Plutocracy Now

[Chris]

Income inequality has grown dramatically since the mid-'70s—far more in the US than in most advanced countries—and the gap is only partly related to college grads outperforming high-school grads. Rather, the bulk of our growing inequality has been a product of skyrocketing incomes among the richest 1 percent and—even more dramatically—among the top 0.1 percent. It has, in other words, been CEOs and Wall Street traders at the very tippy-top who are hoovering up vast sums of money from everyone, even those who by ordinary standards are pretty well off.

Second, American politicians don't care much about voters with moderate incomes. Princeton political scientist Larry Bartels studied the voting behavior of US senators in the early '90s and discovered that they respond far more to the desires of high-income groups than to anyone else. By itself, that's not a surprise. He also found that Republicans don't respond at all to the desires of voters with modest incomes. Maybe that's not a surprise, either. But this should be: Bartels found that Democratic senators don't respond to the desires of these voters, either. At all.

It doesn't take a multivariate correlation to conclude that these two things are tightly related: If politicians care almost exclusively about the concerns of the rich, it makes sense that over the past decades they've enacted policies that have ended up benefiting the rich. And if you're not rich yourself, this is a problem. First and foremost, it's an economic problem because it's siphoned vast sums of money from the pockets of most Americans into those of the ultrawealthy. At the same time, relentless concentration of wealth and power among the rich is deeply corrosive in a democracy, and this makes it a profoundly political problem as well.

Plutocracy Now: What Wisconsin Is Really About | Mother Jones

 

[Truthmatters]

They want our governmnet drown in the bathtub

 

[Chris]

 

[Oddball]

 

[snjmom]

Maybe it's a one note samba, maybe it's the seeds of revolution.

 

[B. Kidd]

Chris learned a new word: plutocracy. Can't wait to see how he twists its' meaning.

 

[Truthmatters]

Maybe it's a one note samba, maybe it's the seeds of revolution.

Its the seeds of power to the people that has awoken yet again.


The real motives of the right are now very apperant to the average American.

They are not going to like it or sit still for it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

As I posted on another thread, that which the power elite of our nation fears the most, open rebellion which kills their golden goose, is seeded and nurtured in the policies of the fringe conservatives, the element which has taken over the GOP. It is also likely that too many elected Democrats put personal advantage first and those they are in office to represent a third or fourth consideration.

The 14 Senators who have left Wisconsin maybe the great exception; maybe the first to say, "No" and may change that deadly course fixed by Citizens United v. FEC, which if left unchecked will kill any pretense that we are a true Republic. Today we are not a Republic, we have become a hybrid where the wealthy control the oligarchy who makes our laws, and the Justices who refine our laws. No finer example exists than the recent exposure of the true motives of the Wisconsin Governor, expressed in comments to someone he believed was billionaire David Koch.

 

[B. Kidd]

Maybe it's a one note samba, maybe it's the seeds of revolution.

Its the seeds of power to the people that has awoken yet again.


The real motives of the right are now very apperant to the average American.

They are not going to like it or sit still for it.

The 'right' has no corner on plutocracy. Plutocracy conquers and controls ALL political persuasions.
Obama is living proof of this!

 

[Truthmatters]

The US like Egypt will never see the military fire on its own people.


The people who are trying to distroy this countrys government and the power of the people will be sorely dissapointed in the results of their push.

 

[B. Kidd]

As I posted on another thread, that which the power elite of our nation fears the most, open rebellion which kills their golden goose, is seeded and nurtured in the policies of the fringe conservatives, the element which has taken over the GOP. It is also likely that too many elected Democrats put personal advantage first and those they are in office to represent a third or fourth consideration.

The 14 Senators who have left Wisconsin maybe the great exception; maybe the first to say, "No" and may change that deadly course fixed by Citizens United v. FEC, which if left unchecked will kill any pretense that we are a true Republic. Today we are not a Republic, we have become a hybrid where the wealthy control the oligarchy who makes our laws, and the Justices who refine our laws. No finer example exists than the recent exposure of the true motives of the Wisconsin Governor, expressed in comments to someone he believed was billionaire David Koch.

Wry, you're still a partisan tool.
In your partisan world, Repubs deliberately serve the Plutocracy via policy; while Dems 'put personal advantage first' as rationale for their part in fostering plutocracy. The reality is Dems as a whole deliberately serve the Plutocracy via policy equally as well as the Repubs do.
Tool.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Maybe it's a one note samba, maybe it's the seeds of revolution.

Its the seeds of power to the people that has awoken yet again.


The real motives of the right are now very apperant to the average American.

They are not going to like it or sit still for it.

The 'right' has no corner on plutocracy. Plutocracy conquers and controls ALL political persuasions.
Obama is living proof of this!

Wrong. You can't seem to see around your biases. The far right wing is conservative by definition and the further out on the fringe becomes reactionary. Only the blind or willfully ignorant deny the GOP has progressively become more ideological since the election of Reagan in 1981; today's GOP rejects compromise and engages in zero sum politics.

Elected Republicans do the bidding for the very, very wealthy at the expense of the middle and lower economic classes in America. It's most dominant feature is greed (avarice) one of the seven deadly sins and so obvious in their recent demand that the wealthy continue to receive tax relief.

