This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Why Everyone Hates You – A Guide For Politicians
Submitted by Mark McHugh from Across The Street
Why Everyone Hates You – A Guide For Politicians
The US Congress is welcoming 112 new members this week.
Congratulations, if you’re on of them. Now get this through your thick,
newbie head. No one likes you. No one thinks you’re smart. Chances
are you got the only reason you got this gig is because your predecessor
couldn’t follow simple instructions. So stop thinking of yourself as a
champion of __________ or the protector of _________. You’re hired help, nothing more, nothing less.
The Parable of the Lousy Waitress
Once upon a time, there was a beautiful waitress (with ample bosoms)
who believed in holistic medicine or something. Whenever a customer
ordered coffee, eggs and toast, she brought orange juice, tofu-spinach
quiche, and healing crystals to unblock their Chi. People got pissed, so she got canned and became a crack whore. The End
Before you start taking pointers from the 423 members of Congress
that we haven’t voted out yet, make sure you understand the difference
between eggs and tofu-spinach quiche, because that is the essence of
America’s growing animosity towards its elected officials: They don’t
listen. Right now, I’ll bet you’re thinking “You’ve never tried my quiche.” And that’s why we hate you.
Time and time again our elected officials have taken it upon
themselves to decide what’s best for us, completely ignoring the will of
the people. Quiche, quiche and more quiche. It’s getting old. We
never authorized congress to make future generations debt slaves. We
never said it was OK for you to grope us at the airport, or photograph
our kids nude. Funny but I don’t recall even being asked.
As quickly as Hank Paulson managed to cram TARP through, Americans were still asked about it. We said, “NO!” 53% of Americans agreed “A
government bailout of the financial industry would burden American
taxpayers and only help the financial institutions that are failing.” CBS poll – question 50.
Only 34% felt the bailout necessary. If you’re a new member of
congress, chances are you’re sitting in the very seat your predecessor
peed in when he decided to vote for TARP.
Fun Fact: TARP never happened. The money authorized to purchases troubled assets was never used for that purpose. Yet
some members of Congress are still inclined to comment on the success
of TARP. I guess they’re referring to the “bait and switch” they fell
for, which is kind of like saying “good thing I fumbled, huh?”
In January 2010, the Senate confirmed the re-appointment of Ben Bernanke as Chairman of the Federal Reserve, despite a 21% approval rating. All kidding aside, there are few jobs in this world with more clear-cut directives, yet
this egghead managed to screw up these very simple tasks and bring the
world to the brink of collapse. Be sure to thank your colleagues for
reappointing him so he could finish the job. We may as well be praying
to crystals at this point….
Enough about the past though. Let’s turn our attention to the next loogie in our eye. 60 Minutes just did a poll January 3 asking “What would you do first to balance the budget?”. Here’s the results:
It doesn’t get any simpler than that, does it? The only question the 112th Congress should be asking is, “How would you like those eggs?” But
instead, like the lousy waitress, they’ll imagine themselves smarter
than the rest of us and start rationalizing that what we really need is
some nice quiche.
And that’s why.
»
- 5545 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Cynically speaking, it's quite possible their predecessors lost their jobs trying to do the right thing.
Indeed...seeing as how law is not enforced (at least at the higher levels) there's not much point in creating new ones.
I have long felt all we really need in positions of leadership is people who are at least as smart and incorruptible as the ordinary poster here at ZH.
Failing the intelligence test, I would settle for just the incorruptible part ;-)
Bring back medieval punishments for politicians who practice corruption (stocks, the walk of shame, a few years in a real prison ect), but pay them a lot more. That way only honest capable people will even bother to run.
If a doctor was intentionally killing their patients in order to make some money they would go to jail, when politicians kill their constituants through their corruption and incompitence nobody blames them.
sorry it dont work that way.
http://www.bamboo-delight.com/download/Cure_Cancer_with_Baking_Soda.htm
http://www.bamboo-delight.com/Anti-Jew%20Medicine.htm
that baking soda article was actually quite an interesting read.
But as Jack Welch says in his management books: given a smart, capable employee who doesn't "get" or clashes with the corporate culture vs. a not so smart or capable employee who does "get" the corporate culture....you go with the later, every time.
Same criteria applies to those who are effective in D.C....to our detriment of course but to the glory of the state.
"Same criteria applies to those who are effective in D.C....to our detriment of course but to the glory of the state."
Exactly Merc.
Lord Acton's quote about power and corruptibility does not mention personal corruptibility...I think that was intentional.
