and leftists, there is only Coke and only Crest. There is no Pepsi, and no Colgate. Edited March 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) Ah...The freedom of Chinese authoritarian Capitalism!!!My point is,that those who hold infantile ideas on individual freedom are many times unwitting pawns in a power and control struggle by those who use that rhetoric to entrench their own power and control... Just like those infantile fools who chose the federal NDP leader on the Internet. Edited March 25, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 WTF? Pepsi or Coke, Colgate or Crest. What's the difference? Jack Weber, you don't get it. The simple freedom to choose gives power to individuals. Yet, socialists want to create social systems (education, health) that restrict individual choice. For socialists and leftists, there is only Coke and only Crest. There is no Pepsi, and no Colgate. uh huh... The simple freedom to chose... Right out of the NAM/Koch Bros. playbook as it relates to things like RTW legislation... 'Cause it's all about the "personal freedom"... Don Blankenship thanks you for your unwitting support... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 Just like those infantile fools who chose the federal NDP leader on the Internet. Quite possibly... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 Leftists often argue that Crest is really no different from Colgate. My dentist informed me that "Crest is really no different from Colgate" (that what matters is the way you brush your teeth, not which brand you buy). I didn't realize he was speaking from an inherited swamp of ideological stasis. We can call this the Walmart or Costco approach to life and economics. Walmart and Costco are following the neoliberal economic dream; and Walmart, at least, is owned and run primarily by religious conservatives, not choice-hatin' lefties. There are economies of scale, and it makes no sense to duplicate what is the best way. A single way is better - and a democratic State should organize this best way for the benefit of all. All economic systems, certainly including capitalism, are premised on the notion of most good for greatest number of people. Properly so. That's the central argument in favour of capitalism, whether it's accurate or not. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 I think when the time comes for the Tories to choose a new leader, things could get a little hot. Why? Well since the PC lost the party I'm sure they will try to recoup what they lost and if you have former reformers running against former PC or west vs east, this could become very interesting situation. Since there more former PC within the party, the PC name could come back. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 (edited) Might I point out that in our world freedom for one group usually means less freedom for another. Who put Pinochet into power? United States intervention in Chile. What? From the land of the free? WTF And secondly, I think references to Costco and Walmart are ironic. These institutions are the very pinnacle of Capitalist achievement, the eventual evolution of industries into singular, all encompassing conglomerates. Without some element of leftism, profit and power always rises upward in a pyramidal shape until it is controlled by the hands of a select few. Then you have exactly the thing which you are fearful of, no more competition, no more choice. There is no ideological "magic bullet". Only a sublime blend, that needs to be properly stirred now and again. ahh freedom, thy name is mediocrity... Edited March 25, 2012 by Manny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 In general, the NDP (and other leftists) want to restrict choice. They want people to send their children to specific schools with teachers chosen by the State. You are not free to see the doctor of your choice. You've repeated this very basic theory of yours to the point where it has become a platitude. The idea that one system or another wants to restrict "choice" is simply a half-blind perspective on things. When large economic players force out competition is that "choice" ? That's free enterprise. When social conservatives pressure employers, stores to not offer contraception, how does that enable choice ? When conservative voices call for a constitutional amendment to restrict marriage to a man and a woman only, how is that providing more choices ? In short, when you categorize left-vs-right with your simplistic choice-vs-no-choice label, it makes leftists look like Luddites and misrepresents them at the same time. ---- Leftists often argue that Crest is really no different from Colgate. They "often argue" ? Really. Frankly, they all seemed identical to me. It seemed to me that Topp and Nash, for example, were very similar: both were union/political activists. This I agree with: the era of political ideas seems to be 20-40 years behind us now. Vive la liberté de choix ! Many leftists argue that the Conservative government is fascist. I say to them, and you both: Come up with a new argument. This one just doesn't fit. Quote  Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted March 25, 2012 Report Share Posted March 25, 2012 Many leftists argue that the Conservative government is fascist. I say to them, and you both: Come up with a new argument. This one just doesn't fit. True enough. The word "fascist" has been woefully over- and mis-used since--well, since the glory days of fascism, presumably. I'm not a fan of the Harper government, but to refer to them as "fascist" is so over-the-top that it actually harms honest discussion. The misuse of "commies" isn't too helpful, either. