Althouse: "Why Uber must be stopped/The touted start-up is proving to be the embodiment of unrestrained hyper-capitalism. What happens when it wins?"

September 1, 2014

"Why Uber must be stopped/The touted start-up is proving to be the embodiment of unrestrained hyper-capitalism. What happens when it wins?"

Hysterical headline at Salon, illustrated by a photoshop of Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko and Leonardo Di Caprio as the Wolf of Wall Street, together at last, glaring at us rapaciously.

Here's Power Line's attack on Salon.

79 comments:

George M. Spencer said...: Other headlines today at Salon include:

I never should have followed my dreams

I quit my steady gig to fulfill my potential. Instead I went broke, and got fired from a job in doggie daycare

---

Here’s how Pandora is destroying musicians

---

The dark side of Snapchat: How the image-sharing app brought out the worst in humanity

Overall, Salon's message seems to be progress, bad; not following dreams, good.; 9/1/14, 9:06 AM
George M. Spencer said...: Oh, also...Under Salon's "Entertainment" heading...

Watch 100 topless people get tasered by their loved ones

That's "Entertainment" in 2014 America!; 9/1/14, 9:07 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Tell me again - is Salon profitable ? Or it is just another of the money-losing librul Pravdas like the Nation? Is it propped up with donations by the likes of George Soros?; 9/1/14, 9:11 AM
The Drill SGT said...: I for one welcome my new Uber Masters. They seem to be less corrupt and most customer oriented than say the DC Taxi Commission.; 9/1/14, 9:13 AM
Greg Hlatky said...: Salon? Are they still in business?; 9/1/14, 9:14 AM
chillblaine said...: Yes, diligent regulation of entrenched legacy business models is highly desirable. It worked very well for Jon Corzine and Angelo Mozilo.; 9/1/14, 9:16 AM
Wince said...: Leonard appears mired in liberal dogma about the free-market leading inexorably to monopoly. Yet in pointing to government regulation as a solution, he hints at the possibility of "regulatory capture", where a market hegemon, like Uber, might use its influence to shape government regulation to actually protect its position.

"So here’s what’s going to happen. Society is going to realize that power as great as Uber’s needs to be checked. Uber, by virtue of its own success, will demonstrate where the lines need to be drawn for the general good. When Uber is the only game in town, the necessity for comprehensive requirements for commercial insurance and background checks will be obvious. When Uber starts using its logistics clout and unlimited investment capital to go after UPS and Hertz and FedEx, regulators will start wondering about antitrust issues."

Unfortunately, we should expect fewer people to critically discern those trade-offs in the future, given that...

Recently, a few conservative intellectuals have raised serious questions about the College Board’s effort to develop a new curriculum for the Advanced Placement history courses. Stanley Kurtz, at National Review Online, writes that “this Framework will effectively force American high schools to teach U.S. history from a leftist perspective.” Naturally, the College Board argues that its intent is only to provide “balance,” to streamline the curriculum, and to enhance teacher flexibility. In other words, all benign matters that educators should welcome...

Take as an example how it frames questions about Progressivism and the New Deal. The report puts it this way:

"Progressive reformers responded to economic instability, social inequality, and political corruption by calling for government intervention in the economy, expanded democracy, greater social justice, and conservation of natural resources."

