Log In/Register
Submit Link

Which drunk is righter?
Click here to read which lame ass rules are definitive argument settlers!

We delve into the newest controversial angles surrounding the HIV/AIDS world. Is AIDS caused by HIV? Some say no.

Friends of NWC
Check out this list of cool sites.




Syndicate this site!
What's this?



Original post by Raving Lunatic on 12//09


An essay on the true, twisted & perverted nature of Global Corporate Capitalism. Transcribed from a presentation given over a decade ago.

We KNOW this to be true; yet nothing ever changes - except to get worse. What does that tell us about the world?

Posted by mrwilder

The thing that communists always leave out is that by getting rid of capitalism (and thereby destroying ALL of our freedoms) you will NOT get rid of the "tiny group of greedy elite" or "criminals". You will EMPOWER them.

Capitalism may not be perfect, however, it is the best POSSIBLE system.

The wonderful thing about capitalism is that, if you don't like your situation you can either sit there and whine or you can go out and get your ass a job. Your efforts WILL make a difference to the quality of your life under capitalism.

Not so under the system of "let's take it from the people who do work."

Posted by Raving Lunatic

Keeping in mind that this was written in 1998, also notice this sentence:

"A few weeks ago the integrity of the entire U.S. banking system was threatened when bets on the Russian ruble made by a single hedge fund called Long-term Capital Management went bad. It turned out that the fund had $25 in bank loans for every dollar in equity and a financial risk exposure of more than $1 trillion in derivatives."

Sound familiar? You'd think they'd be forced to stop their crime spree after the recent financial "collapse" (it was actually a heist), but no, not at all. What are they doing with the money they "borrowed" from the government in order to not have to suffer that much-vaunted "market discipline"? The same thing they've always done with it. Gamble. And when they lose again, we'll pay again - because they own us. And you know what's REALLY a gas? When they lose, who do you think they lose TO? Why, themselves, of course.

Regarding the above comment by mrwilder, once again, Capitalism is apparently assumed to mean "a free market economy with a democratic political system" and Communism is taken to mean "a planned economy with a non-democratic political system". These definitions are both *wrong*, as is the accompanying false dichotomy. Those are *not* the only two choices. Even if they were, what we have under Global Corporate Capitalism is NOT "a free market economy with a democratic political system". What we have is a tightly controlled economy, and a political system that is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Global Corporate Capitalism, Inc. It's almost like some kind of... well, communism - or what people imagine communism to mean, anyway. The World Turned Upside Down. And apparently many, many folks are so inured to the constant propaganda that they lose any sense of cognitive dissonance, and no longer notice that THIS SHIT JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY FUCKING SENSE.

Please read the article for more information. Thank you.

Posted by mrwilder

But that's precisely my point: This is NOT a capitalism. It's a highly regulated system that needs LESS government involvement.
Posted by mrwilder

Course mah ideears is ignurent
Posted by Raving Lunatic

Have you even read the article? It clearly states, and common sense (not to mention economic theory) will strongly confirm, that strong regulation is a *fundamental requirement* of a free market economy. Otherwise, to use a basic example, what's to stop whoever has the most "security guards" from just taking over the place and charging whatever they want for whatever they want to sell - the desires of the market be DAMNED? (Sadly, since we DON'T have a well regulated market, this is very often what happens. They WILL just come and take your shit).

This is one of the basic legitimate functions of a government. To regulate the marketplace. Global Corporate Capitalism has turned this whole idea on it's head. We now have multinational corporations determining which laws we are allowed to have - also regardless of any kind of democratic process that may be involved. Just look at what is going on with the health care issue in the U.S. right now, for a good implicit example. Whatever one's personal views on the issue, it is plain that the vast majority of the American Public are strongly in favor of major health-care reform, with a "public option". The Democratic Party was swept into power with a mandate in the last election - retaking BOTH houses of Congress AND the Presidency - and they STILL ARE NOT GOING TO PASS ANY SUCH LEGISLATION. Why do you suppose this is? For a good *explicit* example of corporate control of local, internal political processes, see any suit brought before any GATT, NAFTA or WTO "court".

Sadly, if you cannot see the truth of this issue, then indeed, your ideears *is* ignurent.

Posted by Raving Lunatic

"Posted by mrwilder

But that's precisely my point: This is NOT a capitalism. It's a highly regulated system that needs LESS government involvement."

