The Economic Truth in Two Minutes

[Avorysuds]

That video was made for stupid children.

 

[georgephillip]

Because...?

 

[FiscalSanity]

George,

I didn't take the time to watch the video, but reading through the rest of the thread made me realize that you do raise some valid points. You're correct that the wealthy don't pay nearly as much in taxes as they used to, and that the wealth hasn't trickled down exactly evenly. Sure, some has been passed on to the workers, but pay rates between workers, professionals/ managers, and executives/owners have tilted seriously in the owners favor over the last 20 years.

Problem is, raising taxes on the wealthy might help the budget problems, but it doesn't do a darn thing to address the pay imbalance issue that is the real problem here. Frankly, we're either going to have to allow the government to stick it's nose into regulating pay scales (which I think is a bad idea), or we're going to have to combine a rewrite of the existing tax code in which the only sort of tax shelters or avoidance schemes the rich have are directly tied to employee raises/bonuses. If the boss can get a tax write off by giving his secretary a raise he's a lot more likely to go for it. Combine that with elimination of all the other tax shelters (except charitable contributions) and start treating capital gains like any other income and we might be able to solve both problems at once without the need for the government to dictate pay scales.

 

[georgephillip]

Excellent suggestions, imo, but I'm not sure elected Republicans AND Democrats would agree with the scale of tax rewrite you're suggesting.

Since both parties depend on the richest 1% of voters for most of their campaign contributions, perhaps your proposed changes to the tax code could inspire the other 99% of voters to reject both corporate parties, starting in November of 2012?

 

[editec]

The Koch brothers don't threaten to throw me in prison if I don't pay for their "services".....Foo.

Not yet.

Give them time.

 

[georgephillip]

They poison the air he breathes and send him the bill.

Self destructive much?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Progressive economists are wrong in the trillions column yet the pat themselves on the back and pretend they're right.

The US economy suffers from too much Progressive regulation and social program.

Eliminate all the Depression Era Labor laws.

Give us the option of taking whatever is in our Social Security as an IRA and I will see you later!

Reform US Healthcare system so people actually start to pay for the stuff they use

 

[FiscalSanity]

George,

Seem's we agree on that as well-nothing meaingful is going to get done in Washington with either party in power. Both sides have too great a vested interest in not upsetting the trough they feed from to be trusted to fix anything, so it's time to get rid of both parties and try to elect people who aren't already bought and paid for by special interests. Only difficulty I have there is that i can't seem to find any other political parties that have a platform I can get behind. Some of them have some ideas I like, but there isn't a one of them that doesn't have at least one or two extreme positions that I just can't support.

 

[Zander]

Reich is a statist. He see any problem as an opportunity to increase government. He and others like him, regardless of party, are the problem.

 

[georgephillip]

"Statism (or etatism) is a scholarly term in political philosophy either emphasising the role of the state in analysing political change; or, in describing political movements which support the use of the state to achieve goals."

Reich is a Statist in which sense?

Do the richest 1% of Americans "support the use of the state to achieve goals?"

Should we pledge our allegiance to Goldman Sachs?

Statism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

George,

Seem's we agree on that as well-nothing meaingful is going to get done in Washington with either party in power. Both sides have too great a vested interest in not upsetting the trough they feed from to be trusted to fix anything, so it's time to get rid of both parties and try to elect people who aren't already bought and paid for by special interests. Only difficulty I have there is that i can't seem to find any other political parties that have a platform I can get behind. Some of them have some ideas I like, but there isn't a one of them that doesn't have at least one or two extreme positions that I just can't support.

Try not to lose sight of the perfect and the good.

FLUSHING hundreds of incumbents from DC in a single news cycle is a political leap of faith.
Should something like that ever happen, there would be no shortage of wing nuts in congress.

Allowing Republicans AND Democrats to continue their dog and pony show while this country comes apart at its seams appears to me to guarantee our destruction.

If you remember the week after 911 and how the attention spans of most Americans was focused on politics, that's the sort of "new normal" we need to begin to reverse our decline.

It won't happen without compromise.

 

[Zander]

"Statism (or etatism) is a scholarly term in political philosophy either emphasising the role of the state in analysing political change; or, in describing political movements which support the use of the state to achieve goals."

Reich is a Statist in which sense?

Do the richest 1% of Americans "support the use of the state to achieve goals?"

Should we pledge our allegiance to Goldman Sachs?

Statism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Statism is the doctrine that maintains that your life, money and property are not yours, but the property of the state. A statist is any individual who upholds this doctrine and/or supports its implementation.

Here is an excellent explanation of Statism.

