40 Years of Class Warfare in One Chart.

[Friends]

The growing income gap could have led to a backlash that would have benefited the Democratic Party. It did not because white blue collar workers - the same people who have been on the losing side of the income divide - left the Democratic Party and became a Republican constituency.

This in turn happened because these white blue collar workers felt that the Democratic Party was forcing them to make sacrifices for blacks. And indeed, forced school busing reduced the quality of public school education for their children. Affirmative action reduced job opportunities for them, and educational opportunities for their children in colleges.

Moreover, it was white blue collar workers, rather than upper middle class liberal intellectuals, who were most likely to be victims of black crime.

 

[Andylusion]

It doesn't need justified. It's his company. Not yours. You don't even have the right to comment on the wages of another person. It's none of your business.

It becomes everyone's business in a democracy based on one person: one vote. When parasitic CEOs have the ability to pre-screen candidates from both major parties for public office, based on legal bribes called campaign contributions, only slaves and conservatives would stay silent.

Two completely different, and unrelated issues.

I'm all for not having business involved in politics. They shouldn't have undo influence, great we agree.

But how much money a rich CEO makes... nonya. Just nonya. You don't have the right to even comment on it. None of your business.

And by the way.... YOU are the rich. Compared to 90% of the world, you are the freakin millionaire.

If the rest of the world, gets to comment on how much you make, as much as you b!tch about how much CEOs make, then you shouldn't earn a fraction of what you do. So shut up.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

But how much money a rich CEO makes... nonya. Just nonya. You don't have the right to even comment on it. None of your business.

.

ah but a liberal not only wants to comment on CEO pay but also to violently intervene at the point of a gun on that issue and 1000 others until we have a soviet style economy and 60 million slowly starving to death under a soviet regulatory state.

 

[georgephillip]

Two completely different, and unrelated issues.

Really?
Money and politics are completely unrelated in your world?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Two completely different, and unrelated issues.

Really?
Money and politics are completely unrelated in your world?

dear he said the should be!!! it is hard given that liberals are fascist/socialists who like to combine business and politics. Obamacare is perfect example.

 

[georgephillip]

I'm all for not having business involved in politics. They shouldn't have undo influence, great we agree.

But how much money a rich CEO makes... nonya. Just nonya. You don't have the right to even comment on it. None of your business.

"Politics is the shadow cast on society by big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance." The rich CEO you are so obsequious to is the principal agent of the business party in the US with its two factions, Republicans and Democrats. The substance of money power resides in big business acting through private control of banking, land, and industry, and funneling a small percentage of private profits into the pockets of corrupt politicians. If that's nonya business, you're blinded by the shadows.
As long as politics is the shadow cast on society by big business the attenuation of the shadow will not change the...

 

[georgephillip]

That is, commons from which peasants grew food are eventually enclosed by those with physical power to control peasants. Peasants are soon allowed to grew food on land now controlled by others, but instead of receiving part of the food that they grew, they are paid in scrip. The land owners (at some point, control of the land is legitimized by government) sell the food in markets for a profit. Peasants can use their scrip to buy food there.

"The Lessons of Agrarian Capitalism

"What, then, does all this tell us about the nature of capitalism?

"First, it reminds us that capitalism is not a 'natural' and inevitable consequence of human nature, or even of age-old social practices like 'truck, barter, and exchange.'

"It is a late and localized product of very specific historical conditions.

"The expansionary drive of capitalism, to the point of virtual universality today, is not the consequence of its conformity to human nature or to some transhistorical natural laws but the product of its own historically specific internal laws of motion.

"And those laws of motion required vast social transformations and upheavals to set them in train.

"It required a transformation in the human metabolism with nature, in the provision of life’s basic necessities."
The Agrarian Origins of Capitalism

 

[georgephillip]

dear he said the should be!!! it is hard given that liberals are fascist/socialists who like to combine business and politics. Obamacare is perfect example.

 

[georgephillip]

The growing income gap could have led to a backlash that would have benefited the Democratic Party. It did not because white blue collar workers - the same people who have been on the losing side of the income divide - left the Democratic Party and became a Republican constituency.

