Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "Charles Koch and Brian Hooks on Learning From Your Critics" video.

  1. Liberty? By undermining democracy. And you're talking total nonsense about what the left wants. The left wants equal opportunity and the entire system not to be corruputed by vermin like the Kochs. The left LOVES freedom and successs - so long as they are fairly achieved and applied. They also recognise that with freedom comes responsibility, and yu are free so long as it does not harm MY freedom.
    5
  2.  @MilwaukeeF40C  "As long as you want anything to be up for a vote, "money in politics" is what you will get. " I disagree. Most European countries manage just fine. The trick is to structure your political system so that lobbyists, corporations and the wealthy do not gain undue influence. Reducing Citizens united to "being about whether a movie could be shown" is MASSIVELY disingenuous. "If you want the state to have the kind of power to interfere in things like that" So you think the state should NOT be involved in decisions about which movies can be shown? What about extreme content?
    2
  3.  @garetclaborn  Yeah that ad was ill conceived but not entirely wrong. I don't agree with equality of outcome, but if we start a race and your foot is on my throat when the starting pistol fires, (as it is metaphorically for black people), how do you address that disadvantage? I'm gonna guess that the guy with his foot on the throat is just fine with that advantage but it's not fair or right. So how would YOU address that Garet?
    1
  4.  @DavidAdkins78  No, I'm not confusing free speech with anything. I simply don't think that bribing politicians is "speech", which CLEARLY undermines democracy. The fact that corporations an billionaires such as the Koch's managed to feneigle the system to even GET such a ruling was one of the greatest failures of the American senate in its entire existence, and may be the one that leads to the downfall of America. Trump was just foreshadowing.
    1
  5.  @DavidAdkins78  And you speak about capitalism as though it's fair and equitable when it is not. When Walmart comes to town, uses its power to wipe out all competition, then employs people in the only remaining jobs at below a living wage, where's the voluntary exchange? When Amazon forces its workers to work during a pandemic, without toilet breaks, but its workers have to continue because they're the only employer left in town, where's the freedom? The billionaires and mega corporations got wealthy by stealing the labour of the working class. The fact that they didn't literally stick a gun in anyone's face does not make it better.
    1
  6.  @DavidAdkins78  Bribing politicians was made legal when money was defined as speech.
    1
  7.  @DavidAdkins78  "nothing will ever really be "fair and equitable"" No it won't, but that's no reason to simply throw your hands up and say "Oh well might as well not bother then." Imagine if that approach had been taken to slavery or worker rights or slavery. "Politicians CANNOT improve on voluntary exchange." Nonsense. When my local mega supermarket becomes so large that it crushes all competition, literally operating at a loss in order to do so, once the competition is gone, our exchange is no longer voluntary. I have NO problem with capitalism. I have MASSIVE problems with unregulated capitalism. "Walmart has made retail so competitive" if competition is your only standard. If you ignore the cost in human lives during manufacture, distribution and retail. If you ignore long-term environmental damage. If you ignore the fact that huge swathes live in poverty so that you can save. And worst of all, if you ignore the fact that walmart is literally subsidised by the taxpapayers who have to give welfare to full-time employees who are paid so poorly that they cannot meet basic bills. "every family saves $2500/year even if they don't shop there." citation please. And again, I'm going to question that in overall context. This is NOT a zero sum game. That saving is undoubtedly offset in many other ways. "America has the richest middle class and poor in the history of the world thanks to capitalism." 11.1% of Americans live in poverty, defined as having insufficient income to meet basic needs. The average college goer will still be paying off college loans into their 40s and even a minor medical incident can bankrupt a family for life. Yes, they may have the latest games consoles and two cars; they also have record levels of debt - 14 trillion in 2019. "A simple fact that you Marxists miss is that GOVERNMENT cost us four times more than all corporate profits combined." What a ridiculous statement to make. It would be like me citing the amount that Republicans spend on suits or golf courses. The issue is not the COST of government but the VALUE that is delivered for that cost. Many countries have far higher taxation than America, but also much greater happiness and social wellbeing because that taxation provides value. The problem in America is corruption by capitalism. The wealthy corrupt the government into spending taxes on endless wars, profit prisons, excessive pharma costs, etc which THEY profit from. The entire western world has recognised that a level of socialism and government is optimal and needed for social thriving. Yes, government could involve itself less in some areas - regulation of recreational drugs and pharmaceutical sales for instance, but by and large, big government is the result of living in megacommunities with corporate scum constantly trying to exploit the masses and game the system. Companies whine about the regulations that were implemented to prevent their PRIOR exploition of more lax regulations, even as they try to exploit the new ones. The irony. The delusion of your world view is that you think America would be a better place without government and regulation. Typical libertarian nonsense demonstrably disproven by endless examples, and just 3 seconds of impartial examination.
    1