Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

Justin James10 said:Honestly, those VEKO companies are nothing more than smoke and mirrors. I call them fictitious because their entire existence serves one purpose: creating cushy jobs for cronies and funneling money into shady offshore accounts. Isn't it obvious what they're actually doing?

Look, sorry, but Dow Chemical actually does what they say on their tax forms, and so does the Department of Transportation. They aren't just there to funnel cash into shadow accounts. You kept claiming you had a million examples like this, yet you keep circling back to the same three stories. Where are the other hundred thousand companies you're talking about?

The core issue lies in deep-seated corruption and a general lack of public awareness regarding our right to demand even a modicum of decent management within our own communities.

I honestly fail to see what kind of "systemic reform" could possibly alter that fundamental reality.

If we want a glimpse of what total liberalization would look like in a broken society devoid of any democratic conscience, we need only look at professional soccer. In that arena, we don't deal with state-run clubs; instead, we see highly capable entrepreneurs like Mamić and Mickey competing in a "free market" that is conveniently regulated by their own close associates. And based on how much our sport has flourished because of it, one can only assume we're doing everything perfectly.

wiredfalcon2 said:The difference between how Baldasar ran San Francisco versus how Opara does it? It’s night and day. Seriously. You're just talking nonsense again.

Your marketing pitch just fell flat. It’s quite literally the same group of people running the show, but oh, suddenly Opara is such a saint! 🙏

What has he actually changed? He did some minor cosmetic touch-ups over in Žnjan, and that’s about it. Though, let's be honest, Žnjan is still an outlier for the city.

If someone less abrasive than Bandić took over tomorrow, everyone would be singing his praises, wouldn't they? It wouldn't matter at all if the exact same crowd continued to run everything behind the scenes.

Justin James10 said:Your marketing pitch just fell flat. It’s quite literally the same group of people running the show, but oh, suddenly Opara is such a saint! 🙏

What has he actually changed? He did some minor cosmetic touch-ups over in Žnjan, and that’s about it. Though, let's be honest, Žnjan is still an outlier for the city.

If someone less abrasive than Bandić took over tomorrow, everyone would be singing his praises, wouldn't they? It wouldn't matter at all if the exact same crowd continued to run everything behind the scenes.

Wait, do you even live in San Francisco?

Besides, you’ve still got plenty of questions left to answer.

The less the government gets involved, the better ☕ everything else is just pure nonsense

Now we’ve got this whole saga about bailing out General Dynamics. I feel like I’ve lived this before—honestly, I can already see how this plays out. We’ll be right back here looking at another massive bailout in five years. 👋

wiredfalcon2 said:Wait, do you even live in San Francisco?

Besides, you’ve still got plenty of questions left to answer.

I lived there for six years, keeping close ties with family and friends, so I’m constantly visiting San Francisco. I know firsthand that whole lineup of "controversial" entrepreneurs and politicians from the area. 😉

I just pointed to one specific example for your research, but honestly, they are everywhere and things are looking pretty grim. 😉

To highlight the biggest issue: take any state-owned corporation at random—they are essentially shells. Dow Chemical is probably the most glaring example. You'll hear the director openly admit that they exist solely to serve themselves. 😉

brightpilot6 said:The core issue lies in deep-seated corruption and a general lack of public awareness regarding our right to demand even a modicum of decent management within our own communities.

I honestly fail to see what kind of "systemic reform" could possibly alter that fundamental reality.

If we want a glimpse of what total liberalization would look like in a broken society devoid of any democratic conscience, we need only look at professional soccer. In that arena, we don't deal with state-run clubs; instead, we see highly capable entrepreneurs like Mamić and Mickey competing in a "free market" that is conveniently regulated by their own close associates. And based on how much our sport has flourished because of it, one can only assume we're doing everything perfectly.