There is no indication that Progressive reform actually may have been instituted by corporate regulators for their own benefit [edh: or the benefit of the regulated], at the expense of small manufacturers and producers. This argument, by historians like Gabriel Kolko, James Weinstein and Martin J.Sklar, whose pioneering work changed the standard view of progressivism, is not even raised as an alternative way to comprehend the Progressive era. The paragraph, as structured, reflects the old traditional left/liberal view of the Progressive Era, and takes it as a given.; 9/1/14, 9:29 AM
Bob Boyd said...: Its bad enough that these ride providers are just driving around giving people rides, but what about the riders?
Do they really need to be going somewhere? Does anyone in authority know where these people are going or why? Are these trips even necessary? Have we thought about the economic, social and environmental costs of all these people going places? Is anybody even talking about getting a handle on that side of it? Please tell me the answer is yes.
Its been well established that ordinary people don't make good decisions when left to their own devices. Can we expect all these folks, who don't even choose healthy foods, to know whether they really need go to the airport or not?
I'd like to see a system in place, some kind of a process, an application and review. There's no reason the whole thing couldn't be online.; 9/1/14, 9:31 AM
Rusty said...: Everybody knows free markets don't work.; 9/1/14, 9:34 AM
furious_a said...: Salon hates Uber because, like most innovations targeting heavily regulated industries, the Uber business model offers insufficient opportunities for graft and lobbyists' retainers.; 9/1/14, 9:45 AM
somefeller said...: AJ Lynch asks: Tell me again - is Salon profitable ? Or it is just another of the money-losing librul Pravdas like the Nation? Is it propped up with donations by the likes of George Soros?

It's at least as profitable as National Review. And political journals aren't expected to be big revenue-generators. That's why many if not most of them are run by nonprofits. For example, per Wikipedia (with cite in piece): "Buckley said in 2005 that the magazine had lost about $25,000,000 over fifty years."

But thanks for playing, AJ.; 9/1/14, 9:59 AM
Drago said...: Somefeller: "It's at least as profitable as National Review."

Links please.

Don't worry, we don't really expect any.; 9/1/14, 10:04 AM
somefeller said...: Dumb Salon piece, though. Uber is the very model of blue culture capitalism (tech-based, geared towards urbanites) and a company that engages David Plouffe isn't likely to be a right-wing outfit. But it shows that even liberals can fall prey to the sort of simplistic populist critiques one would expect from social conservatives. Alas.; 9/1/14, 10:06 AM
traditionalguy said...: The drugged up brains of dedicated believers calling themselves progressives seems comfortable with any hierarchy system that they imagines is "for the people" at the top. It is in Dear Leader's soul.

That is fascism redux. It is also the ruling method of Rome by Caesars. It was also the Roman Church's rule adopted again because it works so well. It sends orders down a chain that then sends money back up the chain to Christ supposedly.

But as its Sicilian offshoot called the Mafia shows, it has to be enforced by an army of murderers...like a militarized police.

The governing authority method set up back in the 13 States' experiment of 1776- 1789 is the last thing a progressive mind can comprehend... it looks like dangerous chaos to them...why anybody can get the money!; 9/1/14, 10:08 AM
somefeller said...: I provided a Buckley quote and where you can find a cite, Drago. You can start there. Too complicated for you? Also, knowledgable people know how these things work in the political journal business. But thank you for playing, too.; 9/1/14, 10:11 AM
Saint Croix said...: The touted start-up is proving to be the embodiment of unrestrained hyper-capitalism.

One of the most annoying things about the left is how they seem unaware how obsessed they are about money. Greed is the only sin they recognize, and so it's greed, greed, greed 24/7.

Capitalists do not say that "greed is good." We simply believe that the attempts to destroy it and purge it out does way more harm than greed itself. You'll never destroy greed, any more than you'll destroy lust or gluttony or any of the sins.

Socialists are rather like Islamists when it comes to greed. Both ideologies say that compound interest is evil and must be stopped. Thus both ideologies create poverty wherever they go. And have you destroyed greed? Or is it still there?

Imagine leftists going on and on about lust. Yes, that's right, unrestrained hyper-lust! Imagine them out on the streets, holding signs about lust. That's what Marx has done, created a religion over money. Pathetic and sad and very impoverishing.

Yes, greed is bad. Be aware of it. Preach against it. But also be aware that your crusade against greed can go too far. You can become intolerant and harsh and make our society a hellish place to live.

A capitalist society is a free society, and it's a free society because it's a tolerant society. Tolerance is an important concept for passionate and religious people.