A statist knows that he cannot get away with—at least, not yet—openly declaring that your life, money and property are not yours, so he advances these ideas by implicit means.

Statists enact laws that forbid you from taking certain actions altogether or only if you have their permission—and the idea is: if you may only act by permission, you do not have a right to your life. Statists, through their regulations, determine how much of your money you will be allowed to keep—and the idea is: if you do not have the right to decide how your money is spent, your money is not yours. Statists issue decrees restricting how you may use your property—and the idea is: if you do not have the right to control the use and disposal of your property, your property is not yours. These are the indirect means by which statists promote and implement their ideas.

An adult statist is grown up, physically, but in a state of self-arrested, stunted, mental development. His worldview is that of a child who can only do what his parents permit and who is dependent on his parents for everything. In the adult world, he seeks to forcibly impose this view on others. You are the child and the state, run by statists, is the parent. The statist may do anything he wants, while you may only do what the statist permits—bringing us a complete reversal of the way it should be. In fact, you should be free to do whatever you want (so long as you do not violate the right of another to do the same), while government officials should only be able to do what the law specifically permits—and no more.

The irony of it all is the fact that statists, left to their own devices, are impotent, powerless to harm you. The power that they wield comes from the willing support of their victims, from the very individuals they control, from any and all who earn a living and produce the financial and material means statists use to regulate others. All that it would take for statists to lose this power over you is for their victims, the productive, to stop supporting them. A statist’s greatest fear is your discovery of this fact.

In his impotence, a statist seeks to escape the terror of facing reality by ruling the competent, the capable—those who do face reality. In a free society, statists would only be able to rise to the level of their ability, which, for most, would not be very far. In a statist society, their ability to produce is irrelevant. They can rise to the extent to which they are able to forcibly harness others—taking statists to heights impossible to them in a free society.

A statist hates self-reliance, so he forces you to rely on others and others to rely on you. He will use anyone and anything to control you and force you into dependence: your children, your elderly parents, your neighbors who have fallen on hard times, your friends who are ill. Every human problem or disaster is an opportunity to be capitalized upon by a statist—another chance to enlarge his powers.

A statist is that schoolyard bully, or his spiritual equivalent, of your childhood. But now he is grown up, all dressed up in a suit. The only way he can allay his constant anxiety and dread is through the control and intimidation of others. He doesn’t want to conquer nature, but other men. He wants to cheat reality, not abide by it. He wants to get away with living, not live his life on his own.

A statist only has self-identity if the eyes of others are focused on him. He only feels alive if is he is part of some group, so he forces others into adoring, dependent herds who must curry his favor in order to survive.

A statist hates the independent mind, since he doesn’t have one of his own. He can’t really think, he can only manipulate words, ideas cut off from reality, emotions and other people—these are his only reality. To a statist, reality is not real—thus, the truth doesn’t matter. Lies, deception—and the truth, on occasion—are interchangeable tools, one as valid as another, to be used to pander to the worst in man: the desire for the unearned.

A statist is that mooching relative, now a bureaucrat, for whom there can never be enough handouts. He is a panhandler with a gun, who despises your charity as an insult, but claims your money as a right. He is a criminal who has gone from bad to worse: an armed robber doesn’t try to convince you that he is taking your money for your own good, but a statist politician does.

Such is the face and soul of a statist.

Before you vote for another statist politician, ask yourself this: would you—and take this literally—sign a legal document giving control over you life, money and property to another person—let’s say, to your Congressman? I doubt it. I doubt if even many of the witless supporters of statism would do this, yet this is precisely what you effectively do when you support statism. When you vote for statist politicians, you give them a proxy, a power of attorney of sorts, to carry out their ideas in practice, to vote away some part of your life, money and property.

The liberation of your life and the recognition of your right to it—to live it without seeking anyone’s permission—will only come once you revoke that proxy given to statists. Once this occurs, the rebirth of freedom will begin in earnest.

Fulton Huxtable
June 7, 1999

I'd prefer Goldman Sachs to the clowns in Congress. We know exactly what GS is looking for - a profit. The state is constantly seeking more power and greater control over our lives.

 

[FiscalSanity]

George,

There's no shortage of wingnuts in Congress now. What makes me so angry with both parties is that I know that at least some of their leadership is smart enough to understand that our current policies are going to lead to an economic disaster that makes 2008 look like childs play, but they won't put aside playing the political game long enough to address the issues. We can't afford for them to keep playing power games or pandering to their ideological bases, because we don't have all that much time left to act before things get to the point where the budget issues are going to be impossible to fix.

