First I will get straight to the point.
You whine about crony/state capitalism (a branch of socialism) a lot but completely miss out the state's role in the equation.
A small state is not weaker, it is less corrupt. It means instead of endless regulation it focuses all it's attention on actually enforcing justice. Instead of the bureaucratic morass we have now I want a slick, tight knit, efficient government, more like a law enforcement agency, with all the nation's media focussed directly apon it leaving no room for error let alone corruption. All those "EVIL KKKKOORPORATION$" you complain about will find that they can no longer worm their way into loopholes and bribe up an obscure politician bestowed with power over billions of $s worth of the economy. Also, yes, tax will be much lower.
>>834
>THAT IS EXACTLY WHY YOUR STANDARDS MEAN NOTHING, YOU ARE A RETARD WHO KNOWS NOTHING AND MAKES SUCH RIDICULOUSLY RETARDED STATEMENTS YOU FUCKING MORON
>>836
>The reply was an irrelevant "less state control needed", which is hilariously ironic, as the subject was about a corporation monopolizing.
>>841
>they just want to get the government off the backs of the corporations in their stock portfolios.
These quotes outline the typical faults in common thinking, the direct result of the enormous attention society pays to the doctrine of a mixed economy. It is time to think outside the box. I explained earlier clearly how state control allows monopolies to exist yet this was never addressed, there is no longer any escape from this argument. Ignoring it again and sending another barrage of personal attacks will only result in me concisely dissecting your argument and disproving you for all to see. If you do provide a counter-argument it will of course be addressed as always. Keep firing away. Criticism is a good thing. It's why free speech is beneficial and should be allowed.