I side with

[guartz]

Corporations and Governments have different goals, which is why one is "better for the everyman" than the other.

This isn't rocket science, you aren't being profound or clever with your comoparison here guartz.

You are right, this isn't rocket science. There are scores of not for profit corporations that have amiable goals that are "better for the everyman".

[guartz]

This method of analysis completely ignores the fact that a government system is structured and ran completely different from a corporate system.

Yes, the people that participate in and have rolls of power in each are likely the exact same (as far as selfishness, motivation, etc), but that being true in a vacuum doesn’t mean that corporations = government. The jobs, responsibilities, how people attain positions of power, how they’re held accountable, the ideals and laws that govern them, and how they keep their job are completely different.

We don't directly elect who runs corporations. We don't vote in the CEOs. We don't nominate the 'board of trustees.' A corporation isn't run to serve the best interests of the people; they're run for profit.

I can feel the ‘you vote with your wallet’ response coming, but I can’t seriously equate the two as being equal. In theory perhaps, but not in practice. There’s far less of a degree of control and choice between ‘either give them your money or keep it for yourself’, and ‘vote for whoever you believe will serve your best interests.’

Interesting. What you just said clearly states why government structure is far superior in protecting people then a corporation. I admit my failures. Turns out, corporations don't have ideals, laws or accountability.

[RKenshin]

Interesting. What you just said clearly states why government structure is far superior in protecting people then a corporation. I admit my failures. Turns out, corporations don't have ideals, laws or accountability.

Somehow you managed to equate me saying "different ideals/laws/accountabilities" with the completely different statement of "don't have ideals/laws/accountabilities."

But I guess if you read it any other way, you wouldn't be able to make a smartass/sarcastic remark in place of a real argument addressing my points.

[guartz]

But that's what you were implying, isn't it? You say different ideals/laws you mean to say that they are better, because what corporations are only self interested hence their policies will reflect that. Not at all like government people, because, well! We elect them!

[RKenshin]

Reductio ad absurdum is a logical fallacy, you know.

Same with the strawman attacks you're building here.

No where have I said or even implied that government workers are somehow more morally responsible than private workers. How about we stop harping that point and address the fact that the entities are what is different here (government vs corporation), and not the people that make them up.

This is like trying to say that a car is equal to an apple because the atoms that make them up behave the same, and then refuting anyone that says a car is better for transportation by mocking them for 'implying' the atoms in the car are somehow better at being atoms than the ones in the apple. Are you purposefully being that obtuse? Or just trolling?

[Tweek]

most government employees aren't elected ftr, pretty small fucking percentage are.

[RKenshin]

most government employees aren't elected ftr, pretty small fucking percentage are.

Of course? The point is that anyone with a reasonable position of power is directly (if not indirectly) voted into that position by the populous.

[Ashmada]

To really hammer it home: the checks and balances built in the system are different (in extreme corporate cases, there can even be none), for instance an elected official can't unilateraly increase his own salary/bonus the way a CEO can.

RKenshin: roles* populace*.

(and no, reductio ad asbursdum isn't fallacious; but what Quartz is doing is just false equivalences/strawmanning)

[Jube]

I am Independent and have always been since I was able to vote. I like to vote for the person I feel at the current time best fits the needs with capabilities. Since I use to live in Mass for 25 years, I know I absolutely can not stand Romeny. But the results seem kinda skewed. Even after answering every question with other, and picking the one that goes the most with what I believe. I would have thought my GOP would be a good deal higher.

http://imgs.isidewith.com/results-image/40233675.jpg

[Plow]

you sound like a fairly reasonable person.... that should explain it.

[guartz]

Reductio ad absurdum is a logical fallacy, you know.

Same with the strawman attacks you're building here.

No where have I said or even implied that government workers are somehow more morally responsible than private workers. How about we stop harping that point and address the fact that the entities are what is different here (government vs corporation), and not the people that make them up.

This is like trying to say that a car is equal to an apple because the atoms that make them up behave the same, and then refuting anyone that says a car is better for transportation by mocking them for 'implying' the atoms in the car are somehow better at being atoms than the ones in the apple. Are you purposefully being that obtuse? Or just trolling?

heh, alright. Let's recap; Government is organized differently then corporations are, however, the people it employs are the same in terms of inclined behavior. Your position is that Government's organization is far better suited to serve humanity because that's it's design, as opposed to corporation, which is designed to earn profit.

I'm pretty sure I captured your position here. Correct me if I'm wrong.


btw what's with the dramatic irony here? reductio ad absurdum and with the same breath apple and car thing. Seriously?

[hey]

heh, alright. Let's recap; Government is organized differently then corporations are, however, the people it employs are the same in terms of inclined behavior. Your position is that Government's organization is far better suited to serve humanity because that's it's design, as opposed to corporation, which is designed to earn profit.

I'm pretty sure I captured your position here. Correct me if I'm wrong.


btw what's with the dramatic irony here? reductio ad absurdum and with the same breath apple and car thing. Seriously?

The difference isn't the people, it's the incentive to fuck people over, and the potential costs of doing so. There is far more to gain, and usually less to lose (it's easier to not get reelected for doing everything you can to make yourself money at everyone else's expense than it is to get fired for doing your job).

[RKenshin]

heh, alright. Let's recap; Government is organized differently then corporations are, however, the people it employs are the same in terms of inclined behavior. Your position is that Government's organization is far better suited to serve humanity because that's it's design, as opposed to corporation, which is designed to earn profit.

I'm pretty sure I captured your position here. Correct me if I'm wrong.

In an oversimplified sense, yes, that's a major part of the argument.

I've yet to see you refute that.

btw what's with the dramatic irony here? reductio ad absurdum and with the same breath apple and car thing. Seriously?

I admit my failures. Turns out, corporations don't have ideals, laws or accountability.

You act overdramatic, I act overdramatic in return. Annoying, isn't it?

[Deadgye]

Spoiler: show

This does not surprise me much. Although I wish some of the questions had a "I don't know what this is" option.

[hey]

You could just not answer.

[Deadgye]

You could just not answer.

I usually expect surveys to bitch at me if I leave something unanswered. Plus radio buttons don't let you unselect.