Think about your own selfishness. I know you've abolished greed from your life, you're 100% greed-free. And you've taken a vow of poverty, that's obvious. But think about all your pride, your envy, your lust, and all the other selfish desires you have, before you start to rant about greedy people who are trying to start a business.; 9/1/14, 10:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Regulations are for the weak! Uber, and all businesses in America, should just do whatever they wish in their pursuit of profits while telling the lawmakers and bureaucrats to eat shit and die.; 9/1/14, 10:17 AM
Big Mike said...: furious_a is right. Progs hate Uber because they haven't yet figured out how to extort graft from their new business model. Once they figure that out then Salon will be perfectly all right with Uber.; 9/1/14, 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Tell me again - is Salon profitable ?

Nope. Just like Limbaugh and Hannity, it is propped up by deep-pocketed billionaires who want to get their personal agenda sold to the masses.; 9/1/14, 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Tell me again - is Salon profitable ?

Nope. Just like Limbaugh and Hannity, it is propped up by deep-pocketed billionaires who want to get their personal agenda sold to the masses.; 9/1/14, 10:22 AM
sane_voter said...: That Powerline post by Steven Hayward really hit the bullseye.; 9/1/14, 10:25 AM
somefeller said...: Progs like David Plouffe, Big Mike? Or Uber's target audience in big US cities? Your analysis never fails to impress.; 9/1/14, 10:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Forget it Jake, it's Salon.; 9/1/14, 10:39 AM
Annie said...: madisonfella doesn't have a clue how radio works.; 9/1/14, 10:40 AM
Drago said...: Early Somefeller: "It's (Salon) at least as profitable as National Review."

Present tense

Later somefeller said...
I provided a Buckley quote and where you can find a cite, Drago. You can start there. Too complicated for you?

Your Buckely quote included Buckley's impression regarding profits/losses for the previous 50 years.

Since the opinion magazine business model has undergone a few "minor modifications", why should I worry about what the profit/loss was in 1955? We are talking about today.

As you were.

Until you weren't.

Too complicated for you?

Apparently, yes.; 9/1/14, 10:43 AM
FleetUSA said...: My son-in-law regularly uses Uber on business trips and loves it.; 9/1/14, 10:44 AM
Drago said...: madisonfella: "Nope. Just like Limbaugh and Hannity, it is propped up by deep-pocketed billionaires who want to get their personal agenda sold to the masses."

LOL

Madisonfella describes, to a tee, the left-wing radio business model and the opposite of conservative talk radio.

Too funny.

Not to worry though madisonfella, you are only 180 degrees out of whack with your "assessment".; 9/1/14, 10:45 AM
somefeller said...: National Review Institute finances from most recent Form 990: Total Revenue $519,459, Total Expenses $1,157,017.

That didn't take long for me to find. And no, I'm not going to teach you to do research, Drago. Now run along.; 9/1/14, 10:46 AM
Drago said...: Annie said...
madisonfella doesn't have a clue how radio works

In that regard, madisonfella strives for consistency across all subject matter.; 9/1/14, 10:47 AM
Mark said...: "What happens when it wins?"

You'll be able to get a car when and where you want at a reasonable price?; 9/1/14, 10:48 AM
Drago said...: Somefeller: "somefeller said...
National Review Institute finances from most recent Form 990: Total Revenue $519,459, Total Expenses $1,157,017."

LOL

You were drawing a comparison with Salon somefeller.

You did that.

Remember.

Now that you've shown us the National Review #'s (I have no reason to doubt them), what are the comparables for Salon?

You know, which was your original point.

That you made.

LOL; 9/1/14, 10:48 AM
rehajm said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/1/14, 10:49 AM
rehajm said...: The only people who like Uber are Uber customers and Uber drivers.; 9/1/14, 10:50 AM
Drago said...: rehajm said...
Besides Uber people the only people who like Uber are Uber customers and Uber drivers.

If people are allowed to make their own choices regarding car service, where will the madness end?

What's next, people choosing their own restaurants? Food at grocery stores?

Chaos.; 9/1/14, 10:50 AM
cubanbob said...: madisonfella said...