The Republic is in free fall. Everyone is looking at their watch asking when is Elvis going to leave the building. Anyone lucky enough to get elected is saying; 'OK. I got two years to make as much money for myself, my family, my friends and whoever owns me back in my state/district.' There is no statecraft going on. They are working on the Mayan 2012 end of time calendar. Its a kleptocracy. Are any banks really being punished? Are derivatives being regulated? As commodities being manipulated? Is the whole fraud-closure mess going to covered up? What is getting better? Watch the debt ceiling vote. That is all you need to know.
Correlation between campaign funding levels and voting for the will of the people = zero.
72% are saying 'eat the rich' - fuk It's over
I guess no1 got the memo thave even if we taxed Everybody at 100% the budget still would not be balanced
And what happens when you run out of the 'rich' or the rich run out on you ? No1 though of that huh, as if the rich where growing on trees
Certain pols say 250k is rich...LOL.
In a few years they will have to say 100k is rich...then 50k...then 20k...no one stops to wonder why this is.
A parasite does not think of the health of the host but you would think a higher form of parasite would ;-)
Actually, most parasites are smart enough not to kill the host. Look it up.
Actually, parasites, if they don't kill the host outright, make the host deathly ill through different diseases...kinda like our economy (the host)...and you don't have to look it up...just look around ;-)
And if welfare checks keep up with inflation, the unemployed will be getting 100k a year. Damn those rich welfare check collectors! They must be taxed! Oh wait...
Those poll numbers still show that "We the People" are still not recognizing the magnitude of the problem. We could tax the rich at 100%, and it wouldn't begin to cover the deficits. Until we deal with entitlement spending, we're just hacking at branches instead of getting to the root of the problem.
As long as those polls show that Americans want to redistribute the wealth, we haven't awakened yet to reality and the awfulness of our situation. Redistribution of wealth is just an society-wide violation of the commandments, "Thou shalt not covet" and "Thou shalt not steal".
"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If `Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free." -- John Adams (A Defense of the American Constitutions, 1787)
.. now I get it you're a Mormon posting from a barn that's why you have IE4
He is WAY safe from all the websploits that whack IE 8,7,6,5!
Hackers will have to go dig up sanscrit tablets at the sunsite archive to code a sploit for that dino...
I don't think you get the concept...you can't tax the rich to balance the budget. You tax the rich to the point that they begin to feel like the non-rich. Then they begin to think twice about giving money to re-elect these assholes. Of course, this is why it won't happen. Although stupid, the pols are not suicidal. They remember the reaction to Jimmy Carter.
You now pay 50% income tax in England.
My Dad left England in 1979 because he was paying 88% income tax (not a typo).
He left in 79 and the UK has not earned a penny from him since. Additionally, neither me nor my brother have ever paid taxes in the UK as we are now ex-pats earning and paying elsewhere.
Lose one....lose them all...
High taxes are the worst thing for any economy.
I very much would like to see Lloyd Blankfein be faced with a similiar choice. And good riddance if he leaves.
You can spend your life running to places that run deficits for the benefit of the rich, as America has done for thirty years if you want, but at some point you either pay up or leave. Good luck in your quest for a new fallback country.
The ability of governments to run deficits is, of course, the issue here.
Let me give you one example: General Electric - American Dinosaur. Half a Trillion in debt (some of which is guaranteed by taxpayers), pays 0$ (not a typo) US tax, while collecting tens of billions a year in government contracts (without which, they are instantly bankcrupt). Sucking up resources, and impeding the survival of the fittest mechanism that makes capitalism work.
They employ many high-priced scientists who also hate paying taxes. My question is at what point do we stop seeing them as scientists and start seeing them as welfare cases? And if they left, would we notice?
GE is a welfare recipient who happens to dress in nice suits -- which we pay for. Google has pretty much got that pesky income tax problem beat as well.
These are a particularly virulent form of parasite.
IE4? I guess you'd be way ahead of me if I touted sealing wax and buggy whips as good investments.
...and because underneath you're all the same.
The job is a setup. Federal spending is designed to overspend, because treasuries are the basis of our monetary system. They don't budget. They put together these enormous spending bills, then add whatever it takes to get enough legislators to vote for it and then the president can only sign or veto it. That's not budgeting, that's negotiating with a fat kid over how many candy bars he can have, if he eats the Happy Meal.
To budget is to list your priorities and spend what you can afford.
If they wanted to actually budget, they could break these bills down to their individual items and then have every legislators assign a percentage value to each one. Then reassemble the bill in order of preference and have the president draw the line at what could be afforded. There would be little incentive to overspend because those paying for the few items on the line would be much greater than those benefiting from them.
