its a late night, and I'm feeling chatty.
Unfettered corporate greed is liquidating Americas wealth. That's why we're shipping all our jobs to countrys unbothered by annoyances like labor, environmental and consumer safety laws. It's also, coincidentally, why we had to recall Chinese toothpaste sweetened with antifreeze and poisoned dog food (that could as easily have been bread; same grade of grain) from our grocery stores. Corporate income taxes have been reduced to such a pittance that, no, that's not the bulk of income taxes; the bulk of income tax comes from grunts doing the actual work of making the product, the ones that, as noted in Stacks suicide note, don't get the cozy loopholes and tax shelters allowed for their companies and the board members running them. My mother likes to point out that in 1992 George H. Bush paid a lower percentage income tax than she did, despite making about ten times as much and living in a house she paid to maintain. And a lot of "average Joes" don't have 401ks or mutual funds; she never did, in nearly a half century of work.
We ship jobs overseas because a person in China demands pennies compared to an American worker. Its a supply and demand problem. The world has a need for products and China has an incredible supply of labor. They can provide 5x the workers that America has, thus the decreased labor cost.
That's before we get to the Arthur Andersens, Enrons, Worldcoms etc. who let greed drive them past mere avarice into the realm of criminality, usually with no consequences to anyone save "average Joes" they formerly employed. How much is a 401k invested in Enron in 1995 worth now? Or Worldcom? Less than Arthur Andersen said it was right till the end, I promise you.
There are bad apples, like everything else in life. You cannot project onto the thousands of good companies the specter of Enron and AA. In addition, rule changes since those disasters have required corporate boards to bring in independent board members to prevent another disaster.
I dispute that, strongly. Unfortunately, for many Americans whether to get a job right out of HS or go to college isn't a choice, it's a given, and intellect or education is frequently irrelevant. The rest may ultimately do quite well, but not many will find themselves in a multi-million dollar McMansion behind a gate. A few may have, but for SOME reason those who worked their way up from the bottom seem to have no more taste for living with people who've never worked a day in their lives than the latter have for them. More often than not, from what I've seen, the "right decision" to get into the gated community was "Harvard instead of Yale. " The valedictorian of the HS class after mine got a $25,000 scholarship to Harvard; she still had to work full time because that only covered half a years tuition. Short of robbing a bank, what "right decision" would you suggest for the salutatorian to attend Harvard at $50,000/year? In 1992. No, I believe the truth is that gate and those security guards are there for a reason that has less to do with the criminal element than with basic elitism. Poll the country club next time you stop by and see how many people worked their way through college, ate a ton of student loans or (most likely if they did earn their way) both. And, no, getting a job because daddy wouldn't foot the bill doesn't count.
It is a choice, and most have chosen not to make it. Its a tough choice, I give you that, but it is possible. To digress a moment, I will use myself and my good friend as an example.
My Friend: Worked part time during undergraduate, and took out a ton in school loans. Did he party? No. Did he have disposable income to party with? No. He spent every weekend busting his tail. He did not go to an ivory league school. But he showed he was a hard worker and how dedicated he was to his field. He now works for NASA and has a "McMansion"
Myself: Worked full time graveyards during undergrad, because I refused to take out student loans. I went to school during the day. Some semesters I averaged 4hrs of sleep a day, because the classes I needed were only offered during the day. I was the first in my family to go to college. I literally ate top roman 5 days a week. It was tough, but I knew the sacrifice might pay off in the end.
Also, just because you go to school, does not mean your parents paid for it. Out of a class of 200 at my law school, less than a dozen of my schoolmates had their tuition paid for by their parents. The vast majority took out school loans or worked part/full time, such as myself. We may not have gone to an "ivory league" school, but many of us live in those "McMansions." Are we to be scorned for working our way to it?
A senior lawyer NEVER responded to the statement, "you have to think of those who are less well off" by saying, "no, I don't. " Warren Buffet surely never said, "If there's a class war in this country, my class is winning. " He's the exception though; in my experience, those who speak of class war do so only to deny it. "Methinks the lady doth protest too much. "
There are idiots everywhere, I myself am one of them. Because someone of a class makes a stupid comment does not mean we should paint all people of that class with the same brush. And in partial defense of the senior lawyer, you cannot force him to care about others. Yah, it makes him a self centered jerk, but if he does not want to, we cannot and should not make him. The village idiot does not represent the village.
