PDA

View Full Version : Economics The top 1%: This is not what democracy looks like


healthpellets
03-15-2011, 03:33 PM
I didn't realize that "Democracy" was an economic system.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5091/5500300007_cf782ca405_b.jpg

Maybe some get pissed off when they see a graphic like that.

I get motivated to go get my slice.

HonestChieffan
03-15-2011, 03:56 PM
When was democracy a function of money at all?

ClevelandBronco
03-15-2011, 03:56 PM
When was democracy a function of money at all?

Exactly.

BucEyedPea
03-15-2011, 03:58 PM
"Democracy is the road to socialism" ~ Karl Marx

KC Dan
03-15-2011, 04:06 PM
Good thing that we are a Republic

mikey23545
03-15-2011, 04:08 PM
What percentage of taxes do those top 20% pay?

<b>"The bottom 47% pay no income tax at all - This is not what democracy looks like!"</b>

BucEyedPea
03-15-2011, 04:08 PM
Good thing that we are a Republic

Yup!


Per Madison democracies become profligate with the majority voting to steal property. That, imo, has to do with economics.

BucEyedPea
03-15-2011, 04:09 PM
What percentage of taxes do those top 20% pay?

<b>"The bottom 47% pay no income tax at all - This is not what democracy looks like!"</b>

That's exactly what it looks like.

Saul Good
03-15-2011, 04:15 PM
That's exactly what it looks like.

It will when it gets to 51%, anyway.

Chief Henry
03-15-2011, 04:25 PM
It will when it gets to 51%, anyway.

QFT

BucEyedPea
03-15-2011, 04:58 PM
It will when it gets to 51%, anyway.

Not too far to go!

chiefzilla1501
03-15-2011, 05:54 PM
If people don't like their jobs or think they're paid unfairly, then get a new job or work your ass off to get promoted.

I don't make a ton of money, but given my job, I make what I deserve. Maybe I'm a little underpaid or overpaid, but it's just a matter of a few thousand in either direction. I'm not going to begrudge somebody else for what they make as long as my salary is reasonably fair.

This is what fires me up. It says a lot that people side with owners in the NFL, but side with lower-income employees outside the NFL. If you ask me, NFL players are grossly underpaid. The fact that the public sides with the owners tells you that there's a lot of jealousy against people who make money.

Deberg_1990
03-15-2011, 06:32 PM
I wonder how many jobs the top 1% create?

Guru
03-15-2011, 06:34 PM
How about posting the pie chart showing who pays the most taxes too.

petegz28
03-15-2011, 06:43 PM
Seems like basic math to me. The rich own more of the wealth than those who are not rich. Isn't that what makes a person rich?

chiefsnorth
03-15-2011, 07:04 PM
When was democracy a function of money at all?

End of thread

Direckshun
03-15-2011, 07:31 PM
When was democracy a function of money at all?

Exactly.

Of course it is.

Money is speech. That's your side talking, through the SCOTUS.

Money is therefore, constitutionally protected expression, which is directly related to the functioning of democracy.

Sannyasi
03-15-2011, 07:46 PM
You shouldn't have to be some kind of socialist for the growing wealth disparity to worry you. The base of a capitalist society in the past has always been the middle class, but to say that the middle class isn't doing too well these days is an understatement. You can argue about what this means and about what we should do (if anything) but the sneering is missing the point completely.

petegz28
03-15-2011, 08:08 PM
Of course it is.

Money is speech. That's your side talking, through the SCOTUS.

Money is therefore, constitutionally protected expression, which is directly related to the functioning of democracy.

So what is it when some left-leaning rag like the NY Times does puff pieces and hit pieces?

RJ
03-15-2011, 08:11 PM
You shouldn't have to be some kind of socialist for the growing wealth disparity to worry you. The base of a capitalist society in the past has always been the middle class, but to say that the middle class isn't doing too well these days is an understatement. You can argue about what this means and about what we should do (if anything) but the sneering is missing the point completely.


I agree with the new guy.

And no, I'm not a commie socialist.

Direckshun
03-15-2011, 08:27 PM
So what is it when some left-leaning rag like the NY Times does puff pieces and hit pieces?

I have either completely missed your point, or you're talking silly nonsense.

Amnorix
03-15-2011, 08:35 PM
I get motivated to go get my slice.


"most men would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor."

John Dickinson, "1776" (the musical)

ClevelandBronco
03-15-2011, 08:37 PM
You quote musicals in a way other than disdainfully?

Direckshun
03-15-2011, 08:38 PM
Is there another way?

Musicals exist disdainfully.

ClevelandBronco
03-15-2011, 08:41 PM
Direckshun get to keep his man card. For the time being.

RJ
03-15-2011, 09:05 PM
"most men would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor."

John Dickinson, "1776" (the musical)


Rule #1 on a football message board: Never quote a Broadway musical to back a point. Except maybe on a Niners board.

Just sayin is all.

MagicHef
03-16-2011, 01:40 AM
I was pretty stunned, until I realized that 1% is still 3.5 million people. That makes it a little less stunning (for me, at least).

Mr. Flopnuts
03-16-2011, 01:46 AM
In this world you're either a slave, or you own them. No way around it.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-16-2011, 01:48 AM
In this world you're either a slave, or you own them. No way around it.

P.S - Everyone on this forum is a slave. Whether they think they are, or not. Your name is Toby.

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 02:11 AM
Of course it is.

Money is speech. That's your side talking, through the SCOTUS.

Money is therefore, constitutionally protected expression, which is directly related to the functioning of democracy.

Interesting way of looking at it. Are we going to just go ahead and let corporations vote, then? How would we arrange it? Each director gets an extra vote? Or should it be every stockholder?

stevieray
03-16-2011, 07:19 AM
We're not a Democracy.

dumbasses.

Hydrae
03-16-2011, 07:21 AM
In this world you're either a slave, or you own them. No way around it.

AP approves this post. :thumb:

penchief
03-16-2011, 07:44 AM
Interesting way of looking at it. Are we going to just go ahead and let corporations vote, then? How would we arrange it? Each director gets an extra vote? Or should it be every stockholder?

They sway policy via influence peddling. Our government is corrupted by this influence. Public policy is no longer a vehicle by which the people promote the common good. It is now a vehicle by which those with the most money shape policy to serve their own narrow interests at the expense of the common good.

Get rid of lobbying and we will have a chance of becoming an effective democratic republic again. One that serves the interests of the people instead of perpetuating the consolidation of wealth and power.

BucEyedPea
03-16-2011, 08:50 AM
Get rid of lobbying and we will have a chance of becoming an effective democratic republic again. One that serves the interests of the people instead of perpetuating the consolidation of wealth and power.

Would this apply to unions too?

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 08:51 AM
.

Yeah, yeah. Now what about the voting twice thing?

Chief Henry
03-16-2011, 09:06 AM
Would this apply to unions too?



:hmmm: not many answers to your question

penchief
03-16-2011, 09:15 AM
Would this apply to unions too?

Of course. Absolutely. Representative government should be free of any and all undue influence in the performance of its duty.

penchief
03-16-2011, 09:19 AM
Yeah, yeah. Now what about the voting twice thing?

Who needs a vote when you can bribe congress? One man, one vote doesn't mean much when campaign contributions routinely cancel out the intent of millions of voters.

penchief
03-16-2011, 09:29 AM
:hmmm: not many answers to your question

Don't be so impatient, grasshopper. Some of us are doing more than one thing.

I'm an advocate of workers rights but that doesn't mean I think public policy should be bought and paid for. Quid pro quo is destroying our representative government. Our country is so corrupted by undue influence right now that it's no better than organized crime.

Cave Johnson
03-16-2011, 09:56 AM
Looks like the wealth distribution in a banana republic.

SNR
03-16-2011, 09:58 AM
P.S - Everyone on this forum is a slave. Whether they think they are, or not. Your name is Toby.
I'm not


/Monty Python

Chief Henry
03-16-2011, 10:03 AM
Don't be so impatient, grasshopper. Some of us are doing more than one thing.

I'm an advocate of workers rights and for democrate legislatures to skip town and the state to preserve the status quo but that doesn't mean I think public policy should be bought and paid for. Quid pro quo is destroying our representative government. Our country is so corrupted by undue influence right now that it's no better than organized crime.



fixed your post

penchief
03-16-2011, 10:05 AM
fixed your post

Nice diversion. Guess you don't have an opinion on what I actually posted. You're no better than those Wisconsin Democrats.

Chief Henry
03-16-2011, 10:14 AM
Nice diversion. Guess you don't have an opinion on what I actually posted. You're no better than those Wisconsin Democrats.



Grasp at straws much ?

BucEyedPea
03-16-2011, 10:21 AM
Looks like the wealth distribution in a banana republic.

Having undue concern for it is banana republic'ish too. A la Che revolutionaries! ;)

penchief
03-16-2011, 10:39 AM
Grasp at straws much ?

Look who's talking. Why don't you comment on what I posted instead of putting words in my mouth? Seems odd that you would employ diversionary tactics and then accuse me of grasping at straws.

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 10:40 AM
Who needs a vote...?

Everyone — and under Direckshun's new plan, every corporation — who is participating in democracy. In fact, since money equates to votes, I look forward to a time when votes are allocated according to wealth, income and taxes paid. Pay more taxes, get more votes. It may be the only way that it makes sense for a corporation to pay taxes.

penchief
03-16-2011, 12:18 PM
Everyone — and under Direckshun's new plan, every corporation — who is participating in democracy. In fact, since money equates to votes, I look forward to a time when votes are allocated according to wealth, income and taxes paid. Pay more taxes, get more votes. It may be the only way that it makes sense for a corporation to pay taxes.