So with the speed of electrons and in ONE AMAZING POST, you reverse course 180 degrees and go from defending the current system not only as Holy Mother Capitalism but the ONLY SYSTEM THAT CAN POSSIBLY WORK, to saying that this is not capitalism at all, but a highly structured...

Wow. I think that's like TRIPLEspeak or some shit.

Also, with regard to the comment about "take it from the people who DO work": this, of course, is another ad hominem against the "dirty lazy communist who wants to steal instead of work", but that's ok. Just know that it doesn't really have anything to do with my actual political beliefs. In fact, it is anathema to them. The current system *does indeed* steal from the working person, only instead of giving the proceeds to other, perhaps even poorer people, it gives the loot to the Ownership Elite through the largesse of an owned government. One of the points I have explicitly stated time and again that somehow consistently seems to be ignored is that under the current system, with the money *already stolen*, I would indeed prefer to see it distributed to the poor and disenfranchised - for whatever reason - than to see it granted to those who already possess far, far too much of the common wealth.

My *actual* political beliefs involve most human beings having the personal freedom, through the provision of economic freedom by a strong government with a healthy social safety net and a well-regulated marketplace, to be truly free to find their own way to security and happiness. Not indentured for life to a soulless corporation who would sell their life and livelihood for a small blip in next quarter's bottom line, and toss a living human being aside like a used up rag doll.

But ya know what's *really* sad? There IS a choice - it didn't used to be that way, and it doesn't have to be that way now. They just don't want you to think so - and apparently you believe them.

Posted by mrwilder

uhhh... I never said this was a capitalism. It's closer to that than a communism, though, and therefore better.

Also, these extreme augmentations of commerce regulation are not a basic function of government. It's derived power implicitly construed from the "necessary and proper" clause - and contentiously at that.

In fact, most regulation of commerce is such an ethereal and unrelated function of the government, if at all, that court justice Douglas once referred to the absurdity of some of these constitutional interpretations as "penumbras formed by emanations", and said that "The very idea is repulsive." Of course, Justice Douglas is probably as ignorant as I am, so what the hell does he know? Some people just don't keep up with all the larnin they is a'goin on in the intertubes. They probably don't have time, what with all the University classes and research and work and such.

As for communists stealing from people who produce the wealth, that's precisely what they do. Your very use of the word "provision" tells me just about everything anyone needs to know about your ideas about wealth and Government, so if your choices are such that you aren't happy, don't demand that the wealthy successful people be brought down. Bring yourself up. YOU HAVE THAT CHOICE NOW. It's absurd to believe that wealthy people got that way by taking something from people who have nothing. Nobody is doing anything to you. They don't know you exist. IF they did, they wouldn't care. As for corporations trying to make money, that's what they are required by law to try to do. No form of government can GIVE freedom, they can only take it away, and therefore the best we can do is pure, true capitalism. The thieves and the greedy will always exist, so no reason to regulate the rest of us.

If a government plan of VOLUNTARY redistribution of wealth doesn't affect me either way, then I don't care - because I believe in freedom... and if you and your group choose it, more power to you.

If, however, the communists are trying to ROB ME to pay for their welfare, even if they "need" to because of the predicament caused by their bad decisions in life, that I have a problem with.

...And this is precisely the problem of course, because communist economic policies are always inherently unsound.

Posted by Raving Lunatic

You are correct, of course, in your statements about "communism" as it is generally imagined. I imagine, though, that you do know that the basic statement of Communist philosophy is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". I can't think of a better description of an ideal world. Yeah, if we were noble elves, that might work. Unfortunately, we're still basically monkeys, like it or not, and we have to live in the real world, and deal with human nature as it is, not as we wish it to be.

In that real world, the problem is not government interference in business. It is business interference in government. This stems from (among other things, and speaking of Supreme Court cases) the actual non-decision (a pro-corporation court official inserted comments into the final decision that actually changed the entire gist of the case - a pretty good indication that this shit is insane and was really never supposed to happen) 'Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company' in 1886. Pretty much everything since then has been gilding the lily - once immortal, omnipotent "personhood" was given to corporations, the game was over.

