Political Opinion

There are two types of privatization. The type that benefits people. Another type that benefits evil.

There are good private people. There are bad private criminals.

A privatician aims to reduce government for moral purposes. That’s why there is no way around moral education. Increasing the size and power of government requires immorality. You cannot make the governments moral by increasing their power.

Those who have power will abuse power. Centralization leads to abuse of power. Privatization is about decentralization of power. It is about reducing the division between haves and have-nots.

Dividing humanity into haves and have-nots comes from low levels of consciousness. To increase the power of government requires increasing the division between haves and have-nots. The power differential between haves and have-nots is widened through theft which is immoral.

We should be concern that our government are being lobby to advance the interests of industries that will harm the citizens

You mean governments are favoring big businesses and attacking small businesses with regulations.

During COVID-19 pandemic, US government favored amazon.com with various subsidies while attacking smaller businesses with medical regulations as excuses. Governments ordered tiny businesses to close to stop the spread of viruses… COVID-19 pandemic was a psy-op to justify tyrannical measures that helped big businesses and almost killed small businesses.

US government made amazon.com bigger and shrunk small businesses.

Amazon.com is essentially a private branch of government at this point. Privatization done by the ruling class actually creates amalgamation of government and supposedly private corporations.

This is what centralization means. Decentralization should prevent governments from subsidizing big companies and attacking small businesses.

That might be part of the ruling class agenda, squashing all small competitions

How BlackRock Became The World’s Largest Asset Manager

BlackRock is one of the world’s most influential companies in finance. At the end of the third quarter, it had $9.464 trillion in assets under management, making it the biggest asset manager in the world.

That scale gives CEO Larry Fink a voice in the international effort to fight global warming. Fink kicked off the decade with a letter to shareholders that called for better stewardship of environment, social and corporate governance issues.

These concerns stem from BlackRock’s conversations with clients across the globe. At a conference at the Bank of Italy earlier this year, Fink said that enforcing emissions reporting standards for public companies “will have the unintended consequences of fueling a backlash against our big companies, and it will promote a narrative of big versus small, and it will create greater and greater political polarization.”

https://youtu.be/ga_we_sOopk

Americans should have known something was wrong when politicians began entertaining billionaire donors. It’s called a favor for a favor, we give you money, now we need your help.

In other countries, this is referred to as corruption, but in America we refer to it as lobbying and private donations.

Corruption is a misnomer. It is not corruption but natural co-operation between assets controlled by the ruling class. The ruling class owns and controls every major institution including all the human governments, big tech, big media, publication, medicine, etc, … All major institutions have been created by the ruling class since thousands of years ago.

Democracy is merely a way to make people think they are in control when they are not. The ruling class is in control of all their assets. Slaves are more productive when they think they are not slaves and they are in control.

1 Like

How Hard Work makes People Poor - Meet the Working Class

A third of British people in work have less than £100 in savings. What is life like for those struggling to make ends meet, despite having a job? This is the real story behind working Britain today.

Watch and Listen to the first 6 minutes of this video, This goes on in all industries

“Growth and jobs are more inportant then peoples lives”

Who Decides what we EAT? - The Price of Progress.

What are the decision-making mechanisms among the Agri-food Industry, European institutions, and the scientific community? Who decides the agriculture of tomorrow? Who decides the price we have to pay for it?

The documentation discusses the practices of giant industries, focusing on the agrochemical industry and the controversy surrounding regulation, transparency, intellectual property rights, and the use of pesticides. It argues that regulation is vital to prevent misuse and that corporate profits have been prioritized over public safety. It raises concerns about a possible lack of transparency, stating that although industry insiders state they are open to full disclosure, intellectual property rights often prevent this.

If official numbers are bad , the real numbers are worse… It’s almost time for a switcheroo…

Not only is Biden’s mental health a concern but so is the mental health of people that still support him… Seriously… What is wrong with you people…?

The Democrats and Dominion are gonna need a bigger ballot printer…

The problem is not more regulation, but the current regulation, the government caving to industries and turning the other cheek when they know what they are allowing is causing serious health problems.

There will be no regulations if the industries get their way, so they can run wild without any guidelines

I understand when you talk about education and knowledge, but we are not there yet

It is true what you say about regulation and I am with you to a certain extent. Knowing what you know today, which one of those benefits is more likely to come from Total privatization with no regulations

Let’s use cars for example, In the past few years, millions of cars have had to be recalled for safety concerns after they found something wrong that caused crashes and the deaths of several people. In the absence of some regulations, I am not 100% sure that those car manufacturers would have recalled those cars. The cars were already purchased and paid for, so recalling them to fix the problem would cost them money.

Education and knowledge won’t help in this situation

MELBOURNE, Australia — Tech billionaire Elon Musk accused the Australian Government of censorship after an Australian judge ruled that his social media platform X must block users worldwide from accessing video of a bishop being stabbed in a Sydney church…

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded Tuesday by describing Musk as an “arrogant billionaire” who considered himself above the law and was out of touch with the public…

Like many other inept Governments across the globe… Australia’s high immigration level is importing extremism from intolerant societies and/or religions that continually resort to violence…

Prime Minister Albanese has presided over historically unprecedented immigration into this country and is now desperately trying to distance his Government and Policies from the increase in housing chaos, extremism and crime that came with it…

No Politician wants to have proof of failed and damaging policies splashed all over social media… It’s just another piece to the puzzle of a Global Ministry of truth that Western Governments are trying to construct…

The Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced in 2022 that it had launched what is being dubbed a Disinformation Governance Board to combat “misinformation…”

A government agency creating a “ministry of truth” to combat what it deems misinformation…

Really…

China’s Social Credit controlled population has given this generation of wanabe totalitarian Politicians some very dangerous and destructive ideas…

1 Like

When you said this I had to look into the negative effects of Politics

Politics seep into daily life, negatively affecting mental health

WASHINGTON—The stress of following daily political news can negatively affect people’s mental health and well-being, but disengaging has ramifications, too, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

There are strategies that can help people manage those negative emotions—such as distracting oneself from political news—but those same strategies also reduce people’s drive to act on political causes they care about, the research found.

