At this point, the argument for the "business without boundary's" case is, that anyone whom opposes the view that business priorities alone should dictate for the rest of us, are bludgers, whingers or socialists.

Your usual case Peter Hume of advocating un-tramelled market ideologies, may not be that pertinent this time, in that the proposition I'm making is, "that autocracy looms on the horizon, because Govt now represents business, not the public. This by definition is excelerating the pace of suppression of the freedom of the individual by economics.

This goes largely unnoticed by the young, because they lack the capacity to identify it. The "powerful third party" the media, also strengthens and adds pace to this process.

How would you go about fixing this problem Peter Hume ?.

I think I speak for most Australians when I say I am dissatisfied by my phone company, my electricity supplier, my decreasing opportunity and living standards, I am dissatisfied with being corralled by automated business systems divesting me from any opportunity of consumer justice, I am dissatisfied with the fact that my wages have not kept pace with the cost of living and I am dissatisfied Govt representatives of all colours for colluding in this process. And there is no real reason, why this should be happening (to coin Lexi), in "the lucky country" other than the greed of the few.

Blows your theory out of the water does it not PH, when all the crooks are on the same side. Govt and control freaks.

*because Govt now represents business, not the public.*

Thinker 2, do you really think that Kim Carr is in the USA, pleading
with Ford, no doubt offering them money, because he loves Ford?

Or could it be because he's worried about jobs for the public?

Unlike yourself it seems, politicians understand the importance of
business to the economy and to jobs, and if the economy is crook,
they will be out on their ear at the next election.

Never forget, business is voluntary and in today's world, if you
try and push them around too much, they will pick up their bat and
ball and go and play elsewhere, for its a large world out there.

Yabby,is just too simplistic.Thinker2 is right.So is Ron Paul.We need smaller Govt that is not controlled by big parasitic business.Govt can be made to be more accountable with a proper constitution.

Business and Govt have now colluded to marginalise the real productive economy under the guise of false environmentalism.It will not end well for you or anyone of integrity.

*Yabby,is just too simplistic*

Lol Arjay, no doubt it is, for you. Nothing would appeal to
a conspiracy nutcase, without imaging conspiracies!

Try the KISS theory for once, its in fact commonly quite accurate.

Next you'll be telling us that the Govt don't want to win another
term in office, that jobs and the economy won't matter in all this
and that if companies like Ford shut up shop in Australia, it
won't affect jobs or the economy.

I'm not so sure I'm talking about the size of Gov't Arjay, so much as the function of Gov't.
And perhaps I should mention at this point, bludgers ,whingers ,socialists "and conspiracy theorists" (lol).

The Govts we get now act on behalf of business not the constituent public. The question is no longer "which party ?" because both act exactly the same in practice. There is no doubt in my mind that the last conservative Howard Gov't, virtually destroyed our legal system, if you are talking about the Legal Practices Act , the Trade Practices Act, Consumer Affairs and Workplace Relations Acts etc and so on ad infinitum.

It is within this broken law framework that either party in Govt must operate.

The ACCC for example is a toothless instrument with little power to actually do anything, that replaced a body with real actual power. They have failed for the most part in their attempts at prosecuting wrongdoers, because they are basically legless and armless, with little or no investigative capacity and with little or no actual law to support any endeavours they may initiate, too seek justice for the actual constituents, us.

I wasn't for a minute suggesting Arjay that the climate conspiracy was part of this. Although I do agree, it does show evidence that almost everyone at the top end is up too their eye balls in fraud at some level, with climate science fraud ,medical fraud, scientific fraud, economic audit fraud (a new one from the Abbott team), (I hope this answers the question of whom would be worse Howard or Abbott Rehctub), and just plain fraud.

Living in a world where the price of a good or service is determined by the intention of the provider or employer alone, and the gullibility or not, of the purchaser/consumer/worker to accept that without some real set of of rules or ethical understandings is damaging the social structure for most people, this in term compromises freedom, I believe.

So Thinker 2, lets cut the waffle.

Should the Govt provide Ford, GM and Toyota with further 100s of
millions of Dollars to keep their Australian plants open,
or should they stop molly coddling these companies and let consumers
rule? Jobs lost would be in the order of 200'000, if they shut
down Australian production.

Who is the Govt protecting here, companies or workers?