You said "No form of government can GIVE freedom, they can only take it away, and therefore the best we can do is pure, true capitalism". This is absurd. What do you suppose would happen if we suddenly dissolved all these evil "form(s) of government [that] can... only take [freedom] away"? My bet is that many, many people would be literal chattel slaves to some corporation in no time. It wouldn't be a whole lot different than it is now, I suppose - they'd probably just feed you less. Just ask some of the folks that DO literally slave away in southeast Asia and other places making our cheap tennis shoes and massive corporate profits. I personally think it's a GOOD thing that we, here, have a government that's (barely) strong enough to restrict the "rights" of corporations to own people - and corporate lawyers (among others) are chipping away at that all the time.

If you hadn't noticed, a corporation IS ACTUALLY A FORM OF GOVERNMENT. It's just one that only represents those rich enough to have an ownership stake in it - and as you said, is interested ONLY in making money for it's owners (whatever the cost to everyone else). Which is fine, and as it should be. The problem arises when those corporations become so rich and powerful through their immortality and unaccountability that they override the TRUE governments in the places where they operate - the governments that are (at least in theory, but that's a different discussion) the representatives of ALL the people.

I tire of your accusations of "communism" - everything I've said here is with regards to a free marketplace - regulated by a democratically elected government. If you can't acknowledge the necessity of *that*, then you, sir, are an antisocial anarchist. Which would be GREAT. Except that there are 7,000,000,000 people in the world and counting - and we have to find just and equitable ways to live together, and the way things are right now just AIN'T IT.

Political domination by massive global corporations is destructive to human societies, the environment, and almost every single individual human being that lives. It must end at some point, and it will. It's just a question of whether it will be a bloody revolution or a peaceful transition.

An economic system is a means to an end, not an end in itself. It seems that much of the world has lost sight of that fact.

Posted by mrwilder

Sigh... okay, once again:

You have every right to believe that your thoughts and ideas have led you to a truly revolutionary place that other, less educated, less experienced, less well travelled, less successful losers such as myself can't comprehend; and you are fine to assume that nobody as bright as you has ever existed who could possibly have thought of, and analyzed, AND DISMISSED your ideology.

But then, just because YOU can't imagine a better world than communist ideology means little. And that's PRECISELY the problem: To implement your ideology, you have to be RIGHT. And it has to be UNQUESTIONABLE because you must FORCE your ideas on people who do not agree with you.

It makes no difference to me if we are talking about economies of money, barter, sex, fun, or whatever, because every economy is but a physical manifestation of the real thing: the free flow of energy in the Universe, observed to maximize the optimal amount of human success and joy. As for me, I DEPISE marxism and I've studied it exhaustively with some of the brightest communists in the world, literally. I do NOT agree that a world where "each according to his needs" is moral. I believe in the truth, therefore, I believe "to each according to his abilities" is as God intended. That's right: I'd rather DIE than take more than I produce!!! I don't need or want anyone to pay my way, and I don't want to pay anyone but my loved ones' way. Indeed, I wish I was MORE successful financially so I could take care of you! The world needs your genius unmolested by circumstance, and I like you. Unfortuntately, right now I'm barely holding my own, and I can't do that.

As for the government. I am willing to CONSENT to government and contribute to items such as roads and waterways which contribute to the common good. Communism doesn't do that. It rewards idiocy, punishes success and individualism, destroys autonomy, and corrupts justice.

But then, maybe I'm wrong. I don't NEED to be right, because more than my own farts and vanity I believe in FREEDOM, and I won't take away your right to sit there and waste yourself instead of using your true genius to take whatever you want from this world.

Would you take mine?

Yes, you would.

And then you and your ideology would EMBODY what you CLAIM to despise from the global corporate legal elite.

Posted by nowheremom

BOYS, SANTA IS COMING TOMORROW NIGHT! Your mindless rants tire me!
Merry Christmas!
Mindless Capitalist:)

Posted by mrwilder

That old communist is coming again?

HAHA... sorry, couldn't resist.

Posted by Zeke

Do any of you think that any system is one that "gives" of "values" freedom?
Every system, from pure capitalism to pure communism, denies the people in it something, in one form or another. All or Nothing type systems almost always fail in the end, so debating which one is "better" is pointless.
What does endure is some form of compromise.
It's not always pretty and someone is always screwed, but it ends up working.

Posted by mrwilder

I mean, yeah, of course, in truth your plan of compromise and reason is what supposedly actually occurs... SO FAR... But why should we accept a compromise of our freedoms? The mere thought of being governed is bad enough. Our Constitution of enumerated and very, very few powers is as awful a thing as we should accept. If the states want to do something about becoming a more communist society let them do that individually, but not the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!!!

