From the article, pure opinion, without any fact or evidence to support the conclusion: "California is one of the most restrictive states in the Union in terms of personal freedoms, thanks in large part to an over-abundance of leftist activist organizations and a legislature that leans far to the left of the general population. The state's current energy woes provide one striking example of the consequences of marxist policies - they are a direct result of the influence of extremist environmental organizations and government meddling." Just ask the people in the San Francisco Bay area if their personal freedoms are the most restrictive in the Union.
Wait a minute, how is that statement false? I'm not saying that statement is true, it might be purely objective on his part, but how is that statement false. See you can find 10 people in the bay area that say they have more freedoms in CA then anywhere then I can find 10 people in the bay area and they might say their freedoms are restrictive so what does this prove? It doesn't prove the statement false and it doesn't prove the statement true. We can make an argument for both sides of the coin here. But you can't categorically come out and say he is wrong. Are there not a lot of leftist organizations out there? Are CA energy policies not restrictive on people and corporations? See you are making a straw man argument here. You can find 10 people then I can find 10 people then you can find 10 more and then I can find 10 more and at the end of the day what have we solved. All we have proven is that we disagree on the issue. But he backed up his opinion with talking points. You might disagree with him but that doesn't make him wrong does it not? It sounds like you are not affording him his first amendment rights. We are all entitled to our opinions but I can't see in any way shape or form how that statement that you used is at all extreme. You are going to have to do better then that.
There is a difference between a factual and true statement, a false statement, and an opinion without fact to support it. His statements and conclusions are fully unsupported by any fact. There are lots of people in California, and lots of left wing, right wing, and moderate organizations. California energy policies have been the most progressive in the nation, and with any progressive legislation mistakes are made. Deregulation without control was a mistake, as we found out. However, who knew that we would have an "energy crisis" so close to de-regulation. We just happened to have a natural gas shortage, and we just happened to see record windfall profits of the energy companies as a result. Coincidence, no doubt. California is an environment friendly state. That is one reason many people love living here. People who hate the tax rate....they leave. I don't understand your obsession with the way California does its business. For the author to make unsupported claims he is just another man spouting opinion, as do you, as do I, as do others. So what? Do you understand what fundamentalism is? Fundamentalism is a way of thought that perceives everything in black and white terms, very homogeneous among members of the groups they belong to, and typically on the basis of a religious interpretation. The author is a fundamentalist in his thought, and if you can't see that, I don't know how to educate you on that. Do you know that nearly all fanatics are also fundamentalists of sorts? Now, let's imagine the photo of the author and what he wrote, and the organization he fronts. Would you imagine him to be: Gay or straight? Hanging with gay friends, or straight friends. Drinking alcohol or drinking wheat grass juice. Belonging to a fundamentalist Christian religion, or be a Buddhist. Owning a Harley Davidson or an electric car. Wearing leather boots or wearing Birkenstocks. Do you really think he could be a gay man, practicing Buddhism, driving an electric car, wearing Birkenstocks? Honestly, do you think so? The point, his line of thinking is not diverse, but very predictable and very fundamentalist in nature. I have a distrust of those who are 100% certain they are right, blame the "other side" for all the problems, and have a need to belong to fringe organizations. People who are predictable, think predictably according to a creed and doctrine.....not based on real time of a particular situation.
famous socialists Jesus Christ (his heart bled for the poor and oppressed) Robin Hood (Robbed from the rich to give to the poor) Gandhi Famous powerful capitalists: Julius Caesar Genghis Khan The Sheriff of Nottingham and Prince John the above is a qoute from arougetrader. he is seriously mislead if he thinks julius ceasar and genghis khan were capitalists. dictators/warlords/sheriffs/princes are creations of the state THEY are not capitalists. what doesn't he understand ?? surfer
you need to burn your birkenstocks and cut that hair. your understanding of economic terms/reality is abysmal. :eek:
Your ability to construct an argument is what is abysmal. capitalist \Cap"i*tal*ist\, n. [Cf. F. capitaliste.] One who has capital
Lets just say I lived in California, loved California may move back, but the politican's really did a nasty job on that state. From the insurance crisis to the energy crisis, to the healthcare crisis, to the tranfer payments it was all done by self interested paid off politicans. Aroguetrader does a good job arguing but I read the papers most days while he was in another state. I saw the politicians creating deragulation in San Diego, having their consulting companies hired by the power companies. I read about the politicians being paid of by the insurance companies. I saw the liberals in Sacramento trying to teach elementary school children that gayness is normal and that sexuality is choice. There was a liberal agenda and it was not fighting for my rights but for special interest groups rights. I saw the monster tax rates and the unwillingness to curb spending. My wife worked in a hospital where she saw medi-cal running up huge stupid bills. It is a great place because of its weather beauty and land and people. It is a mess because of sacramento and the local politicians.
once again, you try to obfuscate the issue by wrongly using definitions and playing word games. the issue is the people you list as "great capitalist" are merely warlords. dictators and other creations of the state, and/ or, gained power by force, coercion, or deceit. you have been reading too much noam chomsky and living on the beach for TOO LONG.