Seventy plus years, eh? Those who survived the 25% unemployment of 1932 wouldn't call that decade prosperous, and the war it spawned brought rationing. My great-grandfather gratefully lay in a ditch digging ten hours a day while water froze around him, knowing if he didn't show there were ten guys waiting for his spot; so abundant was our prosperity. As I recall, it was more like Americas economy collapsed due to overspeculation, we were no longer able to loan the Central Powers (mainly Germany) money, they were no longer able to make reparations payments with interest to the Allies, and they were no longer able to pay interest on loans we made THEM during the Great War. I believe it ended in something called "World War II" with something called "the Holocaust" along the way. I not only know what happened, but have already addressed it. Would you like to address the '70s stagflation, or the hardships of Reaganomics, when the Dow posted it's worst loss since the Crash of '29 and our national deficit went from $1 trillion to $4 trillion? Supply side economics didn't work in the 21st Century, the '80s or the '20s, it simply got people to dump their earnings into unsustainable credit nightmares so those who made the loans got to take the money AND the property; the only difference now is (as stated in Stacks note) this time the taxpayers ate the banks debt. It hasn't been a seven decade boom, but a gradual consolidation of wealth nearing its logical conclusion. Nearly all the nations concrete wealth has been systematically liquidated and concentrated; all that remains is to transfer it to a numbered Swiss account and depart the empty husk. But for where...?
I was careful with my math there. 70 years. 2010-70 = 1940. The great depression ended in 1937.
Since then, we have had a pretty significant economic climb, although we have had bumps such as the early 1980s.
The capitalist economy has made the US richer than any other country by a significant margin. Are there people who have taken a loss in the market? Yes. But the majority have prospered from it.
Taxpayers bailed out the banks debt because banks made loans that were GBS (Government Backed Securites.). With the advent of Fannie and Freddie, which pushed for subprime mortgages, the risk was taken out of the equation for banks. If the loan failed the US Government PROMISED to pay you back dollar for dollar. Who would not loan out money under those terms? That was a significant reason for the collapse of the housing market and the equity of so many banks that had to be bailed out. It was initiated by government interference in the market. Prior to the subprime mortgages were far more rare because companies did not want to risk losing the bank. (Pun Intended)
Did you notice the quotes around the statement about money? The statement was from another poster on this site, and I was rebutting it as I did when he made it. Money is indeed NOT the end all be all of life, particularly fiat money. You're preaching to the choir on that one, but do you see where the sermon leads...?
I apologize, I should not have attributed the quote to you.
I tend to think riots and massive strikes that cripple the government are sure signs of disenfranchisement, but I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Preventing the strikes when they have a significant impact on the country is defensible. I understand the workers point of view, more benefits/wages, but it is difficult to support when some (not all) of their demands are extreme. In addition, if the stoppage of a few thousand cost billions of dollars a day for people all around the nation (Washington State Dock Workers), I do not think that is very fair.
Unfettered corporate greed is liquidating Americas wealth. That's why we're shipping all our jobs to countrys unbothered by annoyances like labor, environmental and consumer safety laws. It's also, coincidentally, why we had to recall Chinese toothpaste sweetened with antifreeze and poisoned dog food (that could as easily have been bread; same grade of grain) from our grocery stores. Corporate income taxes have been reduced to such a pittance that, no, that's not the bulk of income taxes; the bulk of income tax comes from grunts doing the actual work of making the product, the ones that, as noted in Stacks suicide note, don't get the cozy loopholes and tax shelters allowed for their companies and the board members running them. My mother likes to point out that in 1992 George H. Bush paid a lower percentage income tax than she did, despite making about ten times as much and living in a house she paid to maintain. And a lot of "average Joes" don't have 401ks or mutual funds; she never did, in nearly a half century of work.
We ship jobs overseas because a person in China demands pennies compared to an American worker. Its a supply and demand problem. The world has a need for products and China has an incredible supply of labor. They can provide 5x the workers that America has, thus the decreased labor cost.
That's before we get to the Arthur Andersens, Enrons, Worldcoms etc. who let greed drive them past mere avarice into the realm of criminality, usually with no consequences to anyone save "average Joes" they formerly employed. How much is a 401k invested in Enron in 1995 worth now? Or Worldcom? Less than Arthur Andersen said it was right till the end, I promise you.
There are bad apples, like everything else in life. You cannot project onto the thousands of good companies the specter of Enron and AA. In addition, rule changes since those disasters have required corporate boards to bring in independent board members to prevent another disaster.
I dispute that, strongly. Unfortunately, for many Americans whether to get a job right out of HS or go to college isn't a choice, it's a given, and intellect or education is frequently irrelevant. The rest may ultimately do quite well, but not many will find themselves in a multi-million dollar McMansion behind a gate. A few may have, but for SOME reason those who worked their way up from the bottom seem to have no more taste for living with people who've never worked a day in their lives than the latter have for them. More often than not, from what I've seen, the "right decision" to get into the gated community was "Harvard instead of Yale. " The valedictorian of the HS class after mine got a $25,000 scholarship to Harvard; she still had to work full time because that only covered half a years tuition. Short of robbing a bank, what "right decision" would you suggest for the salutatorian to attend Harvard at $50,000/year? In 1992. No, I believe the truth is that gate and those security guards are there for a reason that has less to do with the criminal element than with basic elitism. Poll the country club next time you stop by and see how many people worked their way through college, ate a ton of student loans or (most likely if they did earn their way) both. And, no, getting a job because daddy wouldn't foot the bill doesn't count.