And besides, I think the system THIS country used to have and should have worked pretty hellaciously well.

In fact, it is only because of the sheer successful abundance of the friggin-a' free UNITED STATES OF AMERICA system that anyone, anywhere, even begins to pretend to believe that a system like communism, where you don't work but expect your neighbors "excess" to pay your way could even exist!

The sheer abundance of freedom makes it seems like somehow the weak are "entitled" to the worth of the strong, instead of being ashamed to accept it!!!

The problem is that communists deliberately blur the line between the able bodied and the infants, sickly, disabled, ill, aged, etc. Even all of us are TEMPORARILY DOWN, and people need a hand occasionally. But it's one thing if you legitimately NEED help, it's another if you don't WANT to work cause you're too "good" to clean a toilet.

With our system of freedom, the truth is obvious: If you want prosperity, work. If nobody is hiring, create your own thing. The government cannot create prosperity... it COSTS money to run a government... it doesn't generate ANYTHING. YOU have to do that.

Posted by Zeke

EVERY system requires some sort of surrender of some liberties, it's the nature of the beast.

"And besides, I think the system THIS country used to have and should have worked pretty hellaciously well."

The system used today is the same as it was 226 years ago. And it still works hellaciously well.
Now if you are referring to the ways things used to be done back in the olden days, those were the days of governmental policies of near genocide of Indians, the use of State and Federal troops to crush dissent and to ensure the monopolists maintained control, the sanctioned legal discrimination based on racial and national origin, manipulation of the economy by the financial elite enabled by their control of the government. The list goes on and on, it wasn't this Golden Age where the beer flowed like wine. It sucked.

As to compromise, this nation was founded on compromise. From the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution to the various anti-slavery compromises prior to 1860 to name a few. Nearly every bill that has ever been introduced from then until now has some form of compromise in it.
We compromise because it works.

Posted by mrwilder

Well, that's simply not true. The system as well as its founding values are bastardized beyond all recognition today.

As for the founders of my beloved country, while constantly maligned in the popular media and affirmative action approved academia as "Wealthy protestant slave and land owners" - they had a vision of FREEDOM which has never been surpassed.

Most of them, although they HAD been wealthy landowners LOST their riches and died broke - penniless, some were homeless. Some died at war for their beliefs.

I love what Patrick Henry said, which summed it up so so well, and is ever so applicable today: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

That's no compromise.

The Federal Government has NO POWER over the states - save for a few very specific things, and "cash assistance" and "health care" aint one of em. If you actually care to know the truth rather than endlessly repeating what the Party Line tells you to say, these are the three cases that basically started the destruction of most of our liberty, and began the crushing move from actual decency to phony political correctness:

McCulloch v. Maryland
Wickard v Filburn
Hearts of Atlanta Motel

THOSE are probably the most famous power grabs that destroyed us.

Freedom is NOT just the freedom to succeed - it MUST include the freedom to fail, and BY YOUR OWN HAND. Equality in no way means equal success... it means equal opportunity to TRY. It doesn't guarantee you win or lose.

Posted by Zeke

Bastardized eh? Still vote for government representatives? Laws still made the same way? Does the process still work the same as the framers of the constitution intended? Do the people determine what gets done?
The system isn't bastardized, it's evolved.
As the framers intended, to change with the times.

Talk about the Founding Fathers and their love of freedom, just make sure that you are white and prosperous when you do. They loved the idea of freedom and equality in the abstract, but when it came to the reality, they were very much men of their time.

And don't give me any shit about the fucking party line. I see this country for what it is and has done. All the magnificent triumphs and horrific deeds are something I keep in mind whenever I have discussions like this. You can have all the idealized views you want, but I live in the real world. One where the practical matters

"Freedom is NOT just the freedom to succeed - it MUST include the freedom to fail, and BY YOUR OWN HAND. Equality in no way means equal success... it means equal opportunity to TRY. It doesn't guarantee you win or lose."

It also means not having the way blocked by others for their own selfish gain.

Posted by mrwilder

I absolutely accept everything you just said as a valid perspective. I agree with plenty of it, PARTICULARLY the last line, "It means not having the way blocked by others for their own selfish gain."


Your freedom to swing your fist ends where your fist collides with my face.