At the same time Democrats began turning to the same corporate donors Republicans had always served, and twenty years later Bill Clinton sealed the deal with NAFTA.

 

[Andylusion]

I'm all for not having business involved in politics. They shouldn't have undo influence, great we agree.

But how much money a rich CEO makes... nonya. Just nonya. You don't have the right to even comment on it. None of your business.

"Politics is the shadow cast on society by big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance." The rich CEO you are so obsequious to is the principal agent of the business party in the US with its two factions, Republicans and Democrats. The substance of money power resides in big business acting through private control of banking, land, and industry, and funneling a small percentage of private profits into the pockets of corrupt politicians. If that's nonya business, you're blinded by the shadows.
As long as politics is the shadow cast on society by big business the attenuation of the shadow will not change the...

That's more tin foil hat conspiracy theory crap. If business had control over politicians, then none of the hundreds of executives and business people would have been put in prison. None of the endless regulations would have been passed. None of the fines and fees charged to business would have happened. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the OECD. That wouldn't have happened.

There are endless examples of government screwing over business. Endless. None of which would have happened if business really controlled politics.

Nah, you are full of crap now. You people just make up that "they control everything!" to justify your socialist inspired paranoia.

It's like Hugo Chavez who passed endless regulations and controls over business in Venezuela, and the result was loss of jobs, loss of wealth, shortages throughout the country, bread lines hours long, and empty shelves, and more than one million people fleeing the country.... and all that the Venezuelan government could respond was "it's the evil rich, evil corporations, stealing our wealth, influencing our government....."

All the same crap you are spewing right here, right now.

Your policies and regulations don't work. And when they fail, and the economy is sluggish, and unemployment is 10%, all you can do is try and deflect the blame of your bad policies onto corporations and business.

No, lefitst policies suck, and you are reaping the results of the regulations you put in place. No one to blame, but the left.

 

[SwimExpert]

What do you do for work, eh? How long have you been doing it? And who forced you to accept that job? What stops you from going out to seek another job?

When I began working full time in the mid-1960s it was possible to easily change jobs, especially if you found the new job while still employed at the old. UE was 4%-5% and many of the males in my generation were conscripted into the military. Much has changed since that time, automation in particular has replaced manual labor with machines for millions of US workers. The economic changes during the fifty years of my adult life will likely be dwarfed by those of the next half-century. Sooner or later Americans will have to ask what is the purpose of their economy among the following three choices:
"1. The first of these is that it is a disguised Government, of which the primary, though admittedly not the only, object is to impose upon the world a system of thought and action.

"2. The second alternative has a certain similarity to the first, but is simpler. It assumes that the primary objective of the industrial system is the provision of employment.

"3. And the third, which is essentially simpler still, in fact, so simple that it appears entirely unintelligible to the majority, is that the object of the industrial system is merely to provide goods and services."
Social credit - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That was a whole lot of talk to say nothing.

 

[RKMBrown]

The fact that everyone is working for exactly the amount of money they agreed to work for.

The CEO, however, had her pay established by a board consisting of other (overpaid) CEOs, which leads some of us to the conclusion that the growth in CEO pay between 1978 and the present was not unrelated to the 3.6% decline in the compensation of private sector workers over the same period.
CEO pay and the top 1 How executive compensation and financial-sector pay have fueled income inequality Economic Policy Institute

That response had absolutely nothing to do with what I said. At best, it's a tangent. The fact still remains: Everyone is working for exactly the amount of money they agreed to work for.

Minor point. I work for the money that I agreed to work for yes. But I don't receive the money that I agreed to work for.. I'm actually forced to work for various governments through involuntary taxes for a good percentage of the year. Thus, I'm in effect a slave of the government for a large percentage of the year.

Oh, grow up. Taxation is a fact of life, just like bills, junk mail, and the occasional Jehovah's Witness knocking at your door. If you haven't learned to deal with that yet then maybe you should spend a little more time in mommy's basement.

You say that like a person that does not pay the amount of taxes that I have to pay.