Both Mamić and Mickey are deeply intertwined with local politics.😉

Paul Sanders5 said:The less the government gets involved, the better ☕ everything else is just pure nonsense

Now we’ve got this whole saga about bailing out General Dynamics. I feel like I’ve lived this before—honestly, I can already see how this plays out. We’ll be right back here looking at another massive bailout in five years. 👋

Billions of dollars have been funneled straight through the shipyards. It’s an open secret there—everyone involved knows from day one that the projects they're taking on are dead on arrival. They agree to these contracts knowing full well they aren't profitable. But that's exactly the point, isn't it? It creates this massive gray area perfect for skimming off the top. The entire leadership structure has its hands in the pockets of these partner companies, ensuring the money keeps flowing their way.

Justin James10 said:Both Mamić and Mickey are deeply intertwined with local politics.😉

But isn't that exactly my point? Good morning.

brightpilot6 said:But isn't that exactly my point? Good morning.

But what kind of market competition are we even talking about here?

ruggedjackal46 said:The real question isn't whether the current system is broken—it clearly is—but whether the "solution" you’re pitching actually fixes anything. All I ever hear from you and your crowd is a relentless stream of valid criticisms against the way things work now, but I have yet to hear one convincing argument for why massive privatization and total deregulation would actually benefit society. Beyond just handing more wealth to the tiny handful of billionaires who already own everything? I'm still waiting for that part.

If we could somehow dial back the political interference and all the rot that comes with it—and let's be honest, in this country, about 95% of what we deal with in business and daily life is pure nonsense like cronyism, nepotism, and blatant corruption—then even the harshest version of capitalism starts to sound like a more plausible path forward. It feels far more realistic than the alternative, which seems to be sitting around hoping and praying that this society will suddenly grow a conscience, educate itself, and start electing competent, less corrupt leaders on its own. Perhaps in this century, or maybe the next. 🤷

edit: I'm not some hardcore neoliberal extremist or anything; I'm just stating my observations.

wiredfalcon2 said:There’s a massive difference between supporting the concept of a state existing at all and supporting whatever specific administration happens to be running things. I definitely don't support the latter. But the idea that a tiny, libertarian-style government is the magic fix for our problems? Not happening. As far as I can see, having an organized state structure, taxes, and a republican system of governance is still the best way to run a society.

The US has plenty of issues, obviously. No debate there. The reasons why things are such a mess are complicated, and thinking privatization is a silver bullet won't change anything because the same rot that plagues the public sector usually finds its way into the private sector too. A country's success isn't really about whether taxes are high or low, or how big the government is. It's about social cooperation. Where people actually work together, society thrives because there’s trust. When there's trust, you can plan for the future. When you can plan, you actually make progress.

Guys like Justin James10 will tell you—if something isn't profitable, it shouldn't exist. The problem is, a lot of stuff isn't "profitable," but it's incredibly useful for everyone. Like a municipal water filtration plant. It doesn't turn a profit. In fact, between setup costs and maintenance, it just burns through money (which then gets patched up by the budget and taxes).

To build actual trust and cooperation, American society needs to focus on becoming fairer—and that means having a legal system that's both just and efficient. We need honest, streamlined public procurement processes.

I can't recall the exact name of the study, but two American political scientists gave a killer diagnosis of what happens when a public system gets gutted—like what happened in Washington, D.C. under Milomir Bandić. Without him (and his crew), you can't get anything done in D.C., because he broke the standard system and replaced it with a parallel one where he's the only one who matters. It creates this illusion that he's this indispensable guy who fixes everything, unlike the "sluggish" official system. The trick is that the system is sluggish *because* of him. It's the oldest move in the book: manufacture a crisis just so you can show up as the savior. That's why people vote for guys like him; they think everything will collapse without them because they've lost faith in the institutions. But the idea that public services would magically get better if we privatized everything—only for those contracts to go to Pripuz and his buddies—is just absurd.

See, man, nobody can really argue with what you wrote here, but at the same time, it doesn't do much good because you're talking about theories. They might be 100% correct, but they don't actually offer a roadmap for solutions.
The reality is that the most advanced societies are usually the ones with the most economic freedom. Why bring up water filtration, but stay silent on things like shipyards or the interstate highway system?

So, tell me, how exactly would you handle the mess with the petrochemical plants, the shipyards, or the highways?