If an intelligent, capable person chooses to sit there, sleeping till 3:00 every afternoon for 30 years, or get stoned on downers or drunk to the point of not working, or cranking out babies while I go to work puking, and when I'm not at work I'm studying in school, and yet I still have to refrain from having children because I cannot afford them, DONT make me pay for the lazy person's welfare and healthcare when the inevitable results of his own decisions come home to roost!

Get the government off my back... I DONT want to pay for my neighbor's stupid and thoughtless decisions!!! I DONT want my way blocked by others for their own selfish and lazy gain!

I'm more than willing to assist the people who are not responsible for their own situation. There aren't too many of those. The rest of you fuckers can GET A JOB.

Posted by mrwilder

And of course, if you want to bring up that whitey is responsible for holding down the poor, underprivileged blacks who did so much better on their own in Africa than they did here working with us, nobody better mention that ASIANS AND JEWS OUTPERFORM WHITES hands down.

Asians and Jews are members of *actually* oppressed races, unlike blacks and mexicans, who are literally handed benefits and preference over all other races and STILL refuse to lift themselves up. Indeed, it's a nearly perfect statistical correlation between government "assistance" and poverty. More government involvement in your life relates to MORE suffering - and more government assistance for blacks and Mexicans at greater and greater cost to the working races is NOT going to help them... It's going to create a society that is even more entirely custodial for them.

Of course, that must mean I'm a RACIST!!!!!!!!! OMG!!! (Cause it couldn't *possibly* be a completely factual statistical truth - or could it?)

Posted by Zeke

I mention "whitey" in the above posts in regard to your mention of how much better things used to be in the olden days.
And it was an all inclusive oppression to include everyone that didn't have money or power.

"those were the days of governmental policies of near genocide of Indians, the use of State and Federal troops to crush dissent and to ensure the monopolists maintained control, the sanctioned legal discrimination based on racial and national origin, manipulation of the economy by the financial elite enabled by their control of the government."

Not once did I mention Blacks specifically nor Asians or Jews. I should have included poor white people somewhere, but I thought that you would have known that that White folk got the shaft as much as anyone back in the "Good Old Days".

You can bitch and moan all you want about how this race or that race is getting a free ride, or not taking advantage of opportunities available, but many are. And if you are going to beat that drum, how about the poor White folk who do nothing to improve their lot in life? Why not get on your soapbox about them as much as you do about others.

Get on that soapbox to my friend Dewayne, the Black 12 year navy vet who worked so hard that he nearly died from heart failure and now is on disability, who is going back to school and paying for it himself from the 1100 a month he gets. And not taking a dime in student aid and also helping his niece and two nephews to pay for school as much as he can. Get on that soapbox to his Hispanic cousin who is working three jobs to send his kids to school. When you can show me that every Black and Hispanic is a worthless piece of shit and every White person is doing their absolute best to better themselves, I might think you have a point.

And what I know is that now quite a few people who didn't have legal protection from discrimination then do have it now. Not just racial, but religious and economic discrimination also.

I do agree that too much Government is a bad thing, but then again, too much of anything is a bad thing. And If you think that people and Corporations would play fair and not screw people without some sort of Government intervention, you are mistaken. Because that is what happened, that is why there is Government involvement. Not only did people end up poor, they also DIED because of the actions of people like Rockefeller and Carnegie and Railway corporations and chemical producers just to mention a tiny, tiny few.
So tell me again how pure unadulterated Capitalism is better and more pure and it's no cost to life and freedoms. Tell me how everyone profits from it without anyone losing something.

Posted by mrwilder

I DON'T believe that blacks or Mexicans or any race is incapable in any way. In fact I SPECIFICALLY DENY IT!!!!

I am speaking statistically and generally when I say that the GOVERNMENT is "keeping them down" by destroying their families with AFDC, WIC, Head Start, Affirmative Action, and Cash Assistance and other race preference based programs instead of staying out of the market, which would preserve JOBS.

If you want to call a lifetime of hopelessness and feelings of worthlessness a "free ride", those are YOUR words, not mine. Although, sadly, yes, I admit I do think many of their lives are destroyed.

I support your Navy friend. In fact, I actively support the military and all post military programs such as the GI bill and VA, and I hate it when the military people get screwed. I'm not sure why he doesn't take advantage whatever programs are out there - I would... The Hispanic I don't feel sorry for because he shouldn't have any kids if he can't afford to educate them. I do feel bad for the children though.