Regulations are for the weak! Uber, and all businesses in America, should just do whatever they wish in their pursuit of profits while telling the lawmakers and bureaucrats to eat shit and die.
9/1/14, 10:17 AM "

All things considered today, that would be an improvement.; 9/1/14, 10:54 AM
Achilles said...: Blogger somefeller said...
"Dumb Salon piece... ... But it shows that even liberals can fall prey to the sort of simplistic populist critiques one would expect from social conservatives. Alas."

Liberals aren't liberals anymore. They are statists protecting various graft centered regulation models. Who knew taxi commissions had so much in common with government unions in Wisconsin eh?; 9/1/14, 10:54 AM
Gahrie said...: Yeah because everyone knows that taxi drivers aren't capitalists and never try to maximize their profit, or take advantage of customer ignorance.; 9/1/14, 10:56 AM
Achilles said...: Madisonfella said...
"Regulations are for the weak! Uber, and all businesses in America, should just do whatever they wish in their pursuit of profits while telling the lawmakers and bureaucrats to eat shit and die."

Projection... Check.

Straw men... Check.

Violent ramblings... You hit the prog debate strategy trifecta.; 9/1/14, 10:58 AM
cubanbob said...: madisonfella said...

Tell me again - is Salon profitable ?

Nope. Just like Limbaugh and Hannity, it is propped up by deep-pocketed billionaires who want to get their personal agenda sold to the masses.

9/1/14, 10:22 AM"

There you go again talking about PBS and NPR. What do Hannity and Limbaugh have in common? They pay taxes that help support PBS and NPR that live off theirs and other people's taxes.; 9/1/14, 10:59 AM
rehajm said...: Society is going to realize that power as great as Uber’s needs to be checked.

Society realized power as great the taxi monopoly needed to be checked- that's one reason why we have Uber.; 9/1/14, 10:59 AM
Mark said...: I wonder how much of the knee-jerk anti-capitalism we see is the result of a deep fear that no one is really in control of things?; 9/1/14, 11:01 AM
Birkel said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/1/14, 11:01 AM
Brando said...: The issue Salon seemed to be raising was not so much that a service like Uber was such a bad thing but rather that their tactics in undermining Lyft (by setting up and canceling enough rides to drive Lyft out of business) are the problem. Which it seems to me means that Lyft needs a better way to counter that tactic, like requiring an account or cancellation fees. But arranging and canceling rides itself isn't illegal.; 9/1/14, 11:03 AM
Birkel said...: Achilles:
"Who knew taxi commissions had so much in common with government unions in Wisconsin eh?"

I did. And I'm guessing so did you. What do we win?; 9/1/14, 11:03 AM
somefeller said...: Um, no, Drago, my point was that if Salon is unprofitable (and I have no idea what it's finances are and don't feel like looking), that's par for the course in the political journal business and is a meaningless critique. And I used the venerable National Review as an example.

I guess that was too subtle for you. But I typed the paragraph above slowly so maybe you can get the point now.; 9/1/14, 11:04 AM
Achilles said...: Mark said...
"What happens when it wins?"

You'll be able to get a car when and where you want at a reasonable price?"

Until the government stops trying to ban it and decides to implement a special ride share fee\tax. Then the government can have it's fair share too.; 9/1/14, 11:05 AM
Achilles said...: Birkel said...
Achilles:
"Who knew taxi commissions had so much in common with government unions in Wisconsin eh?"

I did. And I'm guessing so did you. What do we win?"

The way things are going now, citizenship in Costa Rica and the chance to be parasite free for a decade or so.; 9/1/14, 11:11 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: Which it seems to me means that Lyft needs a better way to counter that tactic, like requiring an account or cancellation fees. But arranging and canceling rides itself isn't illegal.

Agree to the first point. They need a business model, at least now, that covers the cost of cancellations. Or, they could just start doing the same to Uber.