“When it comes to politics, there can be a trade-off between feeling good and doing good,” said Brett Q. Ford, PhD, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. “Protecting oneself from the stress of politics might help promote well-being but it also comes at a cost to staying engaged and active in democracy.”

Previous research and polling data have found that politics can be a major stressor in people’s lives, according to the researchers. However, most of that research has focused on major political events such as presidential elections. Ford and her colleagues wanted to explore the emotional and mental health effects of everyday political news and how people use different strategies to manage those negative emotions.

“Politics isn’t just something that affects people every four years during election season—it seems to seep into daily life. But we just don’t know much about the day-to-day impact politics might have,” Ford said.

To learn more, she and her colleagues began by asking a politically diverse sample of 198 Americans to answer a series of questions each night for two weeks about the political event they thought about most that day, the emotions they felt in response, how they managed those emotions, their general psychological and physical well-being that day, and how motivated they felt to engage in political action.

Overall, the researchers found that thinking about daily political events evoked negative emotions in participants—even though the survey question had not asked participants to think of negative political events. Participants who experienced more politics-related negative emotions reported worse day-to-day psychological and physical health on average—but they also reported greater motivation to act on political causes by doing things such as volunteering or donating money to political campaigns.

The survey also asked participants about several strategies they might have used to manage their negative emotions, including distracting themselves from the news and “cognitive reappraisal,” or reframing how they thought about a news event to make it seem less negative. Participants who successfully used these strategies to manage their negative emotions reported better daily well-being, but also less motivation to take political action.

Next, the researchers replicated these results over three weeks with a larger group of 811 participants that included not only Democrats and Republicans but also people affiliated with a different political party or no party.

In a second set of experiments, Ford and her colleagues asked participants to watch political news clips from the highest-rated liberal and conservative-leaning news shows rather than simply asking them to report on politics they had encountered. In these experiments, participants watched a clip from either the Rachel Maddow Show (for liberal participants) or Tucker Carlson Tonight (for conservative participants). In a first experiment, the researchers found that participants who watched the political clip experienced more negative emotions than those who watched a neutral, non-political news clip, and reported more motivation to volunteer for political causes or take other political action. The effect held true for participants across political parties.

In a final experiment, the researchers asked participants to try out several different emotion regulation strategies as they watched the clips—distraction, cognitive reappraisal or acceptance of their negative feelings. Replicating the results from the diary studies, the researchers found two of the strategies, distraction and cognitive reappraisal, consistently reduced participants’ negative emotions which in turn predicted better well-being, but indirectly reduced the likelihood that they would want to take political action.

Overall, the results suggest that politics have a significant daily effect on many Americans’ health and well-being, according to the authors.

Continue

When regulations coincide with principles, they are redundant and irrelvant. Regulations that oppose principles are wrong.

Our job is to learn principles and align with principles.

Regulations rely on punishment instead of understanding of principles.

Even without regulations, objective moral principles dictate that people have a right to defend their personal properties against violations.

We don’t need anything more than knowledge and principle.

Objective (moral) principles are superior substitutes for arbitrary man-made regulations.

If the car manufacturer doesn’t make up for their faulty car models in some ways, people will stop trusting the car manufacturer, and the car manufacturer will go out of business very soon.

Spontaneous order is totally capable of taking care of bad businesses.

You are still advocating initiation of violence for making companies behave. We don’t need government regulations to deal with problems.

There are many ways to solve problems without initiation of violence. As long as we advocate initiation of violence for solving every problems, we end up creating governments that violate everyone’s natural rights.

Initiation of violence is immoral, and should never be considered. Morality should be the first consideration before you consider practicality and other issues.

Now we back to the food Industry with your answer, why havent all the bad producing food companies went out of business, Education and knowledge won’t help in this situation because people spend on what they can afford

Bad food companies are thriving because people are poorly educated.

Most people don’t understand nutrition and health. They don’t even care.

Do they know what I know about raw milk? No. That’s why they advocate banning raw milk.

They are the kind of people who eat snacks and processed foods.

Without education and knowledge, people don’t even think about which food companies they should avoid. They simply don’t care because media outlets don’t tell them about nutrition.

That’s why true media outlets have all the power to galvanize people. Media outlets can educate people so that they create a vastly better civilization than this.

Got it, Is there a way to educate and make people care about the food they eat?

The ruling class applied sheer will power for thousands of years to arrive where we are now.

There is no quick solution. Constant application of will power toward creating true media outlets is the only way out. It can take hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of years to reverse the damage done by the ruling class.

If people don’t donate to or create true media outlets, then mainstream media outlets will make people advocate all the wrong things including government regulations. True media outlets will educate people so well that they will know what to do in the first place.

If people don’t know what to do, anything they end up advocating will be bad. If people are properly informed, bad companies won’t survive long. Properly informed people don’t need to initiate violence because they know better solutions.

We need a culture that fosters creation and maintenance of true media outlets by individuals.

That’s the only way out.

With a gun, you can kill a few people. With a missile, you can kill hundreds of people. With a nuclear bomb, you can level an entire city. With a story, you control the world.

Media outlet narratives are the most dangerous weapon in the world. Swords kill people. Media outlets control people who wield the swords.

1 Like