Context, anyone? I believe very strongly in one man, one vote. I'm just not so naive to think that one man, one vote hasn't been rendered irrelevant by the money that is used to buy public policy.

Corporations vote with their money even though they are not a living, breathing, citizen of this country. Their money weighs far more heavily in shaping public policy than does a single vote by a living, breathing citizens. If you asked any CEO if he'd rather have a single vote equal to that of his fellow citizens or the ability to shape public policy via lobbying and campaign contributions I'll bet he takes the latter.

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 12:23 PM
Context, anyone? I believe very strongly in one man, one vote. I'm just not so naive to think that one man, one vote hasn't been rendered irrelevant by the money that is used to buy public policy.

Corporations vote with their money even though they are not a living, breathing, citizen of this country. Their money weighs far more heavily in shaping public policy than does a single vote by a living, breathing citizen of this country. If you asked any CEO if he'd rather have a single vote equal to that of his fellow citizens or the ability to shape public policy via lobbying and campaign contributions I'll bet he takes the latter.

Take it up with Direckshun. He's the one that wants to let corporations in on democracy. I'm fine with them just buying what they need directly from Congress.

KC Dan
03-16-2011, 12:25 PM
Corporations vote with their money even though they are not a living, breathing, citizen of this country. Their money weighs far more heavily in shaping public policy than does a single vote by a living, breathing citizens. If you asked any CEO if he'd rather have a single vote equal to that of his fellow citizens or the ability to shape public policy via lobbying and campaign contributions I'll bet he takes the latter.
So do Unions but you probably discount those

penchief
03-16-2011, 12:32 PM
So do Unions but you probably discount those

No I don't. Read the entire thread.

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 12:40 PM
Everyone — and under Direckshun's new plan, every corporation — who is participating in democracy. In fact, since money equates to votes, I look forward to a time when votes are allocated according to wealth, income and taxes paid. Pay more taxes, get more votes. It may be the only way that it makes sense for a corporation to pay taxes.

Swing and a miss.

A democracy is not just a summation of voting totals. It is also the summation of all participation regarding public policy.

Therefore, money is a direct actor in democracy.

I'll give you time to rephrase what must have been a razor-sharp syllogism.

Easy 6
03-16-2011, 12:44 PM
Rule #1 on a football message board: Never quote a Broadway musical to back a point. Except maybe on a Niners board.

Just sayin is all.

LMAOx3

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 12:47 PM
Take it up with Direckshun. He's the one that wants to let corporations in on democracy. I'm fine with them just buying what they need directly from Congress.

My point has sailed, unnoticed, over your head.

Summation, in a wild-ass attempt to rescue the thread from typical DC masturbation:

The point in the OP to begin with is the idea that this is not exactly what might call the most sound of democracies since so much of it is controlled by so few.

Your point was that the hilariously depressing chart was irrelevent to democracy, since its only dealing with finances.

My counterpoint was to coopt what has effectively become SCOTUS-enforced understanding that finances are to be treated and protected like speech, and thus the chart has a direct impact on the quality of our democracy.

You then, for some reason that I'm sure was important to someone, decided to veer off into exploring the inanities and stupid logical loopholes of what the SCOTUS has ruled and painting the stance as if I myself advocated it.

So to get back to the original point:

A country of the disproportionate influence showcased in the OP is not undergoing what I'd call a particularly flourishing democracy.

blaise
03-16-2011, 12:49 PM
I don't really get the note on the pie chart about Republicans. Plenty of Democrats are in office. If the 1% is getting their way, then it must mean their way includes electing Democrats.

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 12:51 PM
I don't really get the note on the pie chart about Republicans. Plenty of Democrats are in office. If the 1% is getting their way, then it must mean their way includes electing Democrats.

The point is, the 1% is getting their way no matter who's in office.

Part of this has to be for reasons that Republicans themselves support as political policy.

blaise
03-16-2011, 12:55 PM
The point is, the 1% is getting their way no matter who's in office.

Part of this has to be for reasons that Republicans themselves support as political policy.

So despite the fact that Republicans supposedly share the same philosophies as the top 1%, and guessing that the flip side is Democrats opposing the 1%'s agenda, Democrats continue getting elected. Doesn't seem all that broken to me.

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 12:58 PM
So despite the fact that Republicans supposedly share the same philosophies as the top 1%, and guessing that the flip side is Democrats opposing the 1%'s agenda, Democrats continue getting elected. Doesn't seem all that broken to me.

I'm not entirely convinced Republicans or Democrats exclusively share the same philosophy as the top 1%. That's a leap in logic that you're making.

I think the GOP political agenda just drastically favors the 1%.

And I don't follow your assinine logic that "so long as Democrats are getting elected, our democracy isn't broken."

blaise
03-16-2011, 01:04 PM
I'm not entirely convinced Republicans or Democrats exclusively share the same philosophy as the top 1%. That's a leap in logic that you're making.

I think their political agenda just drastically favors the 1%.

And I don't follow your assinine logic that "so long as Democrats are getting elected, our democracy isn't broken."

Despite the fact that the political agenda of Republicans "drastically favors" the 1%, and the 1% exert such a tremendous amount of influence, Democrats continue getting elected.
That would lead me to believe the 1%'s influence isn't as great as people here are making it seem.
Unless, of course, you're saying the Democrats are in bed with the 1% just as much as Republicans.
Thats not asinine logic. It's fairly easy. I don't know why you needed to start crying.

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 01:06 PM
Despite the fact that the political agenda of Republicans "drastically favors" the 1%, and the 1% exert such a tremendous amount of influence, Democrats continue getting elected.
That would lead me to believe the 1%'s influence isn't as great as people here are making it seem.
Unless, of course, you're saying the Democrats are in bed with the 1% just as much as Republicans.
Thats not asinine logic. It's fairly easy.

Again, you're shaping an argument out of what's turning out to be a number of logical leaps.

Have at.

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 01:10 PM
I'm not entirely convinced Republicans or Democrats exclusively share the same philosophy as the top 1%. That's a leap in logic that you're making.

I think the GOP political agenda just drastically favors the 1%.

So why is gap growing over the last two years?

:drool:

Chief Henry
03-16-2011, 01:14 PM
Look who's talking. Why don't you comment on what I posted instead of putting words in my mouth? Seems odd that you would employ diversionary tactics and then accuse me of grasping at straws.


Truthfully....it isn't worth having discussions with liberals. Besides, what I post was accurate and I wanted to tweek your ass for your liberal union lovin ways. OK You have my permission to flame away if you want. It won't change a thing about me or you.

blaise
03-16-2011, 01:17 PM
"The top 1% control the process! The Republicans do the bidding of the 1%!"

Then why don't Republicans get elected 80% of the time and stay in office forever?

"That's asinine."

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 01:21 PM
"The top 1% control the process! The Republicans do the bidding of the 1%!"

Then why don't Republicans get elected 80% of the time and stay in office forever?

"That's asinine."

How much money did B.O. get from goldman sachs again?

:drool:

RaiderH8r
03-16-2011, 01:22 PM
Of course it is.

Money is speech. That's your side talking, through the SCOTUS.

Money is therefore, constitutionally protected expression, which is directly related to the functioning of democracy.

It's encouraging to see you oppose campaign finance law.

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 01:22 PM
My point has sailed, unnoticed, over your head.

Your point was noted. Apparently, my flippancy sailed over yours.

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 01:24 PM
U.S. millionaires population expanded by 8% in 2010
.
Aaron Smith, staff writer, On Wednesday March 16, 2011, 1:37 pm EDT
What recession? The millionaire population jumped in the U.S. by 8% last year, fueled by the stock market recovery, according to an industry report on Wednesday.

The number of U.S. households worth at least $1 million rose to 8.4 million in 2010, compared to 7.8 million the prior year, according to a report by Spectrem Group.


The rich are getting richer! ROFL

"The affluent market grew in 2010 due primarily to the stock market rebound, but despite their growing portfolios, attitudes remain significantly different than in 2007," the report said.

"The size of the affluent market increased in 2010 but did not reach the highs obtained in 2007," the year that the recession began, according to the report.

Last year marked the second consecutive year of increases, the group said, following a 16% surge in the millionaire population in 2009.



http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-millionaires-population-cnnm-649773567.html?x=0

LMAO

RaiderH8r
03-16-2011, 01:31 PM
They sway policy via influence peddling. Our government is corrupted by this influence. Public policy is no longer a vehicle by which the people promote the common good. It is now a vehicle by which those with the most money shape policy to serve their own narrow interests at the expense of the common good.

Get rid of lobbying and we will have a chance of becoming an effective democratic republic again. One that serves the interests of the people instead of perpetuating the consolidation of wealth and power.

On the one hand you talk about shaping public policy for the common good and then deride lobbyists. I got news for you buster, despite the fact you've been sold a boogie man named "lobbyist", anybody and I mean anybody can be a lobbyist. Anybody interested in politics becomes a lobbyist at some point in their lives. That issue you care enough about to urge your Member to support or oppose? The one you wrote the letter for or talked to your Member in the district, maybe even stopped by on your visit to DC? That's called lobbying jackass and any American citizen by birthright can do it. Just because some are better at it than you are doesn't make them evil, it makes you ineffectual. If you care so damn much about public policy then get in the game. File your fee and run for office. Pack your shit and move across the country to take the job but don't sit on your high horse and toss down your judgements about shit when you 1. don't know shit about and 2. don't have the balls to get in the game.