But, while what they did was probably not a crime, it is conceivably a tort - e.g. tortuous interference with prospective business advantage. Which means that they could sue the local Uber franchise, for the lost business, if they could prove it. It is also the sort of thing that the FTC and its state counterparts typically have jurisdiction over as an unfair business practice. Again, the proof problem, unless you have good political connections (which, I guess, is where the crony capitalism that the left is so enamored with comes in).; 9/1/14, 11:18 AM
ken in tx said...: I don't know how much money National Review looses, but I used to receive fundraising requests from them, just like NPR and other leftist groups send out. In my experience, they did not publish advertising exactly, just PR copy for companies like Milliken Textiles.; 9/1/14, 11:23 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: "Progressive reformers responded to economic instability, social inequality, and political corruption by calling for government intervention in the economy, expanded democracy, greater social justice, and conservation of natural resources."

The problem there, of course, is that progressivism inevitably ends up doing just the opposite - reducing democracy through crony capitalism (etc.), decreasing social justice, and squanders natural resources. It kinda reminds me of the photo joke I saw recently where it starts with the left or Blacks asking for more government, and ends with a picture of riot equipped police confronting a crowd with the caption of "more government". Big government means more opportunities for graft and corruption, until you see what we have under the Obama Administration, where it has become more profitable to spend money in Congress buying special favors than in product development and advertising. And, the standard progressive response to this is to demand more government power, which inevitably turns into more profit in buying government favors, and more money being spent buying those government favors, and correspondingly less increasing national wealth.

You just have to look at OWS to see how naive the left is in this regard. They were asking that the government regulate an industry more extensively that had already bought the Obama Administration. They should have been ODC instead, instead of OWS. But, their presence in DC, the source of the problems that they were complaining about was never more than marginal.; 9/1/14, 11:31 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: One of the most annoying things about the left is how they seem unaware how obsessed they are about money. Greed is the only sin they recognize, and so it's greed, greed, greed 24/7.

I found that comment interesting and enlightening. I think that he is right, though alleged prejudice against a favored minority may also count.

The problem with socialism (and, therefore progressivism) is that it is based on a false premise, that man is perfectable, and that he is, or can be made, to not be greedy. And, it inevitably fails when the forces of greed on the inside of the state manage to put the system into a death spiral of greed. Greed is why the progressive vision is inevitably fated to fail, and that is why it is the greatest of sins for them - but they ignore that it is greed on the inside that kills the system, and not on the outside.

Anytime that progressives think that the state should take over some part of the economy or society, they are implicitly assuming that the politicians and government employees that are to regulate it will be somehow more virtuous than the market place. But, of course, they aren't. They are just as greedy. The politicians need money to get reelected, and to be reelected in order to maintain and increase their power. And the government employees want more pay and benefits for less work, while advancing their personal goals (e.g. Lois Lerner). No different than the private sector, except that those who don't contribute to the profitability there of their employer are ultimately typically let go. There is no bottom line in the government, and esp. the federal government, with its printing presses, able to print as much money as it wants to hire as many bureaucrats as it wants and shove as much money as it can to favored parties (thanks to the inevitable crony capitalism).

I see this progressive fixation with greed somewhat akin to the preacher preaching against sex and adultery, while diddling the women in his congregation, or at least dreaming about it.; 9/1/14, 11:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Yep, no government monopolies, no regulators captured by the industry they're supposed to be watching, and lots of drivers getting to work as much or as little as they want, rather than following someone else's schedule.

It's horrible!; 9/1/14, 12:07 PM
Anonymous said...: How much does a taxi medallion cost in NY, LA, or SF? Or New Orleans?

How much does it cost to be a Uber driver in one of those cities?

More competition, more rides for customers, an apparent drop in drunk driving in cities that Uber serves.

Yep, Uber is horrible, and mist be stopped!11!; 9/1/14, 12:21 PM
n.n said...: Make life, not abortion. Oh, wait. We were talking about money, sex, ego, and convenience. Important things.

As for capitalism, it is the economic analogue of democracy, a dynamically stable system which in principle favors individual dignity. Capitalism is an economic system where people "vote" with the product of their labor.

