Bg_alleyfight_left RefreshGo to The Wall
Bg_alleyfight_right_vote List of Alley FightsGo to The Wall
Barns
XBN
Login to vote
VS.

XBN

Barns

NEW PRESIDENTIAL CONTENDERS: BILL GATES & STEVE JOBS!

Barns wants and the country needs a few REALLY GOOD, FRESH FACES TO RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY!

Barns thinks ALL the present candidates UNINTERESTING, WITHOUT CLEAR MORAL COMPASSES, OF OPAQUE VISION, LACKING IN INTERNATIONAL STATURE, LACKING THE COJONES REQUIRED TO FIGHT THE INSIDIOUS GEOPOLITICAL WARS AHEAD.

Barns wants Gates & Jobs as CO-PRESIDENTS!
1. They “get it!” Whatever “it” is!
2. They know “how to make it!” Whatever “it” is!
3. They know “how to sell it!” Whatever “it” is!
4. They can afford to TAKE THE JOB! Whatever it costs to run and lead unencumbered by outside interests!

Barns wants YOUR suggestions for GOOD PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES and WHY! We will declare and announce the winner for MOST INNOVATIVE AND SMART CHOICE! Winner gets a HUGE prize personally from Barns! Submit your choices now!

It All Started With...

What your advocating here is that the nation should be run as business. There are many reasons as to why to this thought pattern is dangerous and against the entire foundation of the United States. In order to outline these dangers and pitfalls of the United States run as a business idea, I would need more space that is given for this particular posting. Therefore, I respectful request an alley fight.

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 03/31 at 11:48PM PT

Yo Pilgrim! Barns has never shied away from a good (read that is NON P.C. and bright) joust with a quality croaker! As to you being a "quality" croaker, the jury is out until we all see some significant and quality blood-letting in the alley!You are on!

Barns ( 939 posts / 24 fights ) from Den Of Ubiquity, California (United States) on 04/02 at 03:00PM PT


Before addressing America as a business I will first address the idea of co-presidents:

Co-presidents would fail for the reasons in Federalist Paper 70. Here, Alexander Hamilton discussed that the Executive Branch needs unity. Hamilton explained that this unity could be destroyed if the Executive Power was “vest[ed] …in two or more magistrates of equal dignity and authority”. This system would lead to one president seeking to obliterate the other. America cannot afford to have co-presidents quarreling, as they are the face of the nation at home and abroad. This would tell America’s enemies that the American government is “divided”. I believe this division would be seen as a severe weakness that could to be exploited. Hamilton explained that having co-presidents would “ lessen the respectability, weaken the authority, and distract the plans and operations of those whom they divided”.

Next Post: THE U.S. AS A BUSINESS

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 04/03 at 09:52PM PT

AMERICA AS A BUSINESS I
Let us now proceed to the topic of America as a business and why this would certainly be considered a failure. Business is absence in the Constitution but commerce is not. Therefore, in addressing this topic of America as a business it would be necessary to look at how America has responded to questions of commerce. It is without question that Congress should regulate commerce, particularly that of interstate commerce, as is stated in the Constitution. The Framers of our country certainly saw to it that the government must have its hand in business, as when it did not (Article of Confederation) the country almost fell apart. However, the Constitution only allows government to regulate. No instruction by the Framers stated that the government should or could completely control or more importantly be in control of creating commerce or business.

Next: Part II

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 04/03 at 09:59PM PT

Barns doesn't need wisdom on RULE BY COMMITTEE. The last and only time that ever worked was ... well, on reflection, NEVER! And, Barns has read the Federalis Papers (interesting but not nearly as much fun as any issue of THE FEDERAL PENITENTIARY NEWS!!) and is a Hamilton fan. Barns' point was NOT CO-PRESIDENCIES! Heck, if over 50% of marriages fail (and those involve regular and readily available sex ...), what chance do any two headstrong people who are not "getting it on" have to lead together? OK. OK. Enough tomfoolery! The point is/was what an amazing upportunity would it be to move a plethora of agenda items along IF WE COULD AVAIL OURSELVES OF THE IMMENSE TALENT AND LEADERSHIP ABILITY OF AMERICA'S FINEST ACHIEVERS? Would that work? Hell no..... For many good reasons and some pathetically provincial. More when Barns figures out how to spell "tomfoolery"...