You CAN'T get rid of lobbying. Access to a citizen legislature is the cornerstone of this system of governance you ignorant ass. Figure out how to do it better than the other guy.

It's not some small cabal of people advocating something only 2 people in the world care about and somehow, some way the evil lobbyists convinced soembody to submit the bill, a subcommittee to mark it up and pass it, a full committee to mark it up and pass it, the House then Senate to pass it, take the bill to conference to rectify differences, resubmit the conference report to each body, convince the majority of 535 Members of Congress to pass it, the President to sign it, the agencies to regulate it, and the judiciary to enforce it. If that's your vision of what is going on you are dumber than I thought and lobbyists don't earn nearly enough money.

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 01:40 PM
Millionaires continue to multiply, while the middle class sinks down into poverty over the last two years. Isn't this what happens in 3rd world countries?

I think I remember warning everybody about this happening if B.O. took charge of everything. Oh well.

You think this sucks, you aint seen shit yet. LMAO

patteeu
03-16-2011, 04:46 PM
If people don't like their jobs or think they're paid unfairly, then get a new job or work your ass off to get promoted.

I don't make a ton of money, but given my job, I make what I deserve. Maybe I'm a little underpaid or overpaid, but it's just a matter of a few thousand in either direction. I'm not going to begrudge somebody else for what they make as long as my salary is reasonably fair.

This is what fires me up. It says a lot that people side with owners in the NFL, but side with lower-income employees outside the NFL. If you ask me, NFL players are grossly underpaid. The fact that the public sides with the owners tells you that there's a lot of jealousy against people who make money.

I'm with you up until your last point. I don't think siding with the owners is a sign that people are jealous of those who make money. Maybe in some cases it is, but I don't think it's generally true. I think maybe you're being biased by your underlying assessment that players are grossly underpaid. IMO, if that were true, the players could leave and form their own league so they could reap their full value. The fact that that doesn't happen tells me that owners (and the organizations they head) are relatively quite a bit more important to the ongoing success of the enterprise.

patteeu
03-16-2011, 04:51 PM
Looks like the wealth distribution in a banana republic.

Don't sweat it, Pittsie. Your silver spoon background bodes well for you.

penchief
03-16-2011, 04:52 PM
Truthfully....it isn't worth having discussions with liberals. Besides, what I post was accurate and I wanted to tweek your ass for your liberal union lovin ways. OK You have my permission to flame away if you want. It won't change a thing about me or you.

If you're not going to read what someone posts but instead choose to put words in their mouth or paint an inaccurate picture, why even bother responding? It doesn't help to advance your opinions, nor does it reflect well on your ability to represent your opinions.

You've split this board in your own mind and don't even care what someone's actual position is. You've already got them pegged as someone worthy of derision. I consider myself much more conservative than a lot of people on the right when it comes to many issues. And I agree with several issues that most on the right claim as their own.

It would serve you much better to actually read other's thoughts before formulating a response instead of taking uninformed pot shots.

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 04:53 PM
I consider myself much more conservative than a lot of people on the right when it comes to many issues.

Know how I know you use drugs?

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 04:54 PM
Don't sweat it, Pittsie. Your silver spoon background bodes well for you.

Did he go to private school like Jenson?

LMAO

penchief
03-16-2011, 04:56 PM
On the one hand you talk about shaping public policy for the common good and then deride lobbyists. I got news for you buster, despite the fact you've been sold a boogie man named "lobbyist", anybody and I mean anybody can be a lobbyist. Anybody interested in politics becomes a lobbyist at some point in their lives. That issue you care enough about to urge your Member to support or oppose? The one you wrote the letter for or talked to your Member in the district, maybe even stopped by on your visit to DC? That's called lobbying jackass and any American citizen by birthright can do it. Just because some are better at it than you are doesn't make them evil, it makes you ineffectual. If you care so damn much about public policy then get in the game. File your fee and run for office. Pack your shit and move across the country to take the job but don't sit on your high horse and toss down your judgements about shit when you 1. don't know shit about and 2. don't have the balls to get in the game.

You CAN'T get rid of lobbying. Access to a citizen legislature is the cornerstone of this system of governance you ignorant ass. Figure out how to do it better than the other guy.

It's not some small cabal of people advocating something only 2 people in the world care about and somehow, some way the evil lobbyists convinced soembody to submit the bill, a subcommittee to mark it up and pass it, a full committee to mark it up and pass it, the House then Senate to pass it, take the bill to conference to rectify differences, resubmit the conference report to each body, convince the majority of 535 Members of Congress to pass it, the President to sign it, the agencies to regulate it, and the judiciary to enforce it. If that's your vision of what is going on you are dumber than I thought and lobbyists don't earn nearly enough money.

Yeah, I understand all that but the money is what greases the wheels. And those with the most money have the most influence. And they use that influence to perpetuate their own self-enrichment. And the more that wealth is consolidated the more power is consolidated. If you can't see how undue influence has altered the direction of this country over the past thirty years then you are just not paying attention.

And what's with all the name calling? Did I piss you off in the past? I can have a civil debate but it seems like some of you are taking this shit way too personal. Maybe it's because the evidence is starting to pile up and its getting harder to defend the Darwinian economic ideology of the right. Trickle down always has been and always will be a scam designed to consolidate wealth and power.

patteeu
03-16-2011, 05:01 PM
Did he go to private school like Jenson?

LMAO

No, or at least I don't know about that. I'm referring to the fact that he hit the ground running in his dad's law firm after law school. NTTAWWT

penchief
03-16-2011, 05:02 PM
So why is gap growing over the last two years?

:drool:

Because the system is broken. Both sides of the aisle are at fault. That said, we've got three and a half decades of republican's on record pushing for the very policies that have destroyed the middle class and pitted the working class against each other.

ClevelandBronco
03-16-2011, 05:02 PM
No, or at least I don't know about that. I'm referring to the fact that he hit the ground running in his dad's law firm after law school. NTTAWWT

So it's a guilt thing with him.

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 05:03 PM
Because the system is broken. Both sides of the aisle are at fault. That said, we've got three and a half decades of republican's on record pushing for the very policies that have destroyed the middle class and pitted the working class against each other.

ROFL

patteeu
03-16-2011, 05:04 PM
Yeah, I understand all that but the money is what greases the wheels. And those with the most money have the most influence. And they use that influence to perpetuate their own self-enrichment. And the more that wealth is consolidated the more power is consolidated. If you can't see how undue influence has altered the direction of this country over the past thirty years then you are just not paying attention.

And what's with all the name calling? Did I piss you off in the past? I can have a civil debate but it seems like some of you are taking this shit way too personal. Maybe it's because the evidence is starting to pile up and its getting harder to defend the Darwinian economic ideology of the right. Trickle down always has been and always will be a scam designed to consolidate wealth and power.

Do you realize who's been captaining our sinking ship for the past 2 years and who's been in charge of the engine room for the past 4, penchief?

penchief
03-16-2011, 05:05 PM
Know how I know you use drugs?

I doubt you even know what my positions are.

patteeu
03-16-2011, 05:05 PM
So it's a guilt thing with him.

Could be. It's hard for me to understand where liberal obsessions come from.

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 05:05 PM
No, or at least I don't know about that. I'm referring to the fact that he hit the ground running in his dad's law firm after law school. NTTAWWT

Yeah. He comes across as a spoiled brat.

penchief
03-16-2011, 05:15 PM
Do you realize who's been captaining our sinking ship for the past 2 years and who's been in charge of the engine room for the past 4, penchief?

I do. I'm not happy. But holding people accountable for their public positions is where we start. And part of the problem is that republicans don't **** around. They'll go nuclear if they have to. And they don't care how hypocritical they look when the shoe is on the other foot. They know Americans have short memories.

On the other hand, Democrats are major pussies. And hypocrites, too. They pay lip service to their constituents and then cave when the going gets tough. They get their asses handed to them every time. Obama included. Democrats do a major disservice to the country because they represent those who don't want to continue down this road yet they do a piss poor job of it. They may not advocate the current system but the do just fine giving in to it.

penchief
03-16-2011, 05:17 PM
ROFL

ROFL

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 05:27 PM
I do. I'm not happy. But holding people accountable for their public positions is where we start. And part of the problem is that republicans don't **** around. They'll go nuclear if they have to.

Boehner and Obama are having lunch together for St. Patty's day. Yeah, they are really going nuclear. :rolleyes:

The Mad Crapper
03-16-2011, 05:28 PM
Could be. It's hard for me to understand where liberal obsessions come from.

Stokely Carmichael, of all people, said it best, "what the (white) liberal wants is to affect a change that doesn't compromise his own status in life".

HonestChieffan
03-16-2011, 07:26 PM
Does the middle class know they have been destroyed yet?

petegz28
03-16-2011, 08:12 PM
Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.
H. L. Mencken

notorious
03-16-2011, 09:17 PM
The Original Post = Biggest Pile of Shit on CP this year.

:facepalm:

healthpellets
03-16-2011, 10:04 PM
The Original Post = Biggest Pile of Shit on CP this year.

:facepalm:

well, at least you said "original post" and not "original poster".

Mr. Kotter
03-16-2011, 10:32 PM
The Original Post = Biggest Pile of Shit on CP this year.

:facepalm:

Guess what? You just BEAT him; seriously. If you think, for a minute, the growing disparity of wealth is not politically significant, you are a really big douche--worthy of the "biggest POS" on CP this year. Hell, you won...without a real competition. Just sayin'.

LMAO

Yeah, Healthpellets beat "notorious"....badly; it isn't even close. Not remotely. Just sayin'. Wow. Heh. LMAO

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 11:18 PM
It's encouraging to see you oppose campaign finance law.

