The Republicans are not against ALL regulation, but are against OPPRESSIVE regulation and OVER REGULATION.
Pointless rhetoric. What party or political theory is in favour of OPPRESSIVE and OVER REGULATION?
You may as well say the republicans stand for good things and are against bad.
On the Mafia being capitalist, I would disagree with that too. How is the Mafia in any sense free market? Lying, deception, fraud, cheating, threatening, bullying, robbing and murdering are not capitalist.
None of these things are Democrat either. None of these things are ANY political philosophy.
Having a criminal street tax is free market? Aren't Republicans known for wanting to lower taxes? This in itself contradicts your claim.
A street Tax is no Tax at all. It is simple extortion.
The purpose of Tax is to maintain public infrastructure, services, the military etc. The Mafia's 'Tax' serves zero public service and is no more a tax than in name. So this doesn't contradict any claim whatsoever.
However, criminal violence is never capitalist or free market.
Nor is it a political philosophy.
In a free market there have to be a rational and moral set of rules that people/the market follows.
A free market SIMPLY and ONLY means the the economics of supply and demand determine market forces.
It has nothing to do with rationale and certainly any moral set of rules.
I think you'll find in said 'rant' I actually disagreed with
everything you said.
Point by point.
Then your rant wasn't clear. For example:
I wrote: "The Republicans are not against ALL regulation, but are against OPPRESSIVE regulation and OVER REGULATION."
A disagreement would have been: "Yes, Republicans are against all regulation" or "They are not against oppressive regulation and over regulation." Instead you wrote, "What party...is in favour of oppressive and over regulation?" That doesn't refute what I wrote at all.
I wrote: "On the Mafia being capitalist, I would disagree with that too. How is the Mafia in any sense free market? Lying, deception, fraud, cheating, threatening, bullying, robbing and murdering are not capitalist."
You wrote: "None of these things are Democrat either. None of these things are ANY political philosophy."
Since I didn't write anything about Democrats, how does that refute or even disagree with what I wrote? You second point, "None of these things are ANY political philosophy" actually agrees with what I wrote since the other poster said it was part of the Republican's political philosophy (which is pro-capitalism).
I think those two examples are sufficient for my point. Maybe you think you disagree, but really don't. I don't know. It's not up to me to figure you out.