Justin James10 said:But what kind of market competition are we even talking about here?

Fair point.

wiredfalcon2 said:Exactly. Trust is basically non-existent right now, and honestly, can you even blame anyone? It’s not just the government, either—even in private sectors that have absolutely nothing to do with federal overreach, people are looking over their shoulders. Everything feels shaky. Anyway, I'll let Justin James10 explain how the government is supposedly to blame for these specific cases:

So you land this job, right? Boss tells you straight up: three months on probation, then a one-year contract if you don't screw everything up. Standard stuff. You grind for three months, kill it, boss gives you all kinds of praise, feels like you're winning... and then they hit you with another three-month extension instead of the year-long deal you actually signed up for. Just keeps moving the goalposts. Total joke.
So you pull off the job as a subcontractor and then... nothing. Just total radio silence when it comes to getting paid. It’s a joke. You do the work, you deliver, and suddenly everyone’s acting like they don't know who you are. Honestly, it feels impossible sometimes. You're left holding the bag while they just sit on your money. Total scam.
So, your boss is being a total pain and blocking your vacation even though you’re technically within your rights under labor laws? Honestly, what a joke. You know the rules, you've earned the time off, but they just sit there playing gatekeeper like it's their job to ruin your life. It’s such a classic power trip. If you actually follow the handbook, you should be able to walk out that door and head to the beach, regardless of how much they whine about "coverage" or whatever excuse they're throwing at you this week. Don't let them steamroll you.
So, boss isn't actually cutting you the check he promised? Classic. Just typical corporate nonsense. Honestly, I’ve seen this movie before and it never ends well. You think you're part of the team until the money talks, and then suddenly everyone's "reviewing the budget" or whatever bullshit excuse they're throwing at you today. It's a joke. Total scam.
So, you bought some gear from a small business owner for your company, right? Everything seemed fine during the pitch—they were talking a big game, promising the moon. But then the stuff actually arrives at your office, and it’s total junk. It’s nowhere near what they promised when you were signing the contract. What do you even do with that?

blah, blah, blah... same old story.

How is the government responsible when the legal system fails to function? It isn't, obviously! After all, the government's job should be providing legal certainty, not just focusing on manufacturing fake fertilizer or instant soup packets, right? 👍

Justin James10 said:But what kind of market competition are we even talking about here?

It would look exactly like any other industry in this country if you decided to privatize everything overnight.

brightpilot6 said:It would look exactly like any other industry in this country if you decided to privatize everything overnight.

Are you suggesting politics would still have a decisive influence even if you completely decoupled it from everything else? How on earth would that even work?

brightpilot6 said:The core issue lies in deep-seated corruption and a general lack of public awareness regarding our right to demand even a modicum of decent management within our own communities.

I honestly fail to see what kind of "systemic reform" could possibly alter that fundamental reality.

If we want a glimpse of what total liberalization would look like in a broken society devoid of any democratic conscience, we need only look at professional soccer. In that arena, we don't deal with state-run clubs; instead, we see highly capable entrepreneurs like Mamić and Mickey competing in a "free market" that is conveniently regulated by their own close associates. And based on how much our sport has flourished because of it, one can only assume we're doing everything perfectly.

So you think the USSF and American soccer in general are examples of liberalization?

ZZ, I honestly can't believe you can be this incredibly wrong.

Justin James10 said:I lived there for six years, keeping close ties with family and friends, so I’m constantly visiting San Francisco. I know firsthand that whole lineup of "controversial" entrepreneurs and politicians from the area. 😉

I just pointed to one specific example for your research, but honestly, they are everywhere and things are looking pretty grim. 😉

To highlight the biggest issue: take any state-owned corporation at random—they are essentially shells. Dow Chemical is probably the most glaring example. You'll hear the director openly admit that they exist solely to serve themselves. 😉

Look, you don't actually live in Miami like I do. I still hang out with opposition politicians who can't stand the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, plus my job and interests basically revolve around studying politics—specifically local stuff. What I can tell you, without any spin, is that everyone tied to Opar because they work in his council or public offices, and used to be connected to Baldasar—who was a worse mayor—and Kerum, is supposedly worlds apart from him.