I favor REFORM of current campaign finance laws, if we actually want to be precise about it. Which I know we don't, because being precise is for pussies or something. But there you have it.

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 11:18 PM
Your point was noted. Apparently, my flippancy sailed over yours.

Then I guess I just wanted to note that you were effectively withdrawing from the argument I was making.

Direckshun
03-16-2011, 11:20 PM
Does the middle class know they have been destroyed yet?

They know they're being grinded up. They're feeling it.

banyon
03-16-2011, 11:38 PM
Good thing we are a republic.

Yup!


Per Madison democracies become profligate with the majority voting to steal property. That, imo, has to do with economics.

This tired conflation again.

Do either of you geniuses know what a crown republic is? How about a one-party republic? How about Plato's republic,for that matter?

You guys need to familiarize yourselves with basic syllogistic logic.

The fact that some democracies are not republics does not lead to the conclusion that all republics are not democracies.

Our system has elements of both. It is a republic in the sense that citizens do not directly vote on policy changes and allow elected representatives to do that, but it is a democracy in the fact that the representatives are directly accountable through near-universal suffrage and and that the qualifications to serve in a representative capacity are only minimally restrictive. Therefore while he don't have an Athenian-styled pure democracy, that is not the only possible form. Our democracy is direct at voting time for reps, but indirect for policy enactments.

ClevelandBronco
03-17-2011, 12:16 AM
Then I guess I just wanted to note that you were effectively withdrawing from the argument I was making.

Withdrawing from it?

Taco John
03-17-2011, 01:19 AM
This tired conflation again.

Do either of you geniuses know what a crown republic is? How about a one-party republic? How about Plato's republic,for that matter?

You guys need to familiarize yourselves with basic syllogistic logic.

The fact that some democracies are not republics does not lead to the conclusion that all republics are not democracies.

Our system has elements of both. It is a republic in the sense that citizens do not directly vote on policy changes and allow elected representatives to do that, but it is a democracy in the fact that the representatives are directly accountable through near-universal suffrage and and that the qualifications to serve in a representative capacity are only minimally restrictive. Therefore while he don't have an Athenian-styled pure democracy, that is not the only possible form. Our democracy is direct at voting time for reps, but indirect for policy enactments.


A Republic is not a Democracy. Our particular Constitutional Republic is set up for the specific purpose of protecting people from mob rule Democracy. We're not talking about a shade of gradient vs. another similar shade here. They are antithetical. One is set up to protect the individual - the other is set up for the rule of the majority. These are in contrast/conflict with eachother.

It may be true that our Republic takes votes into account. It may be true that our Republic often times will ignore individual rights because the political will to ignore these rights permits it to do so. But that doesn't change the fact that we're not talking about non-trival differences.

teedubya
03-17-2011, 01:31 AM
It's all about the Benjamins, baby.

ClevelandBronco
03-17-2011, 04:17 AM
I doubt you even know what my positions are.

I'll lay pretty good odds that bending over and grabbing your ankles is one of your most familiar ones.

penchief
03-17-2011, 06:29 AM
I'll lay pretty good odds that bending over and grabbing your ankles is one of your most familiar ones.

Really? Is that necessary? It's amazing that people who are so certain they are right about everything would have to resort to such petty tactics. Your attempts to belittle those with whom you disagree are a sign of weakness.

For the record, you couldn't be more wrong. Are you sure that you aren't projecting just a bit here? Looks like a classic case to me, tough guy.

Chief Henry
03-17-2011, 07:35 AM
Because the system is broken. Both sides of the aisle are at fault. That said, we've got three and a half decades of republican's on record pushing for the very policies that have destroyed the middle class and pitted the working class against each other.



Why would one even consider you serious when you post BS like this.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 08:11 AM
Really? Is that necessary? It's amazing that people who are so certain they are right about everything would have to resort to such petty tactics. Your attempts to belittle those with whom you disagree are a sign of weakness.

For the record, you couldn't be more wrong. Are you sure that you aren't projecting just a bit here? Looks like a classic case to me, tough guy.

It's humor, penchief. I don't think ClevelandBronco intended it to be taken as a serious argument. And btw, didn't you just respond in kind? Is that a sign of weakness too?

penchief
03-17-2011, 10:14 AM
It's humor, penchief. I don't think ClevelandBronco intended it to be taken as a serious argument. And btw, didn't you just respond in kind? Is that a sign of weakness too?

Humor? I enjoy good humor as well as the next guy. I can even have a good laugh at my own expense. However, responses like his don't strike me as particularly witty. Who's he targeting with shitty humor like that? If I'm gonna laugh it's gonna have to be funnier than just cheap innuendo. Anybody can do that.

penchief
03-17-2011, 10:15 AM
Why would one even consider you serious when you post BS like this.

I should ask you the same question. At least I'm capable of staying on topic.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 10:20 AM
Humor? I enjoy good humor as well as the next guy. I can even have a good laugh at my own expense. However, responses like his don't strike me as particularly witty. Who's he targeting with shitty humor like that? If I'm gonna laugh it's gonna have to be funnier than just cheap innuendo. Anybody can do that.

Maybe so, but whether you think it's funny or not isn't the point. The point is that he's clearly not trying to make a serious argument.

Chief Henry
03-17-2011, 10:34 AM
I should ask you the same question. At least I'm capable of staying on topic.

Awww, does your vagina hurt from getting your ass waxed in Ws ? And soon to be in several MORE states.

2bikemike
03-17-2011, 10:35 AM
Millionaires continue to multiply, while the middle class sinks down into poverty over the last two years. Isn't this what happens in 3rd world countries?

I think I remember warning everybody about this happening if B.O. took charge of everything. Oh well.

You think this sucks, you aint seen shit yet. LMAO


What I would like to know is where all these new millionaires are coming from? Could they be coming from the middle class?

One of the biggest contributors to the failing middle class is consumerism. Spending more than you make trying to keep up with the Jones.

The rich get richer because they take advantage of opportunities as they present themselves. The heavily indebted middle class can't afford to because they lack the capital due to the leveraging of their lifestyle. It is entirely possible for a middle class person to become a millionaire with sound financial dicipline.

penchief
03-17-2011, 10:35 AM
Maybe so, but whether you think it's funny or not isn't the point. The point is that he's clearly not trying to make a serious argument.

Maybe I took it the wrong way. It's all good. I don't take things like that personally, anyway. It would just be nice to have a debate without having to sort out the tasteless jokes from the personal insults that are too common around here. I'll never understand why some people think that brow beating other posters makes their opinion more valid.

By the way, I probably disagree with your takes as much as is humanly possible but I find your posting style to be genuine, witty, and courteous. You prove that you don't have to be an asshole to get your point across.

penchief
03-17-2011, 10:39 AM
Awww, does your vagina hurt from getting your ass waxed in Ws ? And soon to be in several MORE states.

I'd like to say that I know what youre talking about but unfortunately, I can't.

And no, my feelings aren't hurt. Is it even possible for you to comprehend........aw, fuck it.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 10:45 AM
Maybe I took it the wrong way. It's all good. I don't take things like that personally, anyway. It would just be nice to have a debate without having to sort out the tasteless jokes from the personal insults that are too common around here. I'll never understand why some people think that brow beating other posters makes their opinion more valid.

By the way, I probably disagree with your takes as much as is humanly possible but I find your posting style to be genuine, witty, and courteous. You prove that you don't have to be an asshole to get your point across.

Nonsense. I was just told that I was an asshole two days ago. Thanks anyway. :p

Chief Henry
03-17-2011, 02:01 PM
Yeah, I understand all that but the money is what greases the wheels. And those with the most money have the most influence. And they use that influence to perpetuate their own self-enrichment. And the more that wealth is consolidated the more power is consolidated. If you can't see how undue influence has altered the direction of this country over the past thirty years then you are just not paying attention.

And what's with all the name calling? Did I piss you off in the past? I can have a civil debate but it seems like some of you are taking this shit way too personal. Maybe it's because the evidence is starting to pile up and its getting harder to defend the Darwinian economic ideology of the right. Trickle down always has been and always will be a scam designed to consolidate wealth and power.



If what you say is true....why is it that so many towns, cities and states across America are doing what ever they can to persuade corporations and small business owners to come to there town, city or
state to open up a factory ?

Heres how trickle down economics 101 works PC. Follow along if you can, this might confuse your LIBERAL PEA SIZED BRAIN.

Its because when a factory comes to town and hires 100 people. Those 100 people buy stuff like cars, homes, motorcycles, fishing gear and groceries.


If that business owner/corporation doesn't put capital at risk and those same 100 people employed by the factory can't buy cars, homes, motorcycles and groceries....nor can they pay property tax to help fund the local school to pay for the salary of the local school teachers who belong to the NEA. Those same 100 people employed by the bsn. owner/corporation are paying taxes to help fund all of the local pet liberal projects that gov't representatives can't say NO to.

Chiefshrink
03-17-2011, 02:07 PM
Good thing that we are a Republic

This!!!!!:thumb:

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 02:08 PM
Yeah, I understand all that but the money is what greases the wheels. And those with the most money have the most influence. And they use that influence to perpetuate their own self-enrichment. And the more that wealth is consolidated the more power is consolidated. If you can't see how undue influence has altered the direction of this country over the past thirty years then you are just not paying attention.

And what's with all the name calling? Did I piss you off in the past? I can have a civil debate but it seems like some of you are taking this shit way too personal. Maybe it's because the evidence is starting to pile up and its getting harder to defend the Darwinian economic ideology of the right. Trickle down always has been and always will be a scam designed to consolidate wealth and power.