It is a choice, and most have chosen not to make it. Its a tough choice, I give you that, but it is possible. To digress a moment, I will use myself and my good friend as an example.
My Friend: Worked part time during undergraduate, and took out a ton in school loans. Did he party? No. Did he have disposable income to party with? No. He spent every weekend busting his tail. He did not go to an ivory league school. But he showed he was a hard worker and how dedicated he was to his field. He now works for NASA and has a "McMansion"
Myself: Worked full time graveyards during undergrad, because I refused to take out student loans. I went to school during the day. Some semesters I averaged 4hrs of sleep a day, because the classes I needed were only offered during the day. I was the first in my family to go to college. I literally ate top roman 5 days a week. It was tough, but I knew the sacrifice might pay off in the end.
Also, just because you go to school, does not mean your parents paid for it. Out of a class of 200 at my law school, less than a dozen of my schoolmates had their tuition paid for by their parents. The vast majority took out school loans or worked part/full time, such as myself. We may not have gone to an "ivory league" school, but many of us live in those "McMansions." Are we to be scorned for working our way to it?
A senior lawyer NEVER responded to the statement, "you have to think of those who are less well off" by saying, "no, I don't. " Warren Buffet surely never said, "If there's a class war in this country, my class is winning. " He's the exception though; in my experience, those who speak of class war do so only to deny it. "Methinks the lady doth protest too much. "
There are idiots everywhere, I myself am one of them. Because someone of a class makes a stupid comment does not mean we should paint all people of that class with the same brush. And in partial defense of the senior lawyer, you cannot force him to care about others. Yah, it makes him a self centered jerk, but if he does not want to, we cannot and should not make him. The village idiot does not represent the village.
Seventy plus years, eh? Those who survived the 25% unemployment of 1932 wouldn't call that decade prosperous, and the war it spawned brought rationing. My great-grandfather gratefully lay in a ditch digging ten hours a day while water froze around him, knowing if he didn't show there were ten guys waiting for his spot; so abundant was our prosperity. As I recall, it was more like Americas economy collapsed due to overspeculation, we were no longer able to loan the Central Powers (mainly Germany) money, they were no longer able to make reparations payments with interest to the Allies, and they were no longer able to pay interest on loans we made THEM during the Great War. I believe it ended in something called "World War II" with something called "the Holocaust" along the way. I not only know what happened, but have already addressed it. Would you like to address the '70s stagflation, or the hardships of Reaganomics, when the Dow posted it's worst loss since the Crash of '29 and our national deficit went from $1 trillion to $4 trillion? Supply side economics didn't work in the 21st Century, the '80s or the '20s, it simply got people to dump their earnings into unsustainable credit nightmares so those who made the loans got to take the money AND the property; the only difference now is (as stated in Stacks note) this time the taxpayers ate the banks debt. It hasn't been a seven decade boom, but a gradual consolidation of wealth nearing its logical conclusion. Nearly all the nations concrete wealth has been systematically liquidated and concentrated; all that remains is to transfer it to a numbered Swiss account and depart the empty husk. But for where...?
I was careful with my math there. 70 years. 2010-70 = 1940. The great depression ended in 1937.
Since then, we have had a pretty significant economic climb, although we have had bumps such as the early 1980s.
The capitalist economy has made the US richer than any other country by a significant margin. Are there people who have taken a loss in the market? Yes. But the majority have prospered from it.
Taxpayers bailed out the banks debt because banks made loans that were GBS (Government Backed Securites.). With the advent of Fannie and Freddie, which pushed for subprime mortgages, the risk was taken out of the equation for banks. If the loan failed the US Government PROMISED to pay you back dollar for dollar. Who would not loan out money under those terms? That was a significant reason for the collapse of the housing market and the equity of so many banks that had to be bailed out. It was initiated by government interference in the market. Prior to the subprime mortgages were far more rare because companies did not want to risk losing the bank. (Pun Intended)
Did you notice the quotes around the statement about money? The statement was from another poster on this site, and I was rebutting it as I did when he made it. Money is indeed NOT the end all be all of life, particularly fiat money. You're preaching to the choir on that one, but do you see where the sermon leads...?
I apologize, I should not have attributed the quote to you.