Of course elected Democrats also do the bidding of the very, very wealthy and this trend will become the dominant factor in the furture elections. For the Supreme Court is no longer the arbitrator of justice, it has become the agent of change in America; Citizens United killed any pretense that America is still a Republic.

 

[Chris]

The great unmentioned reality in this is that Reagan and the two Bushes lowered taxes for the rich and created a huge National Debt.

This act effectively transferred $11 trillion dollars from middle class taxpayers to the wealthy.

It is the greatest redistribution of wealth in human history.

 

[B. Kidd]

Sure....we all know that Democrats hate the rich!.......wait....hold on......Democrats love the rich!!!

Surprise! Wealthy donors are funding Democrats - Aug. 2, 2007

 

[snjmom]

The US like Egypt will never see the military fire on its own people.

Too late. See Kent State and the Katrina response. Our military would be more than happy to fire on the "liberal atheists". They have been indoctrinated.

 

[B. Kidd]

The great unmentioned reality in this is that Reagan and the two Bushes lowered taxes for the rich and created a huge National Debt.

This act effectively transferred $11 trillion dollars from middle class taxpayers to the wealthy.

It is the greatest redistribution of wealth in human history.

Hmmm......Obama's economic policy team a Bush clone.

 

[westwall]

Income inequality has grown dramatically since the mid-'70s—far more in the US than in most advanced countries—and the gap is only partly related to college grads outperforming high-school grads. Rather, the bulk of our growing inequality has been a product of skyrocketing incomes among the richest 1 percent and—even more dramatically—among the top 0.1 percent. It has, in other words, been CEOs and Wall Street traders at the very tippy-top who are hoovering up vast sums of money from everyone, even those who by ordinary standards are pretty well off.

Second, American politicians don't care much about voters with moderate incomes. Princeton political scientist Larry Bartels studied the voting behavior of US senators in the early '90s and discovered that they respond far more to the desires of high-income groups than to anyone else. By itself, that's not a surprise. He also found that Republicans don't respond at all to the desires of voters with modest incomes. Maybe that's not a surprise, either. But this should be: Bartels found that Democratic senators don't respond to the desires of these voters, either. At all.

It doesn't take a multivariate correlation to conclude that these two things are tightly related: If politicians care almost exclusively about the concerns of the rich, it makes sense that over the past decades they've enacted policies that have ended up benefiting the rich. And if you're not rich yourself, this is a problem. First and foremost, it's an economic problem because it's siphoned vast sums of money from the pockets of most Americans into those of the ultrawealthy. At the same time, relentless concentration of wealth and power among the rich is deeply corrosive in a democracy, and this makes it a profoundly political problem as well.

Plutocracy Now: What Wisconsin Is Really About | Mother Jones

My aren't we being the hypocrite today, don't you claim to earn a 6 figure income Chrissypoo? That would...uhhh make you a plutocrat you twit.

 

[B. Kidd]

The US like Egypt will never see the military fire on its own people.

Too late. See Kent State and the Katrina response. Our military would be more than happy to fire on the "liberal atheists". They have been indoctrinated.

Federal troops fired on Katrina victims?
Check out Waco and Ruby Ridge if you wanna play that game!

Now I know why so many conservatives here see Dems/Libs as dishonest.......maybe its' because they really are!!!

 

[driveby]

Income inequality has grown dramatically since the mid-'70s—far more in the US than in most advanced countries—and the gap is only partly related to college grads outperforming high-school grads. Rather, the bulk of our growing inequality has been a product of skyrocketing incomes among the richest 1 percent and—even more dramatically—among the top 0.1 percent. It has, in other words, been CEOs and Wall Street traders at the very tippy-top who are hoovering up vast sums of money from everyone, even those who by ordinary standards are pretty well off.

Second, American politicians don't care much about voters with moderate incomes. Princeton political scientist Larry Bartels studied the voting behavior of US senators in the early '90s and discovered that they respond far more to the desires of high-income groups than to anyone else. By itself, that's not a surprise. He also found that Republicans don't respond at all to the desires of voters with modest incomes. Maybe that's not a surprise, either. But this should be: Bartels found that Democratic senators don't respond to the desires of these voters, either. At all.

It doesn't take a multivariate correlation to conclude that these two things are tightly related: If politicians care almost exclusively about the concerns of the rich, it makes sense that over the past decades they've enacted policies that have ended up benefiting the rich. And if you're not rich yourself, this is a problem. First and foremost, it's an economic problem because it's siphoned vast sums of money from the pockets of most Americans into those of the ultrawealthy. At the same time, relentless concentration of wealth and power among the rich is deeply corrosive in a democracy, and this makes it a profoundly political problem as well.

Plutocracy Now: What Wisconsin Is Really About | Mother Jones

How much of that six figure income are you giving back to the people you stole it from with your predatory home sale tactics?.......

 

[Wry Catcher]

Sure....we all know that Democrats hate the rich!.......wait....hold on......Democrats love the rich!!!

Surprise! Wealthy donors are funding Democrats - Aug. 2, 2007

Don't you ever tire of being wrong? Plutocracy is about the rich, not about Democrats or Republicans. The very wealthy protect and vote their own interests no matter what label you wish to attach to them.
The unique difference and a difficult practice to understand is someone who is not rich, yet supports policies which benefit the rich at their own expense. While difficult to understand It's a practice not hard to explain, RW working men and women who support the GOP vote by emotion, not reason.