Just who is exerting this "undue influence"? What shadowy group of people constitute these "lobbyists" of whom you are so afraid? Of course advocacy has altered the course of this country...that's what it is supposed to do. Again, have you ever contacted you Member on an issue? Have you ever cast a vote for or against a candidate because of their position on an issue? That would be an interest of special meaning to you then wouldn't? In other words you have yourself a "special interest".

I'm riled because these accusations against lobbyists are a piss poor attempt to lay blame where none deserves to be laid. Lobbyists don't cast the vote in Congress, they don't cast the votes for the candidates. What they do have is a wealth of information on issues and topics of concern. They have access to citizens, businesses, and other effected groups and offer that access and insight to Members so that they can make their decisions. Jesus f'ing Christ, do you swallow every line of BS Hollywood throws at you? Do also believe we can send Bruce Willis to drill a comet that is hurtling towards earth? I call names because the utter ignorance of your position causes pain to my brain and you remind me that, despite my naive ideals that people deserve to vote for their government, perhaps the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter and I resent your stupidity disabusing me of my lofty ideals. Get your ilk together and stop being stupid. "Lobbyists" are a wonderful scape goat for citizens and, frankly, politicians to absolve themselves of the blame of a state of affairs they find distressing. It's the old, "DC is broke. It's broke not because of you, fine citizen, and not because of me but because of that boogey man behind the tree."

I'll put it to you this way; if lobbyists have so much power in DC how in the hell did Congress pass a lobbying reform act without so much as a peep from the evil lobbyists?

Bottom line? Do you want to be a Dr.? Well you better get licensed and get that degree. Do you want to be a lawyer? Better get licensed and get that degree. Do you want to be a veterinarian, dentist, truck driver etc? Better get licensed. Do you want to be a lobbyist? Then you really need only one thing; credibility. If you don't have credibility then all the glad handing, campaign donations, and ass kissing in the world isn't going to get you one iota of meaningful input on jack shit. Again skippy, anybody can be a lobbyist and that is a beautiful thing.

Chiefshrink
03-17-2011, 02:22 PM
Because the system is broken. Both sides of the aisle are at fault. That said, we've got three and a half decades of republican's on record pushing for the very policies that have destroyed the middle class and pitted the working class against each other.

When you say 'system is broken' I assume you are referring to the free market of Capitalism:shrug:

I say it is the heart of man that is broke in sin which results in 'greed' that is broke and our Founders knew that man is a fallen creature so that is why they adopted the fact that man unto himself will fail(a la 'greed') but man's heart guided by the 'Judeo Christian ethics and values of the Bible( a la God) then man will flourish in true liberty,freedom and justice.

So is it capitalism in and of itself or corrupt individuals(who choose to live apart from God) that is broke? Think awhile before you answer this so then you will answer 'honestly'. Hell let me help you here.

Capitalism is "financial freedom" to at least have the opportunity to acquire and maintain your particular "lot in life" on how you see fit to live it.

It is not the Govt's right to come in and tell you what your worth is to society and tell you when to piss and sh** and how much and what you will make financially and what you are allowed to own materially. Capitialism in and of itself is not corrupt but in the hands of "corrupt people" becomes not Capitalism anymore but outright "theft".

"We the People" must protect ourselves by enforcing the laws we have already in place to avoid the "corruption" that allows those individuals/groups from the financial world and our Fed Govt to "steal" from "We The People".

When a society begins to snub it's nose to high moral ethics(ala Judeo Christian values) and approaches everything with a greeedy attitude of "everyman for himself, gonna get mine and "f" everyone else" mentality as we are seeing right now in our country. Then Capitalism turns into "greed" resulting in "theft" and like cancer that is not cut out before it gets into the "lymph system"(ala enforcing our laws) then the "unchecked greed" will ultimately kill our country because corrupt individuals in power never enforce the law. What did Thomas Jefferson say, "As soon as the Fed Govt realizes they can vote themselves $$ the country will cease to exist or something like that.

The Seven Deadly Sins of which no country in history has ever been immune to but our country has been somewhat more successful than most "BUT" in the last 60yrs has given in significantly to these sins and we have paid a dear, dear price of which IMO we will never recover from.

So I ask you again, is it Capitalism in and of itself or "corrupt individuals" that turn Capitalism into "theft and greed"?

BucEyedPea
03-17-2011, 02:40 PM
Does the middle class know they have been destroyed yet?


They know they're being grinded up. They're feeling it.

The middle-class is really in a vise between the mercantilist Republicans* and the commie Democrats getting squeezed between the two more and more with pressure from above and pressure from below with bankster corporate bailouts and more socialism from Obama.

Cheneyites like patteeu, HCF etc.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 02:46 PM
Harry Reid is threatening to shut down the entire government over funding Planned Parenthood. That would be National Abortion Rights League, National Organization for Women, Emily's List etc. lobbying to have that done. Does that qualify as undue influence or what?

The Mad Crapper
03-17-2011, 02:49 PM
It would just be nice to have a debate without having to sort out the tasteless jokes from the personal insults that are too common around here. I'll never understand why some people think that brow beating other posters makes their opinion more valid.

I don't think they do it because they are trying to make their opinion more valid. I think they do it because they know no matter what they tell you, you're going to ignore it anyway, so they just throw insults at you for comedy purposes.

Where have you been, any way?

The Mad Crapper
03-17-2011, 02:51 PM
Harry Reid is threatening to shut down the entire government over funding Planned Parenthood. That would be National Abortion Rights League, National Organization for Women, Emily's List etc. lobbying to have that done. Does that qualify as undue influence or what?

Anybody who spends a dime in Nevada, can go suck eggs. How that state could allow a POS like that to continue to wield the political power he has, is beyond me.

Harry Reid is a vile, twisted, corrupt scumbag.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 02:53 PM
Harry Reid is threatening to shut down the entire government over funding Planned Parenthood. That would be National Abortion Rights League, National Organization for Women, Emily's List etc. lobbying to have that done. Does that qualify as undue influence or what?

He's just protecting women from those mean Republicans and their religious special interests who want to turn back the clock on women's rights.

penchief
03-17-2011, 05:13 PM
If what you say is true....why is it that so many towns, cities and states across America are doing what ever they can to persuade corporations and small business owners to come to there town, city or
state to open up a factory ?

Heres how trickle down economics 101 works PC. Follow along if you can, this might confuse your LIBERAL PEA SIZED BRAIN.

Its because when a factory comes to town and hires 100 people. Those 100 people buy stuff like cars, homes, motorcycles, fishing gear and groceries.


If that business owner/corporation doesn't put capital at risk and those same 100 people employed by the factory can't buy cars, homes, motorcycles and groceries....nor can they pay property tax to help fund the local school to pay for the salary of the local school teachers who belong to the NEA. Those same 100 people employed by the bsn. owner/corporation are paying taxes to help fund all of the local pet liberal projects that gov't representatives can't say NO to.

You don't have to explain economics 101 to me. I understand how it's supposed to work just fine. How it's supposed to work and how it actually works in this country are two different things. What you seem incapable of doing is recognizing what is going on around you. It's one thing to buy into the ideology but that doesn't make it the reality.

Explain to me why trickle down has been going on for almost three decades now yet things keep getting worse. The mantra from the right for the past thirty years has been to cut corporate taxes and taxes for the wealthy and that will create jobs. Well, where are the jobs? Why are they taking those tax cuts and then shipping jobs overseas? And they're using that overseas slave labor as leverage to drive down wages and eliminate benifits in this country.

The big picture is as clear as day. But too many like you buy into the devisive rhetoric and don't want to do the math for yourself. Eliminating social programs and killing unions is not going to improve the situation in this country. The rich will continue to get richer while the rest of us can look forward to seeing our children work for peanuts.

If trickle down is supposed to work so well why has it always been such a miserable failure? But then again, it was never intended to benefit everyone. It is and always has been a scam to consolidate wealth and power.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 05:29 PM
You don't have to explain economics 101 to me. I understand how it's supposed to work just fine. How it's supposed to work and how it actually works in this country are two different things. What you seem incapable of doing is recognizing what is going on around you. It's one thing to buy into the ideology but that doesn't make it the reality.

Explain to me why trickle down has been going on for almost three decades now yet things keep getting worse. The mantra from the right for the past thirty years has been to cut corporate taxes and taxes for the wealthy and that will create jobs. Well, where are the jobs? Why are they taking those tax cuts and then shipping jobs overseas? And they're using that overseas slave labor as leverage to drive down wages and eliminate benifits in this country.

The big picture is as clear as day. But too many like you buy into the devisive rhetoric and don't want to do the math for yourself. Eliminating social programs and killing unions is not going to improve the situation in this country. The rich will continue to get richer while the rest of us can look forward to seeing our children work for peanuts.

If trickle down is supposed to work so well why has it always been such a miserable failure? But then again, it was never intended to benefit everyone. It is and always has been a scam to consolidate wealth and power.

If you think things have been bad over the past 30 years, you should see what would have happened if we'd have followed the economic ideas that you prefer. Maybe you'll get your chance if Obama gets re-elected.

penchief
03-17-2011, 05:46 PM
Just who is exerting this "undue influence"? What shadowy group of people constitute these "lobbyists" of whom you are so afraid? Of course advocacy has altered the course of this country...that's what it is supposed to do. Again, have you ever contacted you Member on an issue? Have you ever cast a vote for or against a candidate because of their position on an issue? That would be an interest of special meaning to you then wouldn't? In other words you have yourself a "special interest".