The threat to the stability of capitalism is formation of monopolies and monopolistic behaviors. This is why left-wing regimes are disfavored, as the underlying ideologies form monopolies and enforce monopolistic behaviors by design, not chance. Essentially, left-wing ideologies are pseudo-religions -- cults with moralistic characteristics -- headed by mortal gods.; 9/1/14, 12:35 PM
garage mahal said...: Shouldn't conservatives be at work today? The day we celebrate workers, or as conservatives call it, a day of mourning.; 9/1/14, 1:07 PM
Anonymous said...: somefeller wrote;

"Dumb Salon piece, though. Uber is the very model of blue culture capitalism (tech-based, geared towards urbanites) and a company that engages David Plouffe isn't likely to be a right-wing outfit. But it shows that even liberals can fall prey to the sort of simplistic populist critiques one would expect from social conservatives. Alas."

You see why this is a dumb piece now? These guys are on our side! C'mon people, we don't eat our own!

Forget about the merits, David is one of ours. These guys are Democrats, the good guys.

It's ok to overlook a little indiscretion from the home team, right?

Am I right or am I right?; 9/1/14, 1:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Garage wrote;

"Shouldn't conservatives be at work today? The day we celebrate workers, or as conservatives call it, a day of mourning."

There's a lot of stupid in so few words.

1) Conservatives are at work today. Today is one of the busiest shopping days of the year, second only to Black Friday.

2) According to Wikipedia it's a celebration of the American Labor Movement. That would be Unions, not workers. Granted, it's dedicated, supposedly, to the achievement of workers. But we all know this is a Union holiday.

3) What does this have to do with Uber again? I'm pretty sure Uber is working today, on Labor Day, and they aren't even conservative, just ask somefeller.

I know who isn't working today, Garage.; 9/1/14, 1:22 PM
garage mahal said...: 1) Conservatives are at work today. Today is one of the busiest shopping days of the year, second only to Black Friday.

Most conservatives work in retail?; 9/1/14, 1:26 PM
eddie willers said...: 'Greed' is an indefinable word.

Which added dollar pushes one over the line? Give me a number.

I remember scratching my head when Microsoft was being sued for being 'greedy' for giving away Internet Explorer for free.

For free.; 9/1/14, 1:30 PM
Drago said...: garage mahal said...
Shouldn't conservatives be at work today?

Well, at least garage isn't posting on company time today.

That's an improvement.; 9/1/14, 1:32 PM
Drago said...: Newest Somefeller: "Um, no, Drago, my point was that if Salon is unprofitable (and I have no idea what it's finances are and don't feel like looking), that's par for the course in the political journal business and is a meaningless critique."

LOL

Yes, sure that was your point!

Earlier somefeller: "It's at least as profitable as National Review."

Newest Somefeller: "I guess that was too subtle for you."

The problem is that you appear incapable of understanding what you yourself wrote.

Not. Surprising.

If you wanted to make the case that the economic performance of Salon, today, is par for the course in the political journal business and is a meaningless critique than you could have written just that.

So much spinning and now, backtracking claiming "Subtlety!!eleventy!".

Yes somefeller, you are just so gosh darned "subtle" and "nuanced"!

LOL

Keep telling yourself that.; 9/1/14, 1:37 PM
Drago said...: garage mahal said...
1) Conservatives are at work today. Today is one of the busiest shopping days of the year, second only to Black Friday.

Most conservatives work in retail?

LOL

Logic Fail.

Gee, only Retail "work" is being accomplished today!

Who knew?

I'll just set aside this business case now since apparently it's not a commercial retail activity!; 9/1/14, 1:40 PM
Drago said...: somefeller: "Uber is the very model of blue culture capitalism (tech-based, geared towards urbanites) and a company that engages David Plouffe isn't likely to be a right-wing outfit."

Apparently somefeller doesn't understand that his fight is with those on the left.

Assuming he really believes what he writes.; 9/1/14, 1:42 PM
garage mahal said...: Well, at least garage isn't posting on company time today.?