And I'll tell you something else I noticed about all these people that want the "free" handouts: THEY OFTEN DO NOTHING FOR THEIR FELLOW MAN.

In the last six months I have:
a) voluteered at a homeless shelter
b) worked free to clean up a halfway house for ex-cons
c) bought lunch for some kid downtown. He was poor. He didn't ask, but I've been there.
d) Made sandwiches and helped deliver them down to the library to feed the hungry
e) worked at the food bank to feed people
f) volunteered for the local poverty law center to help people fill out their court cases at NO cost. g) Gave some guy I don't know five bucks

The question of whether or not people will play fair is meaningless... they will play FAIRER with freedom than with regulation. It's not an opinion, it's historical fact. In Mexico, ONLY the criminals have guns, sir... Your argument that some corporations commited criminal acts is equally facetious... criminals are criminals regardless of the market type.

And in any case, I'm ALL FOR equal protection, and that is PRECISELY why I despise race based programs such as affirmative action, and so-called Universal Health Care.

Posted by Zeke

"The Hispanic I don't feel sorry for because he shouldn't have any kids if he can't afford to educate them. I do feel bad for the children though."

So the guy that wants better for his kids than a shitty public school is wrong for having kids? The guy that is working harder than most people to do better by his children is wrong?

AFDC, WIC, Head start are not race based. If so, there are some amazingly pale Black folk I'm seeing at the Walmart checkout with their WIC vouchers. Along with all the White folk I see in public housing and taking advantage of Head Start.

And corporations have done illegal acts in the past and continue to do so to this day. A criminal act does not require the use of a gun, it requires braking the law. To say otherwise is a false statement.

Posted by mrwilder

Sigh... first of all, I don't think it's wrong to take advantage of these programs. That's what they're there for, and we are all paying for them so you are ENTITLED to, and I myself do, have, and would again take advantage of these programs. That's not the point.

You keep making such specific points you're missing the forest for the trees. So, first, the trees:

Hispanic: He's welcome to work hard to get what he wants... that's the joy of capitalism... since he's doing precisely what he wants and is free to do so, why should anyone feel sorry for him?

Race Based Policies: Welfare policies ARE either completely race based or are race "considerate", and our racial policies are completely upside down. Individual companies, people, and groups SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DISCRIMINATE. Governments SHOULD NOT. Therefore, if you want to have an "all black" restaurant, that should be up to the management and the patrons. However, the government (Schools, too) should NOT be allowed to even LOOK at your race, since they are supposed to represent everyone, REGARDLESS of race.

Criminals and greedy entities: They will exist whether we have capitalism or communism. They prosper better under communism, though.

SOOOOoooo, now, for the point:

According to the most basic canons of ethics, the entire point of society is the furtherance of the overall amount of autonomy, beneficence, and justice.

Perhaps these communist policies ARE based on beneficence since I know for a fact that YOU, for example, are a well meaning, intelligent person.

Unfortunately, they are UNJUST because they prefer one group over another, and they reward actions that are self destructive and negative to society in general (WIC, AFDC) and punish actions which are productive (working, owning a company).

They diminish autonomy, because you lose the right, IF NOTHING ELSE, to fail. Example: I do not smoke. Yet I am against the VOTER APPROVED ballot initiative which illegalized smoking in restaurants. This is because, before the bill passed I could CHOOSE to go to either a smoking restaurant or a NON smoking restaurant. Since the bill passed, I no longer have a CHOICE. Thus, freedom and autonomy have been diminished.

Overall, communism is ethically undesirable because it diminishes autonomy and justice, which outweighs the question of whether or not it is well meaning!!

Short answer: People are HAPPIER, HEALTHIER, and STRONGER, HERE, NOW than they ever have been ANYWHERE, EVER and will be worse off if the health care bill is passed... and when it does, nobody will even look back and realize it because, likely as not, it will be illegal to!!!

December 13, 2018

Subscribe to our email list. For an automated set of details about our occasional email newsletter and how to join it, send us an email message.

Contact Us
Contact form, Email, address and phone numbers

Link To Us
Link to NetWatchCentral with one of our classy banners!

Cell Phone Alerts
Members can get NWC cell alerts! Just click "Edit Account" to set it up.

View our Posting Policy and our Privacy Policy
Contents ©2002 NetWatchCentral.com