The Wisconsin Cheese Showdown

[Person Man]

All soldiers in the war against Corporatism.

[Person Man]

Well, unions are an important counter balance to the strength of corporations as an American institution, even if they are public unions whose employees are not corporations.  Corporatism is when the most powerful institution in society are the Corporations. Another word for it is "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" (Where the state-run economy is operated vicariously through publically financed private corporations).

[Person Man]

Well, its still an issue of union strength against employers....its kind of an aggregate issue. 

[Person Man]

At either rate, we can say Plutocracy then...though I have seen it refered to in both ways. ..

[Person Man]

The hammer drops.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703529004576160742045911986.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Ohio joins the party and prepares to disband public sector unions. And, thankfully, they only have majority requirements for quorum.

I don't often get a little frightened and oddly hyperbolic and conspiratorial, but the amount of cheerleading you and others in this thread are doing is downright creepy considering the obvious motivations behind these moves. This is about crippling the Democratic Party electorally, this is about crippling the organizational capabilities that left-wing grassroots depends upon, this is about eliminating the only, the only, competition corporate money has in American politics.

This is literally about destroying elements of our democracy for partisan purposes. And people like you scare the sh**t out of me when I think about what a future America could look like after this.

It's not simply a political power issue, its a sovreignty issue. Basically the government is surrending sovreignty to the large private estates that share ownership in the corporations. Its what was called the Latifundia in the Late Roman Empire and was the basis to start whittling away at the sovreignty and territorial integrity of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century A.D.

[Person Man]

The hammer drops.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703529004576160742045911986.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Ohio joins the party and prepares to disband public sector unions. And, thankfully, they only have majority requirements for quorum.

I don't often get a little frightened and oddly hyperbolic and conspiratorial, but the amount of cheerleading you and others in this thread are doing is downright creepy considering the obvious motivations behind these moves. This is about crippling the Democratic Party electorally, this is about crippling the organizational capabilities that left-wing grassroots depends upon, this is about eliminating the only, the only, competition corporate money has in American politics.

This is literally about destroying elements of our democracy for partisan purposes. And people like you scare the sh**t out of me when I think about what a future America could look like after this.

It's not simply a political power issue, its a sovreignty issue. Basically the government is surrending sovreignty to the large private estates that share ownership in the corporations. Its what was called the Latifundia in the Late Roman Empire and was the basis to start whittling away at the sovreignty and territorial integrity of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century A.D.

Now I know we have come full circle if liberals are making comparisons to Rome.

Rome had other issues with sovereignty beyond that, ones which I doubt you would want to make a comparison on to today's US.

They also had a flow of wealth out of Gaul, Italy and Iberia towards the Middle East, and the Han Empire of China. Gold for Silk (I realize its oversimplification of the trade system of 250-400 AD ) eventually leads you with a lot of useless fine clothing and no money. Plus the clothes wear out. Kind of like dollars for oil, today. This is why in 1000 AD the two centers of world finance (and ironically two ends of the same trade route) was China and the Middle East.

For the first point, I guess a conservative could make an argument against immigration though the US is more structurally equiped to deal with it than Rome. ...and of course, there are slight similarities between terrorist attacks and German, Iranian and Arab raiders...mainly being that they are transient, short-lived and expensive events orchestrated by very desperate people.

Oil Shieks....Chinese silk traders?...Well, I guess this is another comparison with Rome that's in order, then?