I'm riled because these accusations against lobbyists are a piss poor attempt to lay blame where none deserves to be laid. Lobbyists don't cast the vote in Congress, they don't cast the votes for the candidates. What they do have is a wealth of information on issues and topics of concern. They have access to citizens, businesses, and other effected groups and offer that access and insight to Members so that they can make their decisions. Jesus f'ing Christ, do you swallow every line of BS Hollywood throws at you? Do also believe we can send Bruce Willis to drill a comet that is hurtling towards earth? I call names because the utter ignorance of your position causes pain to my brain and you remind me that, despite my naive ideals that people deserve to vote for their government, perhaps the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter and I resent your stupidity disabusing me of my lofty ideals. Get your ilk together and stop being stupid. "Lobbyists" are a wonderful scape goat for citizens and, frankly, politicians to absolve themselves of the blame of a state of affairs they find distressing. It's the old, "DC is broke. It's broke not because of you, fine citizen, and not because of me but because of that boogey man behind the tree."

I'll put it to you this way; if lobbyists have so much power in DC how in the hell did Congress pass a lobbying reform act without so much as a peep from the evil lobbyists?

Bottom line? Do you want to be a Dr.? Well you better get licensed and get that degree. Do you want to be a lawyer? Better get licensed and get that degree. Do you want to be a veterinarian, dentist, truck driver etc? Better get licensed. Do you want to be a lobbyist? Then you really need only one thing; credibility. If you don't have credibility then all the glad handing, campaign donations, and ass kissing in the world isn't going to get you one iota of meaningful input on jack shit. Again skippy, anybody can be a lobbyist and that is a beautiful thing.

Honestly, I have nothing against the principal of advocacy. In fact I am an advocate for political and social advocacy. In theory, it is a form of free speech and a way in which to petition congress. So I get your point. I wish it were just about political or social advocacy.

That said, it has become a cesspool for influence peddling. It's created an environment where those with the most resources are those who get to sway policy. If it were merely the exchange of ideas I'd feel the same way you do. But it isn't about that anymore. It's about K Street corporate lobbyists who used to work in the government using their connections to influence policy in order to benefit the commercial interests of their clients at the expense of the common good. Unfortunately, this has created a situation in which the public is getting ****ed so that corporations can get rich.

I don't disagree with you in theory. But in practice, the ground rules to lobbying have to change drastically or else this country will never again represent anything more than a thing to be commercially exploited, raped, and pillaged.

penchief
03-17-2011, 05:53 PM
If you think things have been bad over the past 30 years, you should see what would have happened if we'd have followed the economic ideas that you prefer. Maybe you'll get your chance if Obama gets re-elected.

What are the economic ideas that you believe I prefer? I'll try to address them individually.

That said, it's pretty obvious what the results of Trickle Down Class Warfare have been.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 05:53 PM
Honestly, I have nothing against the principal of advocacy. In fact I am an advocate for political and social advocacy. In theory, it is a form of free speech and a way in which to petition congress. So I get your point. I wish it were just about political or social advocacy.

That said, it has become a cesspool for influence peddling. It's created an environment where those with the most resources are those who get to sway policy. If it were merely the exchange of ideas I'd feel the same way you do. But it isn't about that anymore. It's about K Street corporate lobbyists who used to work in the government using their connections to influence policy in order to benefit the commercial interests of their clients at the expense of the common good. Unfortunately, this has created a situation in which the public is getting ****ed so that corporations can get rich.

I don't disagree with you in theory. But in practice, the ground rules to lobbying have to change drastically or else this country will never again represent anything more than a thing to be commercially exploited, raped, and pillaged.

This isn't a symptom of bad lobbyists or inadequate lobbyist regulation, it's a symptom of big government and the high stakes policy decisions big governments make. If tax rates were low, subsidies were rare/non-existant and regulation was light, there wouldn't be nearly as much urgency for people to influence the decisions government makes. Since government has become far more intrusive at the insistence of your political fellow travelers, the importance of influencing governments decisions has grown. Liberal policies have created the problem you decry.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 05:54 PM
What are the economic ideas that you believe I prefer? I'll try to address them individually.

That said, it's pretty obvious what the results of Trickle Down Class Warfare have been.

Obviously you oppose low marginal rates on high income earners and income from capital and more business-friendly levels of regulation. If you don't, then your criticism of "trickle down" policies makes no sense.

penchief
03-17-2011, 06:24 PM
Obviously you oppose low marginal rates on high income earners and income from capital and more business-friendly levels of regulation. If you don't, then your criticism of "trickle down" policies makes no sense.

Business friendly regulations should not mean a free pass to do harm. If the regulation serves a legitimate purpose then it should stand. I simply believe that if you can't make an honest buck you don't deserve to make a buck.

For instance, I've got nothing against the idea of drilling for gas in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale. This is going on in my back yard. Some of the most beautiful country in the entire United States. However, in many instances it is being done in an unsafe way. They are dumping toxic waste water into some of the purest rivers and streams in this country, which supply many of the residents with their drinking water. The hydraulic fracturing process has led to poisoning of the ground water for many residents.

All I believe is that if you are going to do it you have to do it safely. If you can't do it safely then you find a way to do it safely before you do it. So yes, if regulations are needed to ensure it is done safely then I support those regulations.

Financial deregulation has led to many of the abuses that contributed to the massive fraud the was perpetrated on this country. Regulation that prevents fraud and predatory practices are good regulations, IMO.

The point stands, however. Business has been getting it's tax cuts and deregulation for the past thirty years yet it has not produced the promised results. In fact, the trend has been pretty steady in the opposite direction. Our current predicament is a direct result of that thirty year trend. And it will continue to get worse unless we wake up and smell the coffee.

patteeu
03-17-2011, 06:27 PM
Business friendly regulations should not mean a free pass to do harm. If the regulation serves a legitimate purpose then it should stand. I simply believe that if you can't make an honest buck you don't deserve to make a buck.

For instance, I've got nothing against the idea of drilling for gas in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale. This is going on in my back yard. Some of the most beautiful country in the entire United States. However, in many instances it is being done in an unsafe way. They are dumping toxic waste water into some of the purest rivers and streams in this country, which supply many of the residents with their drinking water. The hydraulic fracturing process has led to poisoning of the ground water for many residents.

All I believe is that if you are going to do it you have to do it safely. If you can't do it safely then you find a way to do it safely before you do it. So yes, if regulations are needed to ensure it is done safely then I support those regulations.

Financial deregulation has led to many of the abuses that contributed to the massive fraud the was perpetrated on this country. Regulation that prevents fraud and predatory practices are good regulations, IMO.

The point stands, however. Business has been getting it's tax cuts and deregulation for the past thirty years yet it has not produced the promised results. In fact, the trend has been pretty steady in the opposite direction. Our current predicament is a direct result of that thirty year trend. And it will continue to get worse unless we wake up and smell the coffee.

You can't have it both ways, penchief. If you want heavy regulation and high taxes, then recognize that you're responsible for energizing the lobbying efforts of those potentially impacted by the heavy hand of government.

penchief
03-17-2011, 06:31 PM
You can't have it both ways, penchief. If you want heavy regulation and high taxes, then recognize that you're responsible for energizing the lobbying efforts of those potentially impacted by the heavy hand of government.

I never said I wanted "heavy" regulation and high taxes. Only that which is necessary.

Also, who can defend the concept of lobbying for the freedom to do harm?

banyon
03-17-2011, 06:32 PM
A Republic is not a Democracy. Our particular Constitutional Republic is set up for the specific purpose of protecting people from mob rule Democracy. We're not talking about a shade of gradient vs. another similar shade here. They are antithetical. One is set up to protect the individual - the other is set up for the rule of the majority. These are in contrast/conflict with eachother.

You seem to think they are mutually exclusive terms. They're not. I note how you ignored the other examples of republics I mentioned and chose not to explain why the term fit them too. The term "republic" doesn't have anything to do necessarily with protecting the rights of minorities. That's a feature of a "constitutional republic", which is also a feature of our government. It's where those rights are explicitly set out and require supermajorities to encroach on them. But, of course a constitution is not an essential feature of a republic. Again, see Plato's republic (or the others) for a republic that didn't give a sh*t about the rights of minorities. ALL* that the word "republic" means is that you have representative policy making.

It may be true that our Republic takes votes into account. It may be true that our Republic often times will ignore individual rights because the political will to ignore these rights permits it to do so. But that doesn't change the fact that we're not talking about non-trival differences.

This definition is inconsistent with the one you just offered.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 06:46 PM
Business friendly regulations should not mean a free pass to do harm. If the regulation serves a legitimate purpose then it should stand. I simply believe that if you can't make an honest buck you don't deserve to make a buck.

For instance, I've got nothing against the idea of drilling for gas in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale. This is going on in my back yard. Some of the most beautiful country in the entire United States. However, in many instances it is being done in an unsafe way. They are dumping toxic waste water into some of the purest rivers and streams in this country, which supply many of the residents with their drinking water. The hydraulic fracturing process has led to poisoning of the ground water for many residents.

All I believe is that if you are going to do it you have to do it safely. If you can't do it safely then you find a way to do it safely before you do it. So yes, if regulations are needed to ensure it is done safely then I support those regulations.

Financial deregulation has led to many of the abuses that contributed to the massive fraud the was perpetrated on this country. Regulation that prevents fraud and predatory practices are good regulations, IMO.

The point stands, however. Business has been getting it's tax cuts and deregulation for the past thirty years yet it has not produced the promised results. In fact, the trend has been pretty steady in the opposite direction. Our current predicament is a direct result of that thirty year trend. And it will continue to get worse unless we wake up and smell the coffee.

