Meet the Kronies: A Team of Politically Inspired Big Government Action Figures

One of the biggest lies in politics is the idea that big government is force to constrain big corporate power. It’s the big lie at the heart of well-intentioned liberal calls for more government intervention into the economy. It takes a certain amount of ignorance, willful or not, to maintain this big lie in the face of actual reality. Crony deals have always been the norm for government intervention from Obamacare, to “green” energy subsidies, to no-bid military boondoggles, union-machine politicking and Wall Street back room bailouts.

Now, there’s an insane new web series that shines a hilarious spotlight on the left’s big lie while putting up a mirror to crony hypocrisy on the right as well. Meet The Kronies! A team of politically inspired action figures: Kaptain Korn, Parts & Labor, Ariel Stryker, Bankor the Prophet and their leader Big G.

We don’t know who’s behind this thing, but there also appears to be a crony “company”, Chimera Global Holdings, which alleges to be the manufacturers of the toys. Check it out and share it with everyone you know who whines about the need for big government to keep corporations at bay.

Yes, well I take the term Conservative with a grain of salt when folks don’t mind if China gets our technology, specifically military grade technology.

I take it with a grain of salt when they don’t mind that we are funding the rise of China to be a global problem player in international circles.

Oh yes, they don’t like government involvement, but when you mention that corporations get tax incentives today to move jobs off shore, you’d expect them to say, yeah that’s bad. No, instead you get folks telling you there are no such incentives.

Good grief? LMAO, yep, well it takes different things for people to be impressed doesn’t it.

Yes I did list off a number of problems. And since the reaction to any suggestion there is need to change always focuses on “Protectionists”, I think it’s fair to ask questions that will cause folks to confront their own ignorance.

You see, it’s not the fault of protectionists is it. What has been taking place has been taking place over the objections to protectionists. And when China starts a war with it’s neighbors, the protectionists who tried to warn it was going to happen, will once again be the focus if they remind folks of what they warned about.

Look at our employment climate in the U. S. today. Think there’s any problems? Why no, and protectionists would be the ones that caused it if the subject comes up.

Okay smart ass...

Would lowering the corporate tax rate be government intervention to control the economy and individuals more?

Well, evidently so. Mase, buy a clue when you get a chance.

I absolutely take ownership of my desire for less government interference in trade and our economy in general.

Well that sounds good, but when it comes to these threads, the first things out of the mouths of folks like you is "Protectionists".

Yes, I call people who call for higher tariffs, protectionists.

Where is your indignation that missile gyro technology was transferred to China? Where is your indignation at the fact that missle vibration damper technology was transferred to China?

Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Today we and our allies, and folks not traditionally affiliated with us, face a growing military threat from China simply because the Free Traders prevailed?

I'm a Free Trader and I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Did I mention tariffs? No.

Free trade, in the form of lower tariffs is somehow to blame for those things? Please show how.

Who cares if China can target our cities with advanced accuracy? Who cares if their missle failures were reduced by 90% with our technology transfers? Who cares if we have 23% of our workforce idle? Who cares if 40% of our workers are making less than the minimum wage of 1968? Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade! Trade!

What level of tariffs would save us?

It's what is taking place

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where?

and you continue to advocate for Free Trade despite that fact.

I agree, higher taxes and regulations cost jobs. I don't agree that lowered tariffs and fewer trade barriers cost jobs.

Am I now to believe you don't advocate for what you have been advocating for?

I believe you lied.

If our government has the highest corporate tax rates, and the taxation is less if corporations manufacture off-shore, wouldn't you agree the corporations get a tax break if they manufacture off-shore?

I agree, government interference, in the form of highest in the world corporate tax rates, pushes corporations out.

I'd prefer less taxes, to keep corporations and jobs here.

Why? After all, you don't think there's a tax advantage to moving jobs off shore. If there was, you'd have to admit there is a tax incentive to move jobs off shore. You can't admit that, because it would end the disruption.

In fact you'd rather argue with yourself about it, than admit you've had your lunch handed to you. Here, from your last post.

You vehemently disagree there are tax advantages for corporations to move off shore. Here...If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Tax breaks caused our situation? What the hell are you talking about?