So you're not at work today? Why not? Some sort of holiday?; 9/1/14, 1:45 PM
garage mahal said...: That's assuming Drago works. Big if.; 9/1/14, 1:48 PM
Joe said...: Where I lived in South America many years ago had a service much less structured than Uber. It was never clear to me what the regulations were, especially since I rode in vehicles which wouldn't pass inspection in any state. Regardless, it worked great.; 9/1/14, 1:58 PM
Rusty said...: madisonfella said...
Regulations are for the weak! Uber, and all businesses in America, should just do whatever they wish in their pursuit of profits while telling the lawmakers and bureaucrats to eat shit and die.

LOL
Your total lack of self awareness is cause for a lot of humor.

In order for there to be a seller, there must be a buyer.; 9/1/14, 2:07 PM
Drago said...: garage: "So you're not at work today? Why not? Some sort of holiday?"

LOL

I don't do holidays.

Of course, my clients do but that doesn't mean I take time off.

You wouldn't understand that, as you have grown accustomed to feeding at someone else's trough.

Not surprising.; 9/1/14, 2:14 PM
Drago said...: garage mahal said...
That's assuming Drago works. Big if.

LOL

Just keep it off company time high school boy and we'll all be happy.; 9/1/14, 2:14 PM
garage mahal said...: You wouldn't understand that, as you have grown accustomed to feeding at someone else's trough.

I've been on 100% straight commission the past 15 years. Is your line of work making inane, stupid blog comments, like today?; 9/1/14, 2:28 PM
SomeoneHasToSayIt said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/1/14, 2:38 PM
SomeoneHasToSayIt said...: Here's something I bet they failed to teach you in school.

Under capitalism, and the conditions of a free market, a business is powerless to create and sustain a monopoly.

To create and sustain a monopoly takes partnership with Government, the key ingredient being a monopoly
on the legal use of force.

So if you're a Big Government Progressive, surprise! - you make monopolies possible.

Ain't that a kick.; 9/1/14, 2:58 PM
Gahrie said...: Shouldn't conservatives be at work today? The day we celebrate workers, or as conservatives call it, a day of mourning.

No, today is the day that our side celebrates the noble working man who built this great country.

Your side celebrates labor on May 1.; 9/1/14, 3:09 PM
garage mahal said...: Must be a confusing day for conservatives, who absolutely despise workers.; 9/1/14, 3:16 PM
Drago said...: garage: " Is your line of work making inane, stupid blog comments, like today?"

LOL

Adorable that garage pretends to know what "inane" means.; 9/1/14, 3:25 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: Yeah but Democrats hate berserkers.

We all know that.

Bigots, big time.; 9/1/14, 4:45 PM
Hyphenated American said...: "Must be a confusing day for conservatives, who absolutely despise workers."

Most non-government workers vote for the GOP. DNC Main support comes from people who rely on the government.; 9/1/14, 6:23 PM
Douglas B. Levene said...: MadisonF-Limbaugh and Hannity are profit machines. You should be so lucky to have a piece of them. For that matter, FoxNews is a profit machine. I can't think of a single left pundit or outlet that's making money, not one. Not MSNBC, not Salon or Slate, not MoJo or WashMo, not Rachel Maddow or David Sirota. Without subsidies from leftist billionaires there would be no left media of any kind.; 9/1/14, 7:07 PM
Achilles said...: "garage mahal said...
Must be a confusing day for conservatives, who absolutely despise workers."

I am currently running a company with 21 full time employees. I haven't been paid yet. I have been putting in between 80 and 100 hours a week. I told them that we have paid the government more than them so far. We pay a 25% excise on sales plus all of the normal taxes. Our taxes are currently about double payroll.

If I get to keep more money I will pay them a lot more. If we elect the statist pieces of shit you support they get to make what we can afford. The workers you describe are parasites.

To respond specifically to your projection that I hate the people that work for me I just want to say you are a piece of shit.; 9/1/14, 8:19 PM