I would not say riots and strikes equal disenfranchisement; indeed, I think the government declaring a strike illegal and firing workers much more so (not that I support the coal strike of '46; that was LABOR greed. ) It cuts the heart out of any strike to say, "If you start making an impact the government will disallow your strike. " While the situation as you describe it sounds extreme, I don't think guaranteed employment once you find employment is disenfranchising either. I've done everything required and requested of me, am one of if not the best workers in my area, and may not have a job at the end of next week, but I can't even get the person who made that decision (who doesn't work for my company) to discuss it. Speak to me of disenfranchisement.
I tend to think riots and massive strikes that cripple the government are sure signs of disenfranchisement, but I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Preventing the strikes when they have a significant impact on the country is defensible. I understand the workers point of view, more benefits/wages, but it is difficult to support when some (not all) of their demands are extreme. In addition, if the stoppage of a few thousand cost billions of dollars a day for people all around the nation (Washington State Dock Workers), I do not think that is very fair.
Plane Crash Suspect's Online Diatribe
- 18/02/2010 08:50:36 PM
936 Views
Definately not to start a fight about anything regarding anything....
- 18/02/2010 11:05:50 PM
551 Views
We'll never know his ultimate motivation for sure but I suspect he would take great pleasure in...
- 19/02/2010 12:47:22 AM
468 Views
He made his motivation chillingly clear.
- 19/02/2010 03:22:28 AM
393 Views
It's a growing sentiment in TX and other "red" states....
- 19/02/2010 04:03:00 AM
416 Views
Ya'll realize dude ended his suicide note by quoting Marx, right?
- 19/02/2010 04:42:01 AM
581 Views
I had to drive by there yesterday...
- 19/02/2010 03:17:42 AM
412 Views
I have to respond.
- 19/02/2010 04:38:40 AM
592 Views
one point
- 19/02/2010 05:30:46 AM
478 Views
With subsidies and tax breaks some pay negative taxes despite healthy profits.
- 19/02/2010 05:52:40 AM
340 Views
Re: one point
- 19/02/2010 06:07:42 AM
365 Views
bankruptcy is hardly a bailout
- 19/02/2010 06:48:02 AM
370 Views
besides...
- 20/02/2010 12:58:55 AM
487 Views
A LOT of things are different depending on whether a corporation or human being does them.
- 23/02/2010 11:41:15 PM
374 Views
Welcome to the fray. 
- 19/02/2010 05:49:08 AM
485 Views
- 19/02/2010 05:49:08 AM
485 Views
I couldn't sleep.
- 19/02/2010 07:07:34 AM
419 Views
Not to endorse Joel's love declaration to socialism, but you're not exactly one to talk re: strawmen
- 19/02/2010 04:21:50 PM
504 Views
There is a huge difference between greed and motivation, drive, and ingenuity.
- 20/02/2010 01:07:12 AM
389 Views
Then fucking go already, and stop trying to impose this dream society on the rest of us
- 19/02/2010 02:21:30 PM
587 Views
When you work for the IRS you take your chances.
- 19/02/2010 02:23:00 PM
453 Views
are you fucking kidding me?
- 19/02/2010 02:34:11 PM
409 Views
Yes, because you are so easy, and I am out of shoe-throwing range.
- 19/02/2010 02:46:27 PM
471 Views
Re: Yes, because you are so easy, and I am out of shoe-throwing range.
- 19/02/2010 03:00:56 PM
421 Views
are you real person?
- 22/02/2010 04:40:28 PM
441 Views
It can be hard to tell.
- 23/02/2010 11:09:51 PM
393 Views
So I guess that makes it 80-1 for the month of February.
- 19/02/2010 08:42:15 PM
517 Views
As charming as ever I see. *NM*
- 20/02/2010 01:08:22 AM
179 Views
Look, I think Dragonsoul take the Muslim thing too far occasionally
- 20/02/2010 05:40:58 AM
417 Views
Weak is all hes got.
- 20/02/2010 08:36:27 AM
391 Views
I've noticed that while everynametaken is a quality poster...
- 20/02/2010 10:14:09 PM
430 Views
I find that he tends to do it when he wants to argue a cause...
- 20/02/2010 10:16:50 PM
395 Views
I don't bother with you because you don't actually want to hear what I or anyone else has to say.
- 21/02/2010 12:37:40 AM
408 Views
In denial much?
- 21/02/2010 01:38:31 AM
549 Views
Again, if you think thereligionofpeace.com is a serious source then you are simply sad.
- 22/02/2010 01:06:55 AM
529 Views
Is it?
- 20/02/2010 10:26:16 PM
405 Views
Exactly. Besides that I don't take his source as a source at all.
- 21/02/2010 12:21:15 AM
409 Views
Well that's quite selective.
- 21/02/2010 12:35:07 AM
421 Views
Whoopty-fucking-doo!
- 21/02/2010 12:42:28 AM
447 Views
If Dragonsoul brought it up out of nowhere, then it's not an issue
- 22/02/2010 11:12:57 PM
455 Views