Princeton: The US Government is Now an Oligarchy.

[Mad Scientist]

Now it's an Oligarchy?

 

[kaz]

Cambridge Journals Online - Perspectives on Politics - Abstract - Testing Theories of American Politics Elites Interest Groups and Average Citizens

Many people understand it, but not many people actually label it.

But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

Been saying this for years but Princeton gets the credit?

Um...so you think you're actually the one who observed that? Let me say, no duh. That's how life works, money influences.

The interesting thing is you were right, but you don't believe it. You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government? So the rich can be more powerful? Bull, you don't believe that. It is an interesting dichotomy, you say what's correct, but you are a liar, you believe politicians control the government and you control the politicians or you would never be a liberal. You're delusional, they don't. What you say is true, not what you believe.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Cambridge Journals Online - Perspectives on Politics - Abstract - Testing Theories of American Politics Elites Interest Groups and Average Citizens

Many people understand it, but not many people actually label it.

But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

Been saying this for years but Princeton gets the credit?

Um...so you think you're actually the one who observed that? Let me say, no duh. That's how life works, money influences.

The interesting thing is you were right, but you don't believe it. If you did, the last thing you would be would be a liberal. You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government. It is an interesting dichotomy, you say what's correct, but you are a liar, you believe politicians control the government and you control the politicians. You're delusional, they don't.

I'm not a liberal. Am a moderate with liberal positions as well as conservative ones. Neither extreme is sound.

 

[kaz]

Cambridge Journals Online - Perspectives on Politics - Abstract - Testing Theories of American Politics Elites Interest Groups and Average Citizens

Many people understand it, but not many people actually label it.

But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

Been saying this for years but Princeton gets the credit?

Um...so you think you're actually the one who observed that? Let me say, no duh. That's how life works, money influences.

The interesting thing is you were right, but you don't believe it. If you did, the last thing you would be would be a liberal. You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government. It is an interesting dichotomy, you say what's correct, but you are a liar, you believe politicians control the government and you control the politicians. You're delusional, they don't.

I'm not a liberal. Am a moderate with liberal positions as well as conservative ones. Neither extreme is sound.

LOL, so are you a Republican like RW and JakeStarkey too? Again you lie, everything you post is liberal.

 

[georgephillip]

You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government? So the rich can be more powerful?

So the rich can be taxed into extinction by a government subject to democratic instead of corporate control. Every government ever created has existed to serve its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Democracy holds the potential of imposing a wall of separation between government and the affects of private wealth; anything less is simply rearranging the Titanic's deck chairs.

 

[kaz]

You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government? So the rich can be more powerful?

So the rich can be taxed into extinction by a government subject to democratic instead of corporate control. Every government ever created has existed to serve its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Democracy holds the potential of imposing a wall of separation between government and the affects of private wealth; anything less is simply rearranging the Titanic's deck chairs.

I know you love the Marx rhetoric, but you didn't think that one through. You went from one non sequitur to another.

 

[Iceweasel]

You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government? So the rich can be more powerful?

So the rich can be taxed into extinction by a government subject to democratic instead of corporate control. Every government ever created has existed to serve its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Democracy holds the potential of imposing a wall of separation between government and the affects of private wealth; anything less is simply rearranging the Titanic's deck chairs.

Sounds like you went to the University of Bong. No country has ever prospered by eliminating the rich. Such a system keeps everyone down and only losers would want it. Democracy is two lions and a lamb deciding on what to have for dinner so you should be happy this is not a democracy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Cambridge Journals Online - Perspectives on Politics - Abstract - Testing Theories of American Politics Elites Interest Groups and Average Citizens
Many people understand it, but not many people actually label it.
But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

"Now"?
Why do you think this wasn't the case 2009-2001?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You think government is controlled by the rich, and you want more government? So the rich can be more powerful?

So the rich can be taxed into extinction by a government subject to democratic instead of corporate control. Every government ever created has existed to serve its richest citizens at the expense of its majority. Democracy holds the potential of imposing a wall of separation between government and the affects of private wealth; anything less is simply rearranging the Titanic's deck chairs.

Sounds like you went to the University of Bong. No country has ever prospered by eliminating the rich. Such a system keeps everyone down and only losers would want it. Democracy is two lions and a lamb deciding on what to have for dinner so you should be happy this is not a democracy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

My alma mater noticed that a liberal government is doing something wrong?

Do you mean neo-liberal government?

Obama is a neo-liberal?
I have never heard that before.Is this a new term from the intelligentsia?

