The Unnanounced Class War

[eyeball]

No conspiracy. Just unintended consequences of greed. They destroyed the very economy that made them rich.

They resisted accountability at every turn. Sycophants to their authority everywhere did little but heap scorn on anyone with the temerity to suggest otherwise.

I agree there's been no conspiracy, it's all been quite out in the open...shamelessly out in the open...in your face and up your nose out in the open in fact.

[Canuckistani]

They resisted accountability at every turn. Sycophants to their authority everywhere did little but heap scorn on anyone with the temerity to suggest otherwise.

I agree there's been no conspiracy, it's all been quite out in the open...shamelessly out in the open...in your face and up your nose out in the open in fact.

I would have chosen a different orifice to make that point.

[eyeball]

Yes, the corporate world can influence government, but to ignore crooked politicians and those with hidden agendas has one missing part of the picture. If corporate America could drive policy, then there would have been no 4 year recession, plain and simple. How many corporations have gone bankrupt in that time? How many billions lost?

Then there are the policies that actively hurt corporate America. The red tape, the triple regulations, the environmental protection that costs corporations so much. That doesn't mesh with your theory too well. If corporations could influence policy as you say, then the keystone pipeline, a no-brainer for the oil industry, would have been built by now. Oil would have drilling in Alaska, and far more everywhere else. They've got the deepest pockets, have they not?

I realize that I won't convince you of anything, and that is fine, you will believe what PBS is saying these days, but I also will remain skeptical. But I again ask you, what is your solution? You mentioned social democratic governments as a shining example. Do you think that is the solution to the problem as you see it? How do you take money out of the equation? The only way I can think of is communism.

I know the temerity galls you but another way is total transparency - a penetration of secrecy where power and wealth rub up against one another.

[WIP]

You can't have a good community without paying taxes, but many of them don't seen to get that. Me, me, me is not a way to run a society.

I guess everyone can thank Ronnie Reagan for that! He figured out how to turn selfishness and disregard for community into a virtue. And ever since, his Republican heirs have been running on a platform that 'government can't do anything right.....and vote us in so we can prove it!'

Since 1950, the average size of the American home has gone from 930 square feet to 2300 square feet. No wonder they can't afford to pay any taxes!

Sounds similar to numbers I came across awhile back that here in Canada, home sizes increased either 40 or 60% since the 1950's. And when it's also factored in that there are half as many children in those homes today, it becomes obvious that most people think they need a lot more space than they actually do. Once again, it's everyone basing their needs on what people just ahead of them are buying.

[Canuckistani]

I guess everyone can thank Ronnie Reagan for that! He figured out how to turn selfishness and disregard for community into a virtue. And ever since, his Republican heirs have been running on a platform that 'government can't do anything right.....and vote us in so we can prove it!'

Sounds similar to numbers I came across awhile back that here in Canada, home sizes increased either 40 or 60% since the 1950's. And when it's also factored in that there are half as many children in those homes today, it becomes obvious that most people think they need a lot more space than they actually do. Once again, it's everyone basing their needs on what people just ahead of them are buying.

Not just homes, but what's in them. But this sort of argument can quickly turn into bashing the poor and middle class for wanting too much. Reducing expectations has to start at the top.

[bush_cheney2004]

..... Reducing expectations has to start at the top.

Why ? Did the rich make poor people want free health care, home ownership, multiple automobiles, etc., etc. ?

[WIP]

I don't know why you say but, as if you are disputing me - we're on the same page here. Clinton is also responsible for pushing the banks to make loans to shaky creditors in order to encourage homeownership by minorities. A nice idea in theory, a disaster in practice. The main drivers of this mess tho were the banks themselves - with their derivatives and such, marketing garbage as AAA securities.

The liberalization of banking was sold to the public in much the same way that free trade has been sold -- helping lower income groups move up the ladder. I recall hearing crap about how deregulation and liberalization of the rules would provide the opportunity for homeownership to lower income groups who were stuck with renting tenements. If Clinton was as smart as his supporters claimed he was, why didn't he check into the history of why Glass-Steagall was signed, and why it was considered essential to separate investment banking and commercial banking in the first place! Or, maybe part of the Clintons's sudden increase in net worth after leaving the White House was indirect payments for this and other services rendered while in Office.

[WIP]

Not just homes, but what's in them. But this sort of argument can quickly turn into bashing the poor and middle class for wanting too much. Reducing expectations has to start at the top.

Yes, because as I posted previously....I think in a different thread, it was the spike in CEO salaries and returns on investments by major holders, that started the expectations game to get out of control. Most people judge their needs on the basis of what those a little higher up the income ladder are buying.

[carepov]

If it's so much better a place to live, then why do more Canadians emigrate to the U.S. ?

This is no longer true:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/recession-unemployment-drive-americans-north-1.875578

[Canuckistani]

Yes, because as I posted previously....I think in a different thread, it was the spike in CEO salaries and returns on investments by major holders, that started the expectations game to get out of control. Most people judge their needs on the basis of what those a little higher up the income ladder are buying.

Yes. Plus we've been exhorted to have those needs, because supposedly that's what keeps the economy rolling. But when you start buying those needs from China, it's the Chines that can fulfill them, because they have the jobs. And when those wants are seen as needs by 7 billion people, no way we can meet that demand.

[bush_cheney2004]

This is no longer true:

http://www.ctvnews.c...-north-1.875578

Why was it ever true....for so many years ? Why did people leave their Canadian paradise for the "evil USA" ?

Edited December 31, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

This is no longer true:

http://www.ctvnews.c...-north-1.875578

That doesn't say what you think it does. Out of a population of 34,000,000 compared to a population of 312,000,000, a higher percentage of Canadians are moving to the U.S. than Americans moving to Canada.