Who is the "they" that are dumping into PA rivers? It isn't the drillers. Moreover, never has hydraulic fracturing been shown to contaminate groundwater.

The point stands, if government weren't so pervasive access to it wouldn't be so valued.

The Mad Crapper
03-17-2011, 06:54 PM
What are the economic ideas that you believe I prefer? I'll try to address them individually.

OK.

#1?

penchief
03-17-2011, 07:02 PM
Who is the "they" that are dumping into PA rivers? It isn't the drillers. Moreover, never has hydraulic fracturing been shown to contaminate groundwater.

The point stands, if government weren't so pervasive access to it wouldn't be so valued.

The gas companies. I've been reading about it in the local papers but here is something I just found.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03/natural-gas-wastewater-rivers_n_830332.html

Contaminated wells are the result of contaminated ground water, no? Cabot Oil was found responsible for contaminating the drinking water of 14 homes in Dimrock, PA. There have been other claims, as well.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 07:20 PM
The gas companies. I've been reading about it in the local papers but here is something I just found.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03/natural-gas-wastewater-rivers_n_830332.html

Contaminated wells are the result of contaminated ground water, no? Cabot Oil was found responsible for contaminating the drinking water of 14 homes in Dimrock, PA. There have been other claims, as well.

That's not the drillers putting it into the rivers, that would be the municpal water treatment plants. Your beef is with them for not doing their job if your beef exists at all.

penchief
03-17-2011, 07:23 PM
That's not the drillers putting it into the rivers, that would be the municpal water treatment plants. Your beef is with them for not doing their job if your beef exists at all.

Did you even read the story? So you won't mind new regulations that prevent them for doing it further?

And what about Dimrock? Still contend that ground wells haven't been contaminated?

Logically, who in their right mind actually believes that toxins can be injected into the earth under high pressure conditions and not come back to bite us in the ass? Haven't we tried that before only to find out that chemical toxins don't miraculously disappear?

banyon
03-17-2011, 07:23 PM
That's not the drillers putting it into the rivers, that would be the municpal water treatment plants. Your beef is with them for not doing their job if your beef exists at all.

Just stepped back in the thread...

followed penchief's link...


NEW YORK Pennsylvania's natural gas drillers are still flushing vast quantities of contaminated wastewater into rivers that supply drinking water, despite major progress by the industry over the past year in curtailing the practice.

Under pressure from environmentalists and state officials, energy companies that have been drilling thousands of gas wells in the state's countryside spent part of 2010 overhauling the way they handle the chemically tainted and sometimes radioactive water that gushes from the ground after a drilling technique known as high-volume hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

Until the second half of last year, Pennsylvania had been the only state to allow most of this wastewater to be discharged into rivers after only partial treatment. Other states required most or all of the brine to be disposed of by injecting it deep underground.

:hmmm:

notorious
03-17-2011, 08:41 PM
Guess what? You just BEAT him; seriously. If you think, for a minute, the growing disparity of wealth is not politically significant, you are a really big douche--worthy of the "biggest POS" on CP this year. Hell, you won...without a real competition. Just sayin'.

LMAO

Yeah, Healthpellets beat "notorious"....badly; it isn't even close. Not remotely. Just sayin'. Wow. Heh. LMAO

The OP Pie Chart has a huge error, hence the pile of shit comment.


No ill will against HP, he just posted a pie chart that states that the US is a "Democracy" for ****s sakes.

We all make mistakes here on CP, and I make more then my fair share, but the beauty of this site is the colorful ways in which posters point out errors.


Besides, it's not like I was trying to beat HP, or trying to get under the skin of "Teacher of the Year".

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 10:12 PM
Did you even read the story? So you won't mind new regulations that prevent them for doing it further?

And what about Dimrock? Still contend that ground wells haven't been contaminated?

Logically, who in their right mind actually believes that toxins can be injected into the earth under high pressure conditions and not come back to bite us in the ass? Haven't we tried that before only to find out that chemical toxins don't miraculously disappear?

It's Dimock and they hit a shallow gas pocket. It had nothing to do with HF. In fact, Dimock has a long history of biogenic methane in their well water.

The assertion that HF can cause migration through the microfractures in the shale is preposterous. Opponents have purposefully conflated issues from well design and casing failures, incidental gas kicks and other regulated practices, literally blaming every incidence and problem within a basin on HF.

The EPA found in 1995 and again in 2004 that there was no risk posed by the practice of HF. The current and former head of the Pennsylvania DEQ have stated that there is no threat of contamination from the use of HF.

The state of PA has addressed the issues related to oversight and permitting as well as pretreatment of produced wastewater before treatment in publicly owned treatment works. The industry is increasingly moving towards recycling chemicals and the reason they don't use underground injection in PA is because they 1. don't have the abundance of geologic formation for it and 2. the geology that does support underground injection is already being used for carbon sequestration.

These formations are miles, MILES, below the drinking water table. If you think that the geology that has served as a caprock for natural gas for eons is going to be phased by high pressure water you are on crack. The pressure used for HF, the maximum they can achieve, usually only fractures up to 6 feet away from the horizontal well bore. That leaves, oh...I don't know...roughly 3 miles of rock to crack before getting to drinking water. Consider, how thick is the concrete that keeps the Hudson River out of the Lincoln Tunnel? Do you think that water pressure can actually crack miles of rock?

Logically, who thinks that pressurized water can break miles of rock? The pressure required would blow out any vessel pumping the water long before the earth gave way. So...logically....

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 10:16 PM
Just stepped back in the thread...

followed penchief's link...




:hmmm:

Again, I addressed this. The CWA stipulates that a properly equipped and permitted water treatment facility is qualified to treat wastewater from those operations. It is incumbant upon those treatment facilities to conduct adequate pre treatment and post treatment measures to ensure their levels of total dissolved solids are within the state and federal guidelines. Since the incidents in question the state of PA has revised their permitting process, inspected those treatment facilities and begun moving forward with responsible treatment of wastewater.

They can't use the underground injection process in PA because they have very little appropriate geology for it and what they do have is being used for carbon sequestration.

I don't blame you guys for buying this stuff, it is piss poor reporting and fails even the most basic of journalistic standards.

banyon
03-17-2011, 10:20 PM
It's Dimock and they hit a shallow gas pocket. It had nothing to do with HF. In fact, Dimock has a long history of biogenic methane in their well water.

The assertion that HF can cause migration through the microfractures in the shale is preposterous. Opponents have purposefully conflated issues from well design and casing failures, incidental gas kicks and other regulated practices, literally blaming every incidence and problem within a basin on HF.

The EPA found in 1995 and again in 2004 that there was no risk posed by the practice of HF. The current and former head of the Pennsylvania DEQ have stated that there is no threat of contamination from the use of HF.

The state of PA has addressed the issues related to oversight and permitting as well as pretreatment of produced wastewater before treatment in publicly owned treatment works. The industry is increasingly moving towards recycling chemicals and the reason they don't use underground injection in PA is because they 1. don't have the abundance of geologic formation for it and 2. the geology that does support underground injection is already being used for carbon sequestration.

These formations are miles, MILES, below the drinking water table. If you think that the geology that has served as a caprock for natural gas for eons is going to be phased by high pressure water you are on crack. The pressure used for HF, the maximum they can achieve, usually only fractures up to 6 feet away from the horizontal well bore. That leaves, oh...I don't know...roughly 3 miles of rock to crack before getting to drinking water. Consider, how thick is the concrete that keeps the Hudson River out of the Lincoln Tunnel? Do you think that water pressure can actually crack miles of rock?

Logically, who thinks that pressurized water can break miles of rock? The pressure required would blow out any vessel pumping the water long before the earth gave way. So...logically....

You just won't carefully read anything you think might go against your preconceptions, huh?

The article (and my neatly summarized recap that you didn't bother to read either) didn't allege that the hydraulic fracking process itself was unsafe. It alleged that the runoff waste water wasn't being disposed in a safe manner. And since it is runoff we are talking about it has nothing to do with the local treatment plant.

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 10:31 PM
You just won't carefully read anything you think might go against your preconceptions, huh?

The article (and my neatly summarized recap that you didn't bother to read either) didn't allege that the hydraulic fracking process itself was unsafe. It alleged that the runoff waste water wasn't being disposed in a safe manner. And since it is runoff we are talking about it has nothing to do with the local treatment plant.

Yeah, the article is wrong. That produced water is regulated under the Clean Water Act so it is either a diminimis amount that doesn't meet the threshold standard to qualify or they're being cited under the CWA or it is produced water that is being treated and discharged from a certified wastewater treatment facility. I concluded, based on the history of development in the region the author of the article was inartfully referring to one of the wastewater treatment facility discharges that wasn't properly treated and resulted in a brief water advisory downstream. If that wasn't the case in question then my bad but, again, I know what's going on up there, better than the author of that piece frankly and at best his piece is misleading and vague. At worst he's flat wrong and lying about it. I purposefully used the word conflated in my previous post. It's there for a reason.

Of course it would be totally unlike the news press, particularly a contributor to the HuffPost's greenpages, that paragon of objectivity, to invoke hyperbole into such a story to stir emotion? Since that could never happen...

RaiderH8r
03-17-2011, 10:36 PM
Sorry for the derail. I'll get back to the regularly scheduled program.

America, F@@K YEAH!

healthpellets
03-17-2011, 11:17 PM
why do people gripe about wealth distribution when wealth is not finite?

i don't have to go rip the wealth out of Mr. Rockefeller's hands in order to get it. it's not a violent process.

i simply have to follow a number of steps to acquire wealth.

is that too much to ask for some?