Down below in the same post you suddenly agree tax policy does incentivise corporations to corporate manufacturing off shore. Here...

I'm in favor of less government interference (that means I'm in favor of lower taxes) and you're admitting that government interference (highest in the world tax rates) gives companies an incentive to move offshore...

How could I be agreeing with you, if I admitted high tax rates incentivised corporations to move manufacturing off shore, if you didn't beleive the same thing at this point?
OL, don't you see what a conumdrum you've created for yourself here? I mention tax breaks, and you ask me what the hell I'm talking about.

The only conundrum is how you think our government is giving tax cuts and that somehow drives corps offshore.

I did not say the government gave tax cuts. I merely agreed with the thought you expressed in the last green sentence above. The government incentivises corporations to move their manufacturing off-shore.

And if you look at both exchanges above, your thoughts do reveal a clear-cut conundrum. You both disagreed with me that government tax policy influences corporations, and agreed with me that tax policy influenced corporations.

Do you agree corporations get tax breaks to move off-shore or not?

Our government does not give tax breaks to move offshore.

Okay, then you're back to disagreeing with yourself again. You two are really going at it. LMAO

If our corporations pay one tax rate, a high one to manufacture on U. S. soil, and pay a much smaller tax rate to manufacture off-shore, then I guess you'd have to be a pretty dim bulb not to realize that government tax policy does include a clear tax break for corporations who want to manufacture off-shore. When you yourself and you settle your argument, get back to me. You know, I hate to see the two of you disagree like this. Hopefully you can settle this and become friends again.

Corporation's tax exposure is less if the corporation does manufacture off shore

Where you're blaming less government interference, in the form of lower tariffs and fewer restrictions, I'm blaming our idiotic tax rates (and structure, taxing world-wide income) and idiotic regulation.

Can we agree on that?

Since I didn't mention raising tariffs as a resoluiton to anything, I find your effort to label me as someone who did, to be downright dishonest. Can we agree on that?

It sure is stange why it takes a number of posts for you to agree that government does compel corporations to manufacture off-shore via tax incentives,

Driving corporations away is not a tax incentive.

God you are dense. The government sets up tax rates. The government charges two difference tax rates. It taxes corporations who manufacture on U. S. soil one rate. It taxes corporations that manufacture on foreign soil another rate.

If you don't see a tax advantage to manufacturing off shore, you're not really worthy of discussing this issue with. And above you clearly expressed an agreement with this fundamental concept. What the hell is going on with you?

Why? After all, you don't think there's a tax advantage to moving jobs off shore.

Of course there is an advantage to moving from the highest rate in the world to somewhere lower.

That's why I've always said WE SHOULD CUT OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE. If we make it low enough, we'll even get foreign corporations to expand here.

See, that would be less government interference. That's what I favor.

If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Is English your second language?

Government policies drive jobs out. I want to eliminate those policies. That wouldn't be more government intervention, that would be less.

The government incentivises corporations to move their manufacturing off-shore.

Idiotic US taxes and regs are a disincentive to jobs here.

You know the difference between incentive and disincentive?

Really? Please show me the different rates.

Since I didn't mention raising tariffs as a resoluiton to anything,

You blame lower tariffs for our problems, what is your solution if not higher tariffs?

What the hell is going on with you?

Trying to untangle your muddled thinking is exhausting.

I absolutely take ownership of my desire for less government interference in trade and our economy in general.

Well that sounds good, but when it comes to these threads, the first things out of the mouths of folks like you is "Protectionists".

Yes, I call people who call for higher tariffs, protectionists.

Well Bable-mouth, please link me to where I advocated for higher tariffs.

Where is your indignation that missile gyro technology was transferred to China? Where is your indignation at the fact that missle vibration damper technology was transferred to China?

Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Except folks in your camp NEVER address that stuff until you are cornered and forced to deal with it.

Could that have taken place without open trade with Communist China? No. And yet you advocate for open trade across the board. China has been on the table here for quite a while by now, and you've taken a pass on disagreeing with it all along.