 

[Brutus]

Dot 2: Virtually all economic gain since 1980 has gone to the richest 1% of Americans.

that of course is a silly goofy absurd liberal lie. You've been brainwashed by Marx through Reich and haven't a clue.

You don't need to be an economist to see how rich the middle class got by looking at all the new inventions they could suddenly afford in the last 10 years: suddenly we had plasma TV's, LCD TV's, DLP-TV's, iPods, iphones, CD's and CD players, DVDs and DVD players, Blue Ray and Blue Ray players, PCs, desk top PCs, DVRs, color printers, satellite radio, Advantium ovens, HD-TV, Playstations, X-Boxes, X-box live, X-box Konnect, broadband, satellite TV, cell/camera/video phones, digital cameras, OnStar, palm corders, Blackberries, smart phones, home theaters, SUVs, big houses, more houses per capita, TiVo, 3D movies and TV's, built in wine coolers, granite counter tops, $200 sneakers, color matched front loader washing machines, matching washer dryer combinations, McMansions, 6 burner commercial ranges, Sub Zero refridgerators, more cars than drivers, a $1 billion ring tone industry, a pet industry that just doubled to $34 billion, 10's of millions lining up to buy Apple's I-tablet, Wii, Netflix boxes, jet skis, low profile tires, aluminum/titanium rims, Harley Davidson and Japanese motorcycles. $700 Billion Christmas 2010, $10.5 billion movies 2010, 10 million ocean crusies.

The list goes on and on. I hope that helps you realize you can't just parrot the communist press and expect to make sense? They have other objectives and are merely using you to promote their point of view.

 

[georgephillip]

George,

There's no shortage of wingnuts in Congress now. What makes me so angry with both parties is that I know that at least some of their leadership is smart enough to understand that our current policies are going to lead to an economic disaster that makes 2008 look like childs play, but they won't put aside playing the political game long enough to address the issues. We can't afford for them to keep playing power games or pandering to their ideological bases, because we don't have all that much time left to act before things get to the point where the budget issues are going to be impossible to fix.

We have too many millionaires in congress, imo.

Imagine the difference for 99% of voters if US Senators were apportioned by income instead of geography; the richest 1% of voters would share a single Senator.

I've never studied Karl Marx or his theories; however, I think he was completely correct about capitalism becoming a revolutionary force after it emasculates government. These "leaders" you mentioned seem to support Marx in that respect.

The rich will do what they've always done before in times of crisis.
Divide and conquer.
Blame the immigrants or queers or Taliban...

All we can try to do is advise others to follow the money.
Whose wealth and incomes have increased since the Great Recession began?
The Fall of 2008 is not that long ago. It hasn't slipped that far into the US memory hole.
If another economic crisis hits in November of 2012, hopefully more voters will blame Republicans AND Democrats and vote accordingly.

If this scenario comes to pass, look for the Next New (and Improved) Pearl Harbor to happen.

 

[georgephillip]

Dot 2: Virtually all economic gain since 1980 has gone to the richest 1% of Americans.

that of course is a silly goofy absurd liberal lie. You've been brainwashed by Marx through Reich and haven't a clue.

You don't need to be an economist to see how rich the middle class got by looking at all the new inventions they could suddenly afford in the last 10 years: suddenly we had plasma TV's, LCD TV's, DLP-TV's, iPods, iphones, CD's and CD players, DVDs and DVD players, Blue Ray and Blue Ray players, PCs, desk top PCs, DVRs, color printers, satellite radio, Advantium ovens, HD-TV, Playstations, X-Boxes, X-box live, X-box Konnect, broadband, satellite TV, cell/camera/video phones, digital cameras, OnStar, palm corders, Blackberries, smart phones, home theaters, SUVs, big houses, more houses per capita, TiVo, 3D movies and TV's, built in wine coolers, granite counter tops, $200 sneakers, color matched front loader washing machines, matching washer dryer combinations, McMansions, 6 burner commercial ranges, Sub Zero refridgerators, more cars than drivers, a $1 billion ring tone industry, a pet industry that just doubled to $34 billion, 10's of millions lining up to buy Apple's I-tablet, Wii, Netflix boxes, jet skis, low profile tires, aluminum/titanium rims, Harley Davidson and Japanese motorcycles. $700 Billion Christmas 2010, $10.5 billion movies 2010, 10 million ocean crusies.

The list goes on and on. I hope that helps you realize you can't just parrot the communist press and expect to make sense? They have other objectives and are merely using you to promote their point of view.

Are you paid to spew out propaganda for six burner granite-topped Blu-Ray wine coolers?

