You wrote
So we need to subsidize the whole press as well. You do realize that what you describe is sheer communism
You do realize that what you describe is sheer communism
in response to
Of course, it doesn't solve the underlying problem that wealth can buy elections, because wealth can still buy the press and can still bankroll belief tanks and pay for lawyers.
Unless my English skills have taken a turn for the worse of late, this reads like a discussion of the problems of having a corporate press in a democratic country.
You can go upthread and read the exchange from the beginning. You were the one who started with the allusions to communist dictatorships - and with a highly spurious claim to boot.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
When I speak of my english, I mean that I am not a native speaker, and fluent as I may seem, I do make mistakes actually, easy to misinterpret in the charged context that you provoked. Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
There is a certain internal coherence to your claim. But it flies in the face of historical and contemporary facts.