Today we and our allies, and folks not traditionally affiliated with us, face a growing military threat from China simply because the Free Traders prevailed?

I'm a Free Trader and I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Well, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but China demands copies of the patents and the complete plans for manufacturing before it will allow our corportations to manufacture on its soil.

Can you see any benefit of this for China? China now has the fastest computer on planet earth. How do you think China got that technology? It got it because people just like you advocated for open trade with it. None of this mattered to the Free Trade advocates, becuase we declared this to be the eventual outcome if we did go full tilt Free Trade with China. The Free Traders said it didn't matter. Here we are.

Did I mention tariffs? No.

Free trade, in the form of lower tariffs is somehow to blame for those things? Please show how.

Did I mention tariffs? No. If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know. You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

What level of tariffs would save us?

Did I mention tariffs? No. If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know. You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

It's what is taking place

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where?

We have 25% or close to it un-employment. We have another 25% or so making half what they used to. I linked you to a study that showed over 40% of our workers are making less than the minimum wage in 1968. None the less, I am demeaned as being some sort of sociallist because I think Free Trade has been a massive betrayal of the American public. And now you act offended because I have called you on the fact you still favor Free Trade, and the devistating impact is has had on our workers and nation.

Where? Wow, this is all over your head isn't it.

and you continue to advocate for Free Trade despite that fact.

I agree, higher taxes and regulations cost jobs. I don't agree that lowered tariffs and fewer trade barriers cost jobs.

Well that tariff discussion you're having with yourself is certainly interesting to watch. I haven't made any advocacy related to tariffs, other than to point out that China has manipulated between 30 and 40% tariffs on our goods going in. This evidently didn't interest you, because you basically ignored the fact to move on to the real important issues... snicker.

Am I now to believe you don't advocate for what you have been advocating for?

I believe you lied..

We've seen that you believe a lot of things. None of them all that accurate. You can't even agree with yourself part of the time.

Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Except folks in your camp NEVER address that stuff until you are cornered and forced to deal with it.

So what?

Could that have taken place without open trade with Communist China?

Yes.

Well, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but China demands copies of the patents and the complete plans for manufacturing before it will allow our corportations to manufacture on its soil.

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Did I mention tariffs?

You're whining about free trade, that means low or no tariffs.

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where? If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know. You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

Well that tariff discussion you're having with yourself is certainly interesting to watch.

Not as interesting as your poor grasp of English and your confusion between incentive and disincentive.

And now you act offended because I have called you on the fact you still favor Free Trade

I'm not offended by your calling me out because I favor less government interference with trade.

I am offended by your lies about me.

You know, when you think about it, the government policies that put 23% of our workforce out of work, and caused as many to earn far less than they used to, amounts to 100% taxes, and in some cases up to 50% taxes.

What?

Why do you do this? It just makes you look petty or ignorant.

It's what is known as a concept. Conceptually, the 23% of our workforce out of work are making the same wages they would be if they were working and being charged at a 100% tax rate. They have no income.

The same conceptual method can be used to state that those who are working and making 50% of what they used to, are now being taxed at a 50% tax rate. They only have 50% of the income they used to have.

This is not to imply the government is actually taxing them, or receving revenue, but when it comes to the disadvantages these potential workers experience due to free trade and other influnences on the economy, the outcome is the same as stated above.

There are great things associated with Free Trade. I also think there can be devistating things associated with it as well.

The same can be said of govenrment policy, illegal immigration, and other issues that impact our economy.The financial crisis that was foisted off on the American public was devistating. These things all contribute to what is going on in the nation, and it isn't good.

Okay it’s not taxes, but it works out to no income and severely lessened income. Why is that of no concern to you?

I'm concerned that big government is ruining our economy.

So am I. It goes far beyond the Free Trade issue too. Obama has done just about everything he can to destroy jobs. He killed the pipeline to Canada. He has devistated the coal industry. On and on it goes, with this guy playing the lead role in Dumb and Dumber, the White House years.

I bring up the issue of lopsided trade and illegal immigration raving our workforce, and you actually have the gall to take me on rather than admit we have a massive problem on our hands.