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 26, 2012 Report Share Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) WTF? Pepsi or Coke, Colgate or Crest. What's the difference? Jack Weber, you don't get it. The simple freedom to choose gives power to individuals. Yet, socialists want to create social systems (education, health) that restrict individual choice. For socialists and leftists, there is only Coke and only Crest. There is no Pepsi, and no Colgate. Your proposed utopia would only offer the illusion of choice. People would be segregated by their ability to pay. Only those with the most money would actually have the freedom to choose, while those without would be relegated to an underclass with no escape. Fortunately, most governments, including the current Harper Conservatives, realize that people should have truly equal access to healthcare and education. It's one thing to be able to choose between a luxury car and a bus pass, or a multi-million dollar home and renting a basement apartment. It's quite another when you're going to limit the best healthcare and education to the upperclass because they're the only ones who could afford such "luxury." So, August, in your own rhetorical style, why do conservative "fascists" want to punish children and the sick by limiting their access to quality healthcare and education? Moreover, what's an uneducated and unhealthy labour force going to do for the capitalist entrepreneurs? Edited March 26, 2012 by cybercoma Quote "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." --Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 Just like those infantile fools who chose the federal NDP leader on the Internet.Sorry, I indulged in sarcasm on the Internet.My bad. You've repeated this very basic theory of yours to the point where it has become a platitude. The idea that one system or another wants to restrict "choice" is simply a half-blind perspective on things.Socialists, Leftists, the PQ, the NDP, unions, syndicalistes etc want to restrict choice.MH, make no mistake. In general, leftists oppose the freedom to choose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 In general, leftists oppose the freedom to choose. That's just plain moronic. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted March 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) That's just plain moronic. Leftists want to have monopoly State education and monopoly State health care. Leftists want State bureaucrats to decide.Your proposed utopia would only offer the illusion of choice.Modern Leftists refer to the "illusion" of choice. Yet, the choice between Crest/Colgate or Democrats/Republicans is a real choice - and fundamental to a civilized society. Even if Crest/Colgate are identical, choice puts power into the hands of individuals.Socialists oppose this individual power; according to socialists, this individual choice would only benefit rich people. ---- Yet, while the federal NDP encouraged new members to vote among many, even young, potential leaders - unions choose according to seniority. And while the federal NDP has opened its membership/leadership to anyone, public sector unions of teachers and medical workers are restricted. ----- For the rest of us, the NDP means that we must wait in line. If you want to see a nurse, doctor or send your child to a teacher - Your choice is restricted. Wait in line. The ability/freedom to choose is fundamental to a civilized society. For God's sake, we have a Charter of Rights. Edited March 27, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 Socialists, Leftists, the PQ, the NDP, unions, syndicalistes etc want to restrict choice. MH, make no mistake. In general, leftists oppose the freedom to choose. I offered you an argument, and you instead chose to repeat (again) your assertion. You're restricting my choice to have a debate with you. Quote  Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Sorry, I indulged in sarcasm on the Internet. My bad. Socialists, Leftists, the PQ, the NDP, unions, syndicalistes etc want to restrict choice. MH, make no mistake. In general, leftists oppose the freedom to choose. So it's pointed out to you several ways how wrong that statement is and you're just going to continue saying, as though repeating it makes it truer. Quote "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." --Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Leftists want to have monopoly State education and monopoly State health care. Leftists want State bureaucrats to decide. Modern Leftists refer to the "illusion" of choice. Yet, the choice between Crest/Colgate or Democrats/Republicans is a real choice - and fundamental to a civilized society. Even if Crest/Colgate are identical, choice puts power into the hands of individuals. Socialists oppose this individual power; according to socialists, this individual choice would only benefit rich people. ---- Yet, while the federal NDP encouraged new members to vote among many, even young, potential leaders - unions choose according to seniority. And while the federal NDP has opened its membership/leadership to anyone, public sector unions of teachers and medical workers are restricted. ----- For the rest of us, the NDP means that we must wait in line. If you want to see a nurse, doctor or send your child to a teacher - Your choice is restricted. Wait in line. The ability/freedom to choose is fundamental to a civilized society. For God's sake, we have a Charter of Rights. You're so completely wrong it's not even funny. I don't know any leftists that are restricting your ability to choose between Coke and Pepsi or Colgate and Crest. Moreover, you're entirely wrong about healthcare, as you have all the choice in the world of where to get your healthcare. We have a SINGLE-PAYER system here in all of the provinces. That doesn't restrict your choice of where to get healthcare; it restricts who is going to pay for it. I already provided you with an argument about why education is government run and even then you have the choice to homeschool or have your children taught at private schools. You're entirely wrong, not even close to the truth. But you keep repeating your claim as though it's a foregone conclusion. Quote "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." --Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.