In less than a single generation the richest 2% of Americans nearly doubled their share of returns to wealth (rents, interest, dividends and capital gains.) This happened because Wall Street inflated and collapsed a pair of financial bubbles, and the government rode to the rescue with a $13 trillion bail out.

In 1979 the richest 1% of Americans earned about 9% of total annual income.
They "earn" over 20% today.
Maybe you should stop parroting Advertising Age and open your eyes to the class war.

 

[FiscalSanity]

George,

I haven't really studied Marx much either, but i think he touched on the fact that taken to it's logical conclusion unrestrained capitalism would eventually reach the point where almost all of the wealth was concentrated in the hands of a very small portion of the population, and that while there would be some social mobility the vast majority of the population would spend their entire lives dependent on that small group for virtually everything. At the point the lower classes only option is to overturn the system and shake it until all the wealth has been more or less evenly redistributed, at which point the whole cycle starts again.

 

[Brutus]

Dot 2: Virtually all economic gain since 1980 has gone to the richest 1% of Americans.

that of course is a silly goofy absurd liberal lie. You've been brainwashed by Marx through Reich and haven't a clue.

You don't need to be an economist to see how rich the middle class got by looking at all the new inventions they could suddenly afford in the last 10 years: suddenly we had plasma TV's, LCD TV's, DLP-TV's, iPods, iphones, CD's and CD players, DVDs and DVD players, Blue Ray and Blue Ray players, PCs, desk top PCs, DVRs, color printers, satellite radio, Advantium ovens, HD-TV, Playstations, X-Boxes, X-box live, X-box Konnect, broadband, satellite TV, cell/camera/video phones, digital cameras, OnStar, palm corders, Blackberries, smart phones, home theaters, SUVs, big houses, more houses per capita, TiVo, 3D movies and TV's, built in wine coolers, granite counter tops, $200 sneakers, color matched front loader washing machines, matching washer dryer combinations, McMansions, 6 burner commercial ranges, Sub Zero refridgerators, more cars than drivers, a $1 billion ring tone industry, a pet industry that just doubled to $34 billion, 10's of millions lining up to buy Apple's I-tablet, Wii, Netflix boxes, jet skis, low profile tires, aluminum/titanium rims, Harley Davidson and Japanese motorcycles. $700 Billion Christmas 2010, $10.5 billion movies 2010, 10 million ocean crusies.

The list goes on and on. I hope that helps you realize you can't just parrot the communist press and expect to make sense? They have other objectives and are merely using you to promote their point of view.

Are you paid to spew out propaganda for six burner granite-topped Blu-Ray wine coolers?

no but Steve Jobs is paid very well to sell 100 million Americans iphones and Ipad toys at $150/ month. What does that tell you about how poor the middle class has gotten?? Maybe the 100 million are the rich, not the middle class???

In less than a single generation the richest 2% of Americans nearly doubled their share of returns to wealth (rents, interest, dividends and capital gains.) This happened because Wall Street inflated and collapsed a pair of financial bubbles, and the government rode to the rescue with a $13 trillion bail out.

In 1979 the richest 1% of Americans earned about 9% of total annual income.
They "earn" over 20% today.
Maybe you should stop parroting Advertising Age and open your eyes to the class war.

ah yes the old Marxist class warfare sthick while 100 million have smart phones and Ipad toys at $150/month and spend a $1 billion a year on ring tones and $40 billion on pets.

Do you have any idea how you were brainwashed into talking like a complete liberal buffoon??

 

[Brutus]

unrestrained capitalism would eventually reach the point where almost all of the wealth was concentrated

of course Marx proved to be idiotic. Capitalism is about nothing if not broad distribution. Henry Ford got only 1.49 per car for giving millions of people billions of dollars in automobiles. Think about it over and over again and you'll understand why todays poor are far better off then the rich of 100 years ago.

 

[georgephillip]

George,

I haven't really studied Marx much either, but i think he touched on the fact that taken to it's logical conclusion unrestrained capitalism would eventually reach the point where almost all of the wealth was concentrated in the hands of a very small portion of the population, and that while there would be some social mobility the vast majority of the population would spend their entire lives dependent on that small group for virtually everything. At the point the lower classes only option is to overturn the system and shake it until all the wealth has been more or less evenly redistributed, at which point the whole cycle starts again.

That's pretty much how I understand his critique.

I don't have any confidence in his solution to capitalism; however, I think we ignore his criticisms of capitalism at our peril. There appear to be psychopaths in this society who have enjoyed immense wealth for generations, and have no intention of compromising their sense of entitlement.

Interesting times?