I admit 20 million illegals is a huge problem. Deport them now. Build a wall. And then cut corporate taxes and idiotic regulations, especially Obamacare, and watch jobs grow.

I believe that would help. It certainly wouldn't hurt.

As for the Free Trade part of it, I want to support Free Trade as much as I can. The problem is, we have massive problems right now. Incentivise companies to employ people in the United States. Our national debt is expanding because our tax base has taken such a hit. And yet, the government can't see any reason to help entice jobs back here. If a nation is going to effectively charge us 30-40% tariffs on our goods going into their nation, then cut them off. Tell them to change it, or else.

I would rather pay a bit more for the goods I buy, if it's going to put the Johnson family down the street back on the payroll. They will be making income. They will be spending in the community. The government won't have to hand out food stamps and welfare. The Johnsons will have pride in what they earned and bought with their own money. The kids won't have to feel like they're a bunch of societal rejects. The government will see it's tax base expand, and the national debt growth will slow.

I take the term Conservative with a grain of salt when folks don’t mind if China gets our technology, specifically military grade technology.

Remind me again who said they don't mind if China gets our military technology? Or are you just tilting at windmills again? Sounds like you have a problem with government.

they don’t like government involvement, but when you mention that corporations get tax incentives today to move jobs off shore...

Sounds like another problem that government has created. Again, your problem is with government, not freedom.

And since the reaction to any suggestion there is need to change always focuses on “Protectionists”, I think it’s fair to ask questions that will cause folks to confront their own ignorance.

You're good with itemizing problems. You're not so good with solutions.....other than we must place more restrictions on the private sector and reign in liberty. That doesn't sound very conservative, but maybe I just don't know you well enough. I'm sure you mean well.

I don't blame protectionists for those problems directly. I blame those who would empower government even more to rectify their perceived problems. And that's exactly what protectionists propose. Their only solutions, at least that I've seen, involve bigger government and greater restrictions on freedom. You may or may not be a protectionist, but offering bigger government as your solution ain't much of a solution.

Look at our employment climate in the U. S. today. Think there’s any problems?

Lots of problems. You've pointed out another result of big government. I'm seeing a common thread here.....you?

Would lowering the corporate tax rate be government intervention to control the economy and individuals more?

I'm all for lowering the corporate tax rate so that more businesses will choose to locate here. Dramatically reduce regulation along with that and you might be on to something. Looks like you finally suggested a solution.....and, gasp, it involves shrinking government. I like it.

Why? After all, you don't think there's a tax advantage to moving jobs off shore.

Of course there is an advantage to moving from the highest rate in the world to somewhere lower. Oh now you agree again. Well, I'm sure you'll be back to disagreeing in a few moments.

That's why I've always said WE SHOULD CUT OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE. If we make it low enough, we'll even get foreign corporations to expand here. Perhaps you can find a place where I disagreed with this, since you keep saying basically the same thing over and over.

See, that would be less government interference. That's what I favor.

Very impressive. What would be more impressive is if you acknowledge that I agree. It would save you having to repeat it over and over.

If tax breaks and government policies helped to create the situation we have now though, you don’t mind government intervention at all do you.

Is English your second language?

I guess my come-back should be if you even have a language, but what the heck.

Your on-again off-again agreement that government taxes incentivise companies to move manufacturing off-shore, plays into the above comment. You'd rather yell protectionist than make statements that take the government or our Free Trade policies to task on merrit. It's only after I trash you for not focusing on the real problem that you come up with the idea you'd like to see the government do this or that. You charged me with wanting the government to take action, so I reminded you that the government incentivises companies to move their manufacturing off shore. Then you addressed the high corporate rates. Wow, you sure coudn't find that nugget before I led you in that direction could you. You don't like big corporate tax rates. Wow, you're so impressive. Do you know anyone on the forum that does?

Government policies drive jobs out. I want to eliminate those policies. That wouldn't be more government intervention, that would be less.

Zzzzzz, zzz, zzzzzzzzzzzzz, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, zzzzzzz....

The government incentivises corporations to move their manufacturing off-shore.

Idiotic US taxes and regs are a disincentive to jobs here.

