Rob's House Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/the-u...MCD,WMT,XRT,DIA The sad part is that most people reading this drivel don't know they're being snowed.
Dan Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/the-u...MCD,WMT,XRT,DIA The sad part is that most people reading this drivel don't know they're being snowed. Care to plow the road?
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 "The giant sucking sound" ~ H. Ross Perot Wrong thread... Can somebody point me to the "statement thread." Anyway... That statement was the first thing that came to mind even before I opened the link... Low and behold I open the link and... I must have been snowed!
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 Care to plow the road? He'll get back with you... Gotta square it away with the sub-sub-contractor.
Fingon Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 Half those "facts" have nothing to do with the middle class. Its a commonly repeated fallacy that if the rich are doing well, everyone else isn't.
Rob's House Posted July 25, 2010 Author Posted July 25, 2010 The entire article is predicated on the assumption that free trade has led to the dissolution of the middle class, and is then supported by random facts, many of which have to point of comparison or relevant context, the rest of which point to trends over the past three years. A less informed person would get the impression that over the last 3 years we'd thrown Keynesian intervention out the window and gone with a strict laissez faire strategy for recovery.
Hossage Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 Rob, I did not get the impression from that article that we have gone with a laissez faire strategy from that article.
Rob's House Posted July 25, 2010 Author Posted July 25, 2010 Rob, I did not get the impression from that article that we have gone with a laissez faire strategy from that article. So why are we witnessing such fundamental changes? Well, the globalism and "free trade" that our politicians and business leaders insisted would be so good for us have had some rather nasty side effects... I based my assumption on that line. I know there is some grey area for interpretation, but I got the feeling he supports the kind of protectionism that brought us Smoot-Hawley.
Booster4324 Posted July 25, 2010 Posted July 25, 2010 I based my assumption on that line. I know there is some grey area for interpretation, but I got the feeling he supports the kind of protectionism that brought us Smoot-Hawley. So your argument is that the middle class is better off now? That the rich do not control more money now than they did in say the past decade? Is that correct?
GG Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 This is where I stopped reading "The big global corporations have greatly benefited by exploiting third world labor pools over the last several decades." Are Japan, S Korea & Taiwan considered 3rd world labor pool, 'cuz they certainly were in the early '70s.
drnykterstein Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 http://www.thenation.com/article/37889/no-oligarchy The 400 richest families in America, who saw their wealth increase by some $400 billion during the Bush years, have now accumulated $1.27 trillion in wealth.
Alaska Darin Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 http://www.thenation.com/article/37889/no-oligarchy Rich people got richer? There's news. Another article about how not taxing someone won't feed the federal beast to the tune of a TRILLION dollars? Even more news. Maybe the douche bags on the left should visit the idea of a flat tax. Nah, that would take away their power to curry favor. Instead they'll try to put in another poorly thought out plan to "tax the rich" that will inevitably screw middle class family businesses - because they're morons. Like you.
LeviF Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 This is where I stopped reading "The big global corporations have greatly benefited by exploiting third world labor pools over the last several decades." Are Japan, S Korea & Taiwan considered 3rd world labor pool, 'cuz they certainly were in the early '70s. Japan and S Korea no longer are, not sure about Taiwan.
/dev/null Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 Maybe the douche bags on the left should visit the idea of a flat tax. Nah, that would take away their power to curry favor. Instead they'll try to put in another poorly thought out plan to "tax the rich" that will inevitably screw middle class family businesses - because they're morons. Like you. That's not a fair statement. The douche bags on the left (as you put it) are not morons like conner. They just understand how to use morons like conner to advance their agenda
birdog1960 Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 http://www.thenation.com/article/37889/no-oligarchySanders nailed it. I don't see anyone disputing the actual data here or elsewhere. how does it not bother all these patriotic, freedom loving ideologues that money and consequently power is becoming more and more concentrated in a few hands? every further step in this directions further cheapens the already miniscule value of a single vote. i would wager that almost no one on this board has ever even met any of the ultras, yet they effectively run our world with little oversight and no input from us. how can anyone support oligarchy or corporatocricy? yet, i see it supported here, over and over. talk about cutting of your nose to spite your face.
drnykterstein Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 how can anyone support oligarchy or corporatocricy? trick people into thinking the liberals are the bad guys and are out to get them, and they'll support anything.
drnykterstein Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 That's not a fair statement. The douche bags on the left (as you put it) are not morons like conner. They just understand how to use morons like conner to advance their agenda Uhm yeah. I'll bite. Name (1) what their agenda is, and (2) a few of the tactics they purportedly use that I supposedly fall for. I suppose it's entirely impossible that the right wing of this country is just a bunch of rambling retards and I absolutely refuse to let a group of rambling retards run this country unchallenged. Disgust at the crazy right wing (Palin, Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Rove and their zombie followers) is far more of a motivator than any of the underwhelming things the left has done to try to fix this country.
GG Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 Sanders nailed it. I don't see anyone disputing the actual data here or elsewhere. how does it not bother all these patriotic, freedom loving ideologues that money and consequently power is becoming more and more concentrated in a few hands? every further step in this directions further cheapens the already miniscule value of a single vote. i would wager that almost no one on this board has ever even met any of the ultras, yet they effectively run our world with little oversight and no input from us. how can anyone support oligarchy or corporatocricy? yet, i see it supported here, over and over. talk about cutting of your nose to spite your face. What's there to dispute, that Bernie Sanders cherry picked his "data" from a larger set of numbers to pen an article as Congress debates a massive tax hike? Or is the debate about how suddenly we're inundated with these facts by concerned citizenry who now care about the budget deficit? I do appreciate how the sole socialist in Congres is waxing nostalgic about American history & democracy.
Alaska Darin Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 trick people into thinking the liberals are the bad guys and are out to get them, and they'll support anything. It's a good thing there's no such thing as an ultra rich liberal influencing policy. There's no limits to partisan stupidity.
birdog1960 Posted July 26, 2010 Posted July 26, 2010 It's a good thing there's no such thing as an ultra rich liberal influencing policy. There's no limits to partisan stupidity. i don't support greed on either "side". undue influence from unelected persons on any governmental policy is destructive. why don't we remove that straw man from the argument and discuss oligarchy on its merits or evils.
Recommended Posts