Barns ( 939 posts / 24 fights ) from Den Of Ubiquity, California (United States) on 04/03 at 10:06PM PT

2
The Framers did allow the government to have some business like powers as they have the power to tax and spend. This power was given to the government in order to, among other things, “provide for the general Welfare”. Therefore, the government is able to have money in order to further benefit those who gave them money in the first place. But it also entrusted the government to have other functions beyond that of a business. The Framers wanted the government to be able to provide intangibles such as rights, freedoms, and liberties. The issue of commerce was important to the Framers but hardly as important as rights, liberties, and freedoms. Above all, the Framers wanted a government that could provide justice to its people. It’s first in the Constitution. Justice ensures fairness and equality. This country began with war over fairness and equality.

Next: Part 3

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 04/03 at 10:12PM PT

3
Political philosopher John Locke, whom the Framers relied heavily upon when they created this country, said that people form a government in order to be protected and that protection was one of the primary things government needed to provide for its people. I venture to say that one of those protections would be justice as is the canopy under which all other rights and freedom are protected from storms of greed and an unethically behaviors. Business cannot provide justice, as this is not business or commerce’s purest goal. Business and commerce’s purest goal is to make profit not provide justice. Lawyers are involved in business and are a business themselves but their purest goal is not to make money, but to see that justice is properly provided. This may involve getting someone money but the primary responsibility of a lawyer is to get their clients justice.

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 04/03 at 10:17PM PT

Yo XBN.... Off the throttle a bit! America and business are synonimous. Remember: love makes the world go around. Money has to be there to grease the axel. The "business or business" is the fundamental expression of the foundation of our political structure. Regulating busines is a both a qualitative and quantitatie matter. Whereas business needs to be regulated TO THE EXTENT AND ONLY IF MARKET ECONOMICS SOMEHOW IGNORE THE PUBLIC GOOD, the body politic is a woefully innadequate arbiter of what is appropriate. Remember that politics aggregate to a voracious, insatiable entity. You need to re-focus on the main gig, here. The presidency.... Sorry, XBN: Barns is not interested. Particularly since he would be an entirely too non P.C. candidate! He most certainly would piss-off everybody in the arena. Given that, now that I reflect on it, Barns would probaly play awfully well in Peoria. Where the hell is Marshall McLuhan when I need him??

Barns ( 939 posts / 24 fights ) from Den Of Ubiquity, California (United States) on 04/03 at 10:18PM PT

4
Business seeks to provide profit and the legal field seeks to provide justice. These two things are essential to our nation and can only be provided by one body. That body is a government, in which the Framers entrusted the power to gain revenue for itself and allow for citizens to the make profit for themselves as well as provide citizens with the protection of justice while operating in the business sphere. To run America and its government like a business is to eliminate justice and the rights it protects. To run this country simply as a legal system would eliminate many of the opportunities for America to be prosperous in a business field. America must be run on a government not a business.

Next: The Conclusion of America as a Business: Why Gates and Jobs are not fit for the Executive Branch

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 04/03 at 10:23PM PT

Conclusion
America is a place where regulated businesses can exist and most importantly justice can thrive. Furthermore, without justice the evils of business would never be brought to …well you get the point. Gates and Jobs have plenty of things, make plenty of things and sell many things in the business realm. Justice transcends computers, marketing, and even business. Gates is certainly not about justice (Microsoft monopoly-enough said). However, he has begun to show signs of a humanitarian in his efforts to bring computers to those in poverty but still what computers did he bring them-computers running on Windows. That is quasi-justice. Had the Framers wanted a business or legal system they would have set-up one. The Framers designed a government, which again provides the protection of justice in a business environment. Therefore, one could say America is open for business with liberty and justice for all.

XBN ( 40 posts / 6 fights ) from Las Vegas, Nevada (United States) on 04/03 at 10:25PM PT