You know the difference between incentive and disincentive?

LOL. I know you're trying. Why respond to this nineth grade level drivel.

Really? Please show me the different rates.

You agree that the government incentevises the movement of manufacturing off shore. Then you disagree with it. And now you want me to prove what one of your two personalities has already signed on to.

Since I didn't mention raising tariffs as a resoluiton to anything,

You blame lower tariffs for our problems, what is your solution if not higher tariffs?

Please link me to where I blamed lower tariffs for anything.

What the hell is going on with you?

Trying to untangle your muddled thinking is exhausting.

Well, if agreeing with my own stated conclusions exhausts you, imagine what it's like to deal with you when you can't even agree with yourself within the same post.

I'm concerned that big government is ruining our economy.

Wow! It's like you suddenly sobered up.

I admit 20 million illegals is a huge problem. Deport them now. Build a wall. And then cut corporate taxes and idiotic regulations, especially Obamacare, and watch jobs grow.

I believe that would help. It certainly wouldn't hurt.

As for the Free Trade part of it, I want to support Free Trade as much as I can. The problem is, we have massive problems right now. Incentivise companies to employ people in the United States.

There you go again, suddenly making sense.

And yet, the government can't see any reason to help entice jobs back here. If a nation is going to effectively charge us 30-40% tariffs on our goods going into their nation, then cut them off. Tell them to change it, or else.

I have no problem calling them a "currency manipulator". Although the idea that paying more for imports and selling your exports at a discount is the route to prosperity is difficult for me to wrap my head around.

I would rather pay a bit more for the goods I buy, if it's going to put the Johnson family down the street back on the payroll. They will be making income. They will be spending in the community.

That is an excellent idea. How do we do it?

Clinton and others who did that should be jailed.

Except folks in your camp NEVER address that stuff until you are cornered and forced to deal with it.

So what? Well, you obviously wouldn't know...

Could that have taken place without open trade with Communist China?

Yes.

Well, I hate to be the one to break this to you, but China demands copies of the patents and the complete plans for manufacturing before it will allow our corportations to manufacture on its soil.

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm against the transfer of sensitive technology to China.

Except our trade with China can't take place without it, and you support our open trade with China. Now why don't you sit there for a moment and try to figure out how you trapped yourself yet again.

Did I mention tariffs?

You're whining about free trade, that means low or no tariffs.

The answer is no. I did not bring up the subject of tariffs or advocate for raising or lowering them. There are other ways to impact trade.

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where? If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know. You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

I mention the 23% of our workers out of work and you tell me there's no need to review our trade policies. So either you're lying about your blindness when it comes to the need for a review of our trade policies, or you're lying about actually caring about our displaced workers. Which is it?

Well that tariff discussion you're having with yourself is certainly interesting to watch.

Not as interesting as your poor grasp of English and your confusion between incentive and disincentive.

What is particularly amusing here, is that whichever word is used, the use of it reveals your agreement that the government moves corporate policy via tax manipulation. Thanks for admitting the concept is sound and in play.

And now you act offended because I have called you on the fact you still favor Free Trade

I'm not offended by your calling me out because I favor less government interference with trade.

I am offended by your lies about me.

You probably are. Nevermind if I have lied about you or not. And the sad thing is you should really be offended by your own slander of your intellect here through your actions.

Except our trade with China can't take place without it

Baloney.

The answer is no. I did not bring up the subject of tariffs or advocate for raising or lowering them. There are other ways to impact trade.

By all means, elaborate.

You claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing. Where? If I need to express that again and again for you, just let me know. You seem to be having a bit of a comprehension problem.

I mention the 23% of our workers out of work and you tell me there's no need to review our trade policies.

So you lied when you claimed I view job displacement in the US as a great thing.

What is particularly amusing here, is that whichever word is used, the use of it reveals your agreement that the government moves corporate policy via tax manipulation.

Where did I disagree that high taxes impact corporate policy?

I am offended by your lies about me.

You probably are.

I am.

Nevermind if I have lied about you or not.

You made a claim about me. If you have proof, show it.

If you can't, admit you lied.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.