BucEyedPea
03-17-2011, 11:20 PM
why do people gripe about wealth distribution when wealth is not finite?
Ya' know, I almost said this myself. Those who are obsessed with others wealth act as if they're having it is why they don't have it. It's such a fallacy



is that too much to ask for some?

Yes it is for some.

mikey23545
03-18-2011, 03:44 AM
why do people gripe about wealth distribution when wealth is not finite?



The ol' zero-sum fallacy.

It's always good for stirring up the useful idiots when you need a blood-soaked revolution followed up by a good solid tyranny.

Mr. Kotter
03-18-2011, 07:44 AM
The ol' zero-sum fallacy.

It's always good for stirring up the useful idiots when you need a blood-soaked revolution followed up by a good solid tyranny.

Zero-sum is a fallacy; but so is the notion that we can all be rich.

The privileged elite and trickle-down enthusiasts have become skilled at exploiting the ambition of the working class to inspire dreams of wealth--dreams that are, indeed, possible, even though the system is notoriously rigged in favor of those who already "have."

It's like a high stakes game of Roulette--and Americans remain gambling addicts despite their losses. And the war on the middle class marches on.

alnorth
03-18-2011, 07:53 AM
Weird. Didn't read the thread, but apparently we went from class warfare to natural gas waste treatment in just 10 pages?

Chiefsplanet posters have a lot of range.

The Mad Crapper
03-18-2011, 08:05 AM
The OP Pie Chart has a huge error, hence the pile of shit comment.


No ill will against HP, he just posted a pie chart that states that the US is a "Democracy" for ****s sakes.

We all make mistakes here on CP, and I make more then my fair share, but the beauty of this site is the colorful ways in which posters point out errors.


Besides, it's not like I was trying to beat HP, or trying to get under the skin of "Teacher of the Year".

LMAO

HonestChieffan
03-18-2011, 08:06 AM
Zero-sum is a fallacy; but so is the notion that we can all be rich.

The privileged elite and trickle-down enthusiasts have become skilled at exploiting the ambition of the working class to inspire dreams of wealth--dreams that are, indeed, possible, even though the system is notoriously rigged in favor of those who already "have."

It's like a high stakes game of Roulette--and Americans remain gambling addicts despite their losses. And the war on the middle class marches on.

I hope you are able to pass on the despair and hopelessness to your students.

The Mad Crapper
03-18-2011, 08:12 AM
Zero-sum is a fallacy; but so is the notion that we can all be rich.

The privileged elite and trickle-down enthusiasts have become skilled at exploiting the ambition of the working class to inspire dreams of wealth--dreams that are, indeed, possible, even though the system is notoriously rigged in favor of those who already "have."

It's like a high stakes game of Roulette--and Americans remain gambling addicts despite their losses. And the war on the middle class marches on.

How so, teacher of the year?

Precedence has demonstrated if you give a million dollars to a person who can't budget a welfare check, they will eventually go broke.

Take the NFL for example where the avg player makes $150,000 a year, but quite a few make millions. It doesn't matter though, because within 5 years after retiring, 80% are broke.

Some people are born with a silver spoon in their mouth, hooray for them. But the fact is they are smart enough to know how to hold onto it and make it grow. Crying about your own luck at birth, or trying to punish the haves with fronts like "justice" and "fairness" is all sour grapes.

Chief Henry
03-18-2011, 08:37 AM
If trickle down is supposed to work so well why has it always been such a miserable failure? But then again, it was never intended to benefit everyone. It is and always has been a scam to consolidate wealth and power.



Miserable failure ? Compared to what ?

Cannibal
03-18-2011, 09:37 AM
80% of the population share in 7% of the wealth, that is a staggering statistic regardless of where you reside in the political spectrum.

Color me unsurprised that people are defending the chart though. If I had to guess, those billionaires in the top 1% are very happy with those of us in the bottom 7% who are coming to their defense. We should probably cut their taxes to 0% and watch a few million more jobs go overseas.

Baby Lee
03-18-2011, 09:41 AM
If what you say is true....why is it that so many towns, cities and states across America are doing what ever they can to persuade corporations and small business owners to come to there town, city or
state to open up a factory ?

Heres how trickle down economics 101 works PC. Follow along if you can, this might confuse your LIBERAL PEA SIZED BRAIN.

Its because when a factory comes to town and hires 100 people. Those 100 people buy stuff like cars, homes, motorcycles, fishing gear and groceries.


If that business owner/corporation doesn't put capital at risk and those same 100 people employed by the factory can't buy cars, homes, motorcycles and groceries....nor can they pay property tax to help fund the local school to pay for the salary of the local school teachers who belong to the NEA. Those same 100 people employed by the bsn. owner/corporation are paying taxes to help fund all of the local pet liberal projects that gov't representatives can't say NO to.

WTF? I thought it was all about getting enough cookies when the tray comes out.

The Mad Crapper
03-18-2011, 09:44 AM
80% of the population share in 7% of the wealth, that is a staggering statistic regardless of where you reside in the political spectrum.

Color me unsurprised that people are defending the chart though. If I had to guess, those billionaires in the top 1% are very happy with those of us in the bottom 7% who are coming to their defense. We should probably cut their taxes to 0% and watch a few million more jobs go overseas.

Go look at the same pie chart for Russia and Mexico.

patteeu
03-18-2011, 09:48 AM
80% of the population share in 7% of the wealth, that is a staggering statistic regardless of where you reside in the political spectrum.

Color me unsurprised that people are defending the chart though. If I had to guess, those billionaires in the top 1% are very happy with those of us in the bottom 7% who are coming to their defense. We should probably cut their taxes to 0% and watch a few million more jobs go overseas.

What's preventing you from moving into that top 1%? Seriously. List two or three of the things holding you back.

RaiderH8r
03-18-2011, 09:53 AM
What's preventing you from moving into that top 1%? Seriously. List two or three of the things holding you back.

Intellect, ability, talent...shall I continue? :p

Chief Henry
03-18-2011, 11:01 AM
80% of the population share in 7% of the wealth, that is a staggering statistic regardless of where you reside in the political spectrum.

Color me unsurprised that people are defending the chart though. If I had to guess, those billionaires in the top 1% are very happy with those of us in the bottom 7% who are coming to their defense. We should probably cut their taxes to 0% and watch a few million more jobs go overseas.



Go out and get after some of what you are complaining others have.

patteeu
03-18-2011, 11:07 AM
Intellect, ability, talent...shall I continue? :p

No, I think you've got a pretty decent list there. I know that if I look at myself and honestly assess why I probably won't ever make it into the top 1% (not really sure where that cutoff is), those are some of the shortcomings I'll find along with lack of willingness to take risk, lack of persistent effort, choices made earlier in life and a whole lot of other things that have more to do with me than they have to do with some fat cat banker, corporate ceo, or trust fund baby.

BucEyedPea
03-18-2011, 11:12 AM
Intellect, ability, talent...shall I continue? :p

According to Sovereign Man more of those guys are leaving the country, while the opposite end of the spectrum is flooding into America.

It ain't America, no more, no more. It ain't America no more.
How in the heck can you make big bucks when it ain't America no more.

The latest news reports reconfirm a continuing trend we at the Sovereign Society have observed since our founding in 1997; the most recent U.S. State Department figures for 2010 show the total number of U.S. citizens formally ending their citizenship is rising at double previous rates.

According to one web site, the 2010 figure was 1,485, but Bloomberg News lists 1,534. In both cases, the 2010 figure appears to be about double that for any year since 2003.

We at the Sovereign Society have noted sadly that each year hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens and resident aliens have left America to make a new home in other nations, even though most of them do not renounced U.S citizenship. Admittedly, that number pales against the millions clamoring to get into the U.S., legally and otherwise.

But there’s a huge difference in the economic status of these two groups.

Although the current recession has slowed the pace, those seeking admission (or just illegally crossing our borders) are, by and large, poverty stricken persons desperately trying to better their lot with a new life in the Promised Land. They’ll settle for low-paying jobs, welfare, free education for their kids, and U.S. taxpayer subsidized housing and health care.

Those leaving are the wealthy and the talented – those who have had enough, thank you.

Reprinted with permission from Sovereign Man ( http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/bauman-b6.1.1.html)

The Mad Crapper
03-18-2011, 11:20 AM
According to Sovereign Man more of those guys are leaving the country, while the opposite end of the spectrum is flooding into America.


Exactly. You see it more clearly on a state level--- for example, NJ lost 72,000 people last year who left the state, at the same time the Hispanic population grew in percentage.

headsnap
03-18-2011, 11:27 AM
What's preventing you from moving into that top 1%? Seriously. List two or three of the things holding you back.

Mr. Kotter needs to be on that list...

RaiderH8r
03-18-2011, 11:57 AM
Go out and get after some of what you are complaining others have.

It's amazing how much the neo-communist lemmings "know" about business and the rich yet don't have the competence or the balls to actually achieve it for themselves. Stunning really.

They know about job creation and watch jobs disappear. They know why corporations flee the country yet can't get them to stay. They know how the rich got rich yet insist nobody else can do it.

The Mad Crapper
03-18-2011, 12:10 PM
It's amazing how much the neo-communist lemmings "know" about business and the rich yet don't have the competence or the balls to actually achieve it for themselves. Stunning really.

They know about job creation and watch jobs disappear. They know why corporations flee the country yet can't get them to stay. They know how the rich got rich yet insist nobody else can do it.

And most, if not all of these moonbats never missed a meal in their life. Mommy and Daddy put them through college.