Justin James10 said:I lived there for six years, keeping close ties with family and friends, so I’m constantly visiting San Francisco. I know firsthand that whole lineup of "controversial" entrepreneurs and politicians from the area. 😉

I just pointed to one specific example for your research, but honestly, they are everywhere and things are looking pretty grim. 😉

To highlight the biggest issue: take any state-owned corporation at random—they are essentially shells. Dow Chemical is probably the most glaring example. You'll hear the director openly admit that they exist solely to serve themselves. 😉

What list of research? Name them. You can't just make categorical claims without proof; that's just talking nonsense, not an argument. For all I know, I have enough research to prove you're a total bear instead of a human being.

Justin James10 said:I lived there for six years, keeping close ties with family and friends, so I’m constantly visiting San Francisco. I know firsthand that whole lineup of "controversial" entrepreneurs and politicians from the area. 😉

I just pointed to one specific example for your research, but honestly, they are everywhere and things are looking pretty grim. 😉

To highlight the biggest issue: take any state-owned corporation at random—they are essentially shells. Dow Chemical is probably the most glaring example. You'll hear the director openly admit that they exist solely to serve themselves. 😉

So, you don't even know a single other state-owned company besides ExxonMobil and Caltrans, since you can't name ten off the top of your head.🤣

Unaccountable questions:

Alright, let's see Justin James10 explain how the government is to blame for these scenarios:

- You get hired at a company where the boss says you'll have a 3-month probation, then a one-year contract if you perform well—but after 3 months, he praises you, then just gives you another 3-month extension instead of what was agreed upon?
- You do the work as a subcontractor, but it becomes impossible to actually get paid?
- Your boss won't let you take your vacation when you want to, even though you're legally entitled to it?
- Your boss doesn't pay you the salary you agreed on?
- A private entrepreneur you bought supplies from for your business delivers products that are lower quality than what was promised during the deal?

Charles Chase4 said:If we could somehow dial back the political interference and all the rot that comes with it—and let's be honest, in this country, about 95% of what we deal with in business and daily life is pure nonsense like cronyism, nepotism, and blatant corruption—then even the harshest version of capitalism starts to sound like a more plausible path forward. It feels far more realistic than the alternative, which seems to be sitting around hoping and praying that this society will suddenly grow a conscience, educate itself, and start electing competent, less corrupt leaders on its own. Perhaps in this century, or maybe the next. 🤷

edit: I'm not some hardcore neoliberal extremist or anything; I'm just stating my observations.

But look, Yellow and his crowd aren't saying pure capitalism is somehow "less evil" than the mess we have now; they're claiming it’s the actual solution. My question is: how? Honestly, I am completely fed up with this whole "choosing the lesser of two evils" argument. Everyone becomes a PhD expert when it's time to list everything wrong with the current system, but when it comes to actually proposing a fix, the best anyone can come up with is, "Well, let's just pick something slightly less bad," or "Let's just hand the keys over to private corporations." Sorry, but that doesn't strike me as a solution—especially since, as ZZ pointed out, the biggest private players in this country are usually tied at the hip to the same corrupt politicians.

ruggedjackal46 said:But look, Yellow and his crowd aren't saying pure capitalism is somehow "less evil" than the mess we have now; they're claiming it’s the actual solution. My question is: how? Honestly, I am completely fed up with this whole "choosing the lesser of two evils" argument. Everyone becomes a PhD expert when it's time to list everything wrong with the current system, but when it comes to actually proposing a fix, the best anyone can come up with is, "Well, let's just pick something slightly less bad," or "Let's just hand the keys over to private corporations." Sorry, but that doesn't strike me as a solution—especially since, as ZZ pointed out, the biggest private players in this country are usually tied at the hip to the same corrupt politicians.

So, basically, what you're saying is we're just waiting around for some flawless utopia to arrive, and until then, we'll just keep grinding through this absolute dumpster fire of a system because the one that's actually proven to work better isn't perfect either.

Is that the gist of it?