Its not an ideological statement, it is a comment on the structure of the organizations and how they have to work to survive. Corporations need to do things efficiently or they disappear, the reason large companies are able to be so inefficient is that they are propped up by the government. But the big corporations still have to be more efficient than the other giant companies or their business gets taken.

When it comes to the government they can have irrational requirements and ways of doing things, and since they allegedly are beholden only to the voters (who dont have a clue what is happening) then they can be as inefficient as they want. An example that is non monetary is how the police will investigate themselves and find they did nothing wrong, they only have an incentive to protect themselves and their own people.

I think this is a seperate issue when private corporations build and own roads. I dont know enough about that sort of thing, I was more referring to how the government hires out private companies to create infrastructure instead of having government employees do it.

I used to also, and I understand the issue, but the mega corps will still be more efficient than the government. This brings up the other issue of how the government funds all the tax dollars to large corporations and also props them up with regulatory protections.

Public employees are almost always not the highest quality and tend to be overpaid, why is it bad to have private companies do the work?

I agree, I think we need to go back to a more small community groups where people with similar ideologies in similar places build up bonds. I have been trying but I think we are a bit too individualistic and those groups only tend to be family based.

I agree with most of what you are saying, but it just doesnt work as a system in our current cultural framework. There has to be an exchange of value added to money given, its not perfect but there just is not a way to do it better differently without discouraging going above and beyond.

Not all, but a majority of labor people do is to make money. What reason do I have to work extra hard for if not for financial gain?

Then there would be no reason to go above and beyond.

Yes, being friendly with the west and exiting the russian sphere is considered a threat against russia to them. You can no like it, but I am all about avoiding war and dead people. Those countries mean nothing to us and we should have no part in their politics.

Yeah because they didnt want them to join nato. Why wouldnt nato just say “we have no interest in having Georgia and Ukraine in nato” to prevent wars?

If Russia is probably capable of doing what Nazi Germany did, why would giving them weapons to defend themselves end in a win?

Cool, that is not what we are talking about right now.

What your logic seems to be saying is - you are in favor of giving weapons to Ukraine so they can fight and weaken Russia, but they never had a chance of winning because Russia is strong enough to semi-replicate what Nazi germany did. So you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Ukrainians to weaken Russia. What part about this is not what you believe?

Apparently you are not aware that the war could have ended two years ago but Boris Johnson flew in and offered them weapons to keep fighting. What your logic seems to be saying is - you are in favor of giving weapons to Ukraine so they can fight and weaken Russia, but they never had a chance of winning because Russia is strong enough to semi-replicate what Nazi germany did. So you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Ukrainians to weaken Russia. What part about this is not what you believe?

And all that had to happen is for NATO to mind its own business and the wars would not have happened. Why was it so important for two countries that we dont actually care at all about to join NATO if it was going to cause wars?

Who do you get accurate battle reports from?

So that is a yes, you want Ukrainians to die for a narative that is not proven and doesnt seem logical?

If that is true then Ukraine had zero chance of winning. So then considering that, you are in favor of using the deaths of tens of thousands of dead Ukrainian soldiers and civilians to mildly harm the Russian military?

Oh wow, the comparison to nazi germany… Do you honestly believe that a country with the GDP of one of americas states is a risk to take over Europe like germany did?

Because that conflict far predates NATO involvement.

That is not true, in the 2008 Bucarest summit in April they discussed how they wanted Ukraine and Georgia to join nato, and then in August Russia invaded Georgia to stop this and put in a Russia puppet government. Why would Nato indicate they wanted to have Ukraine join Nato when they knew it was a serious provocation? Before this war no one gave a shit about Ukraine, and most americans probably couldnt point to it on the map, why was it so important to have it join nato if it risked a war?

Russia took over Crimea due to the overthrow of the Pro russian government with a pro west government, a thing they also found as direct provocation. Why did Russia invade Georgia?