 

[RKMBrown]

YOU FOLKS IN THE BOTTOM 50% ARE NOT PULLING YOUR WEIGHT, then you have the nerve to complain about the very people who are pulling your weight for you. WOW

It is telling how your knee-jerk reaction to blame the poor blinds you to those who aren't "pulling their weight."

Where did I blame the poor? WTF kind of drugs are you on?

 

[georgephillip]

That's more tin foil hat conspiracy theory crap. If business had control over politicians, then none of the hundreds of executives and business people would have been put in prison. None of the endless regulations would have been passed. None of the fines and fees charged to business would have happened. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the OECD. That wouldn't have happened.

We also have the lowest minimum wage in the Western world, the greatest amount of consumer debt, highest rate of child poverty, the highest adult poverty rate in the West, huge underemployment AND crumbling infrastructure while hugely profitable corporation not only pay $0 in taxes but, in some cases, receive $billions in tax refunds.

Remember what FDR said about "American fascism?"

"It's the control of government by big business."
Franklin D. Roosevelt Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies.

 

[georgephillip]

Where did I blame the poor? WTF kind of drugs are

You question whether the bottom fifty percent of US earners are pulling their weight, right? What does the following chart tell you about the earnings of the bottom fifty percent?

Do you see how the bottom 40% of earners disappear in the Actual Distribution of Wealth? How much in taxes should these people pay in order "to pull their weight."

 

[georgephillip]

That was a whole lot of talk to say nothing.

Too many big words?
"Douglas disagreed with classical economists who recognised only three factors of production: land, labour and capital. While Douglas did not deny the role of these factors in production, he saw the 'cultural inheritance of society' as the primary factor. He defined cultural inheritance as the knowledge, techniques and processes that have been handed down to us incrementally from the origins of civilization (i.e. progress)."
Social credit - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[RKMBrown]

Where did I blame the poor? WTF kind of drugs are

You question whether the bottom fifty percent of US earners are pulling their weight, right? What does the following chart tell you about the earnings of the bottom fifty percent?

Do you see how the bottom 40% of earners disappear in the Actual Distribution of Wealth? How much in taxes should these people pay in order "to pull their weight."

Paying Zero federal tax is pulling NOTHING paying nothing, but expecting full benefit. Taxing income at all is a poor way to get people to pull their weight, but if your gonna do it, make it the same percentage of income for everyone. Better to tax on the voluntary spending side... such as real estate taxes and sales taxes on luxury items.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

highest rate of child poverty,.

"This would explain why the United States, on child poverty, is ranked between Bulgaria and Romania, though Americans are on average six times richer than Bulgarians and Romanians".

and imagine how much richer Americans would be if liberals had not declared war on our families and schools, and shipped 30 million jobs to China and others?

 

[Andylusion]

That's more tin foil hat conspiracy theory crap. If business had control over politicians, then none of the hundreds of executives and business people would have been put in prison. None of the endless regulations would have been passed. None of the fines and fees charged to business would have happened. We have one of the highest corporate taxes in the OECD. That wouldn't have happened.

We also have the lowest minimum wage in the Western world, the greatest amount of consumer debt, highest rate of child poverty, the highest adult poverty rate in the West, huge underemployment AND crumbling infrastructure while hugely profitable corporation not only pay $0 in taxes but, in some cases, receive $billions in tax refunds.

Remember what FDR said about "American fascism?"

"It's the control of government by big business."
Franklin D. Roosevelt Message to Congress on Curbing Monopolies.

Yeah, and the rest of the world has much higher unemployment than we do. Higher minimum wage = higher unemployment.

That's your big example? That's your proof companies control everything? Because we have more people with jobs..... therefore corporations are controlling the country? So what's the excuse for the rest of Europe where people have higher minimum wages, and massive unemployment? No one is screwing them.... their just unemployed and impoverished?


France just tried your plan, and it failed. People started leaving the country because the economy was so bad. OOO but they had a higher minimum wage. I'm sure that was a big boon as they left.

 

[georgephillip]

and imagine how much richer Americans would be if liberals had not declared war on our families and schools, and shipped 30 million jobs to China and others

That was NAFTA that shipped US jobs to China.
Ready to cheer for the TPP?