Its an attempt to discredit The Obama and create a distinction between Hime and "real" liberalism, much like the creation of the term "neoconservative".
In other words... it's their admission that He has failed.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You forgot labor unions (especially public employees), whose impact dwarfs all others.

It is really helpful to our plutocrats that people like you believe that unions are acting in the interests of huge money interests instead of working on behalf of working people. They do appreciate your help

Aw... isn't it cute how you think that unions are something other than an organ of the DNC.

 

[M14 Shooter]

But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

We need a policy of publicly funded elections to get the buying and selling of votes out of the system. Given the amount of time politicians spend raising campaign funds, if it were eliminated, they might have time to read a bill or two.

That pesky 1st amendment, eh?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You forgot labor unions (especially public employees), whose impact dwarfs all others.

It is really helpful to our plutocrats that people like you believe that unions are acting in the interests of huge money interests instead of working on behalf of working people. They do appreciate your help

Aw... isn't it cute how you think that unions are something other than an organ of the DNC.

Even though they aren't, why would they support you guys, you want them outlawed, like most other fascists.

 

[Flopper]

Cambridge Journals Online - Perspectives on Politics - Abstract - Testing Theories of American Politics Elites Interest Groups and Average Citizens

Many people understand it, but not many people actually label it.

But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

The only countries I can think of that aren't oligarchies are dictatorships.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Cambridge Journals Online - Perspectives on Politics - Abstract - Testing Theories of American Politics Elites Interest Groups and Average Citizens

Many people understand it, but not many people actually label it.

But everything is clear enough. Politicians trade votes for money, and their policy shows that. Policy is now written with only the rich in mind, not the people and the country's best interests.

The only countries I can think of that aren't oligarchies are dictatorships.

There are a few around, Sweden for instance.

 

[zeke]

Now it's an Oligarchy?

Nah, it is what it has been for some time now; a plutocracy. Govt. of the rich by the rich for the rich. Which is better than a oligarchy.

You forgot labor unions (especially public employees), whose impact dwarfs all others.

It is really helpful to our plutocrats that people like you believe that unions are acting in the interests of huge money interests instead of working on behalf of working people. They do appreciate your help

Aw... isn't it cute how you think that unions are something other than an organ of the DNC.

Even though they aren't, why would they support you guys, you want them outlawed, like most other fascists.

Amazing that right wingers are so upset about unions supporting Democrats. Especially after all the good things the right wingers say about unions.

Unless those union members are working in the defense and oil industries. Then unions are ok. Cause everybody knows them Dems don't like oil and defense, so it's ok to support those union members. Amazing.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Now it's an Oligarchy?

Nah, it is what it has been for some time now; a plutocracy. Govt. of the rich by the rich for the rich. Which is better than a oligarchy.

Since you agree that is it wrong, would you then characterize the claim in OP as ignorance or dishonesty?

 

[percysunshine]

My alma mater noticed that a liberal government is doing something wrong?

Do you mean neo-liberal government?

Obama is a neo-liberal?
I have never heard that before.Is this a new term from the intelligentsia?

.

what a low information,low iq ,uneducated slope skulled trailer dweller

DEFINITION OF 'NEOLIBERALISM'
An approach to economics and social studies in which control of economic factors is shifted from the public sector to the private sector. Drawing upon principles of neoclassical economics, neoliberalism suggests that governments reduce deficit spending, limit subsidies, reform tax law to broaden the tax base, remove fixed exchange rates, open up markets to trade by limiting protectionism, privatize state-run businesses, allow private property and back deregulation.

.

So 'Neo-liberalism' is the leftists' new code word for 'Conservatism'?

Why do y'all keep changing the words? You can't defend the stupid ideas you have been backing all this time?

.

 

[percysunshine]

My alma mater noticed that a liberal government is doing something wrong?

Do you mean neo-liberal government?

Obama is a neo-liberal?
I have never heard that before.Is this a new term from the intelligentsia?

Its an attempt to discredit The Obama and create a distinction between Hime and "real" liberalism, much like the creation of the term "neoconservative".
In other words... it's their admission that He has failed.

Actually, it is an admission that the ideas of the left have bankrupted everything they come in contact with.

.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

My alma mater noticed that a liberal government is doing something wrong?

Do you mean neo-liberal government?

Obama is a neo-liberal?
I have never heard that before.Is this a new term from the intelligentsia?

Its an attempt to discredit The Obama and create a distinction between Hime and "real" liberalism, much like the creation of the term "neoconservative".
In other words... it's their admission that He has failed.

Actually, it is an admission that the ideas of the left have bankrupted everything they come in contact with.

.

The ideas of the Left founded this nation. You are always free to move if you like, which is yet another idea of the left.