[Canuckistani]

That doesn't say what you think it does. Out of a population of 34,000,000 compared to a population of 312,000,000, a higher percentage of Canadians are moving to the U.S. than Americans moving to Canada.

Wait. Now population size matters? What happened to "you do it tooooo..."

[bush_cheney2004]

That doesn't say what you think it does. Out of a population of 34,000,000 compared to a population of 312,000,000, a higher percentage of Canadians are moving to the U.S. than Americans moving to Canada.

Thank you AW...they always miss that little bit of math. More Canadians move to the U.S. for a host of reasons, not just "better weather".

[Guest American Woman]

Wait. Now population size matters? What happened to "you do it tooooo..."

That makes no sense at all. None. Not even a little bit.

[Smallc]

And a higher total is moving north. And the population is 35M.

[Canuckistani]

That makes no sense at all. None. Not even a little bit.

Not to you, who can deny proportionality on the one hand, then bring it in on another when it suits here

[WIP]

A large proportion, yes, but you can never say all, or it gives ammunition to the other side. That's especially so with a broad statement about how none of them contributed anything (think Steve Jobs and Bill Gates).

Actually, neither Jobs, nor Gates were the real sources of innovative technology at Apple and Microsoft; and that's why they had to pay off co-founders such as Steve Wozniak and Paul Allen respectively, when they wanted them out of the way so they could hog all the glory and future returns. No doubt both were well compensated for actually being the real brains behind both ventures! But, the real talents of Jobs and Gates, are as ruthless businessmen, who are focused on maximizing profits, not creating new inventions for any sort of public good. If anyone wants to bring in the biggest bullshit story of the last 10 years - The Gates Foundation, I'll be happy to put that one under the microscope, because a lot of Bill and Melinda's works, which are labelled as great charitable works in the media, have sinister back stories that are trying to conceal other objectives, such as privatizing education for profit all around the world. And Jobs....well he was a little more honest, since that prick never even pretended to be a philanthropist in the first place! Maybe it was bad karma or divine retribution, that the horrid stories of Apple suppliers like Foxcomm, started leaking out as Jobs was being buried and lauded for leading the way to the future.

The theory is you cut business taxes, business is more profitable, and it expands, creates more jobs. After all, that money either has to go into expansion, which is great for the economy, or payouts to the end owners, the shareholders, where it can then be taxed anyway.

In theory.

But then the capital gains tax was lowered to 15%, and then the dividend tax credit was lowered, eventually to 15% also.

Oh, and all sorts of measures were inserted in the tax code to allow even those rates to be played with, deferred indefinitely or eliminated.

So in the end, the government wound up with WAY less money, and those who owned most of the stock, that would be the wealthy, wound up with WAY more money.

That was the whole dog and pony show about Trickle Down Economics that supply siders tried to argue when they claimed lowering taxes would provide more revenue, stimulate investment, and provide more jobs for all. The real story has been that they are hiding most of the money in Swiss and Cayman Island's bank accounts, and there is something trickling down on the rest of us, and it isn't money and it isn't rain!

[Guest American Woman]

Not to you, who can deny proportionality on the one hand, then bring it in on another when it suits here

You're actually arguing my point here. You say "Canada does it less" - if you want to talk "proportionately," Canada likely doesn't "do it less," so I'll be sure to apply that line of thought in the future.

But here's a tip: when talking sheer numbers, no other factors involved, then yeah - percentage works.

Edited December 31, 2012 by American Woman

[carepov]

That doesn't say what you think it does.

Oh please AW, please tell me what I am thinking.

[kimmy]

"This is the greatest country in the world!"

"You ever been to any other countries?"

"Well, no."

"You know anything about other countries?"

"Well, no."

"Then how do you know yours is best?"

"You some kinda Communist!?"

-k

[Argus]

I know good from bad, right from wrong, success from failure - without comparisons to others.

This might be a difficult concept for you to understand, but no, you can't know failure from success until you have something to compare. No, you can't know good from bad until you have something to compare. I'm sure a gravel road looked fantastic -- compared to dirt. But it sure seems crappy compared to asphalt. You need something to compare in order to properly asses how good a thing is. Boy,t hat doctor was a great one for keeping me alive after he had to cut off both my legs! Oh, wait, those other doctors had the same injury and managed to save the legs... maybe mine wasn't so good after all, eh?

You have to compare to know the value. It has to be measured against something.

Is America the greatest place in the world? Well, a lot of Americans would say yes, but none of those international bodies which like to assess such things seems to think so, and unlike most Americans they've actually looked at other places.

[Canuckistani]

There is no such thing as the greatest country in the world. Define some limited paramaters and you can maybe say that for a specific person, but that's about it. I'm sure of what's his face, North Korea is the greatest country in the world.

[Argus]

It's probably that second nail Argus was talking about.

I'll tell you what I, as a conservative like. I like a government with a lot of money to spare. Money is security. I never would have eliminated the GST. I would have raked it in, paid off all our debt, and then built up the biggest mother of a bank account until we could actually live off the interest and cut taxes. Now that'd be great!

I sure as hell wouldn't run up a gazillion dollar deficit the way the Republicans have, and then propose a 20% tax cut. How in the hell can that be considered conservative?

[bush_cheney2004]

....Is America the greatest place in the world? Well, a lot of Americans would say yes, but none of those international bodies which like to assess such things seems to think so, and unlike most Americans they've actually looked at other places.

True, but when it comes to people actually voting with their feet, it is the U.S. chosen more frequently than any other nation.