Of course this would crash our entire monetary system, because the laws of supply and demand also apply to capital and without sufficient demand for it, ie. borrowing, there would be no way to create this illusion of enormous wealth.
Of course, we could go to a system of local public banking, in which wealth generated by the community is invested back into the community, by those who know the community and the profits used to fund local public spending, not just line the pockets of bankers.
Money is a form of communal contract and when there is more money than value being producted by the community, then its value goes down, unless we create those bubbles of surplus borrowing and then wars break out when the bubble pops and the creditors demand blood from the debtors.
Money is a tool. Use it wisely, or it will cut your hand off. It's not some god you can pray to and it will ignore you.
The financial system is the circulatory system of the economy. When it is in private hands, then the rest of the economy works for those who own this system. Once upon a time, the political system was privately run. It was called monarchy and those who thought democracy could never work railed against mob rule, yet we have managed to make political power a public trust. It's time to do the same with the monetary system.
good post but i disagree with your conclusion. a public trust is a weak vehicle at best. better to just put the monetary system back into the hands of the market. actually if you think about it, the market, as long as its sanctity remains unviolated (e.i. no gov't intervention), is the ultimate public trust. let the market decide what it wants to be money and let the bankers sink or swim on their own... they will get real honest real fast.
The problem is that a currency needs a guarantee. It provides the foundation for a market, so if you make the entity guaranteeing that currency a private corporate entity, then the rest of the market effectively works for that party and that's what we have now.
If we put it in biological terms, the political system is analogous to the central nervous system, while the financial system is analogous to the circulatory system. Plants do not need a central nervous system because they have no need to navigate, but to the extent they function as a singular multi celled organism, they need a circulatory system. If you look at basic tribal cultures, they tend to have a more developed trading process than they have a developed political process. So finance is as or more fundamental than politics
Think of money as being similar to a road system. It's the mutual interchangeability which makes it function. That the dollar in your pocket has the same value as any other is what makes it function and it means these units are all part of a larger economic entity. When you make that institution some form of private structure, then that money really belongs to that private party, not you. Just as the money now belongs to the Federal government/Federal Reserve. Just try printing some, if you doubt who owns the copyrights.
The fact is that society and the economy is like a house. There are private rooms and there are family/public rooms. Roads, parks, government buildings, etc. are the public areas. If people understood that money was actually a form of public commons, they would be far more careful what value they take from social connections and private resources to convert into money. This would result in stronger communities, less waste of resources and a more stable money and economy, while reducing the power of government and banking.
Money has no value other than as a contract, by everyone using it, with everyone using it. If there is widespread cheating and coercion, then the contract looses value. If you have a situation where such basic contracts cannot be maintained, you will not have a very viable economy. It is similar to disease in a body.
you are correct.
and that is why we can accurately predict that if the market were allowed to decide, it would choose a commodity backed currency, backed by something like precious metals, which it has historically chosen innumerable times, and coincidentally led to stable economies with almost no inflation.
That is the reset position. Then they start with gold certificates and the whole structure of contract builds itself back up again, then cheating starts around the edges and finally destroys the whole system, etc.....
You would think by now that those who take the time to even consider the thicket we have landed in would have gleaned that the existing paradigms DO NOT FUCKING WORK! Taxes, employment, culture, society, redistribution, rich vs poor, man vs woman, old vs. young, black vs othe colors, china vs US---the entire adversarial paradigm has ceased being useful---these are all being derived from base 10 when the demands of 6.9 billion people are at base 100.
An entirely NEW way of thinking about the seemingly insoluble problem of 6.9 billion people needs original thought leaders and actors who will, if not immediately, then gradually, take our country, our people in a plodding, meandering, danger filled journey to the promised land.
The newbies are the only ones who can even begin this quest. Without that, we are doomed to a meager existence if not born bright and talented. It was always so, but a confluence of events that will never be repeated at the turn of the last century when manual labor could employ the average issue of average parents and grandparents is gone. There are simply 4 billion too many average or far below average breeders in this world that need something to do or otherwise be sustained if they are not wiped out in some pandemic.
The established interests need overthrown if they are not going to adapt. If they can't be overthrown then they need to be assassinated.
Oh yeah, I forgot, competition is the root of all of our problems... </sarcasm>
Hello, I'm from the government. I'm here to help.
Then let me be the first one to offer you a big warm fuzzy ZH Fuck You!
Tell you what. I'll make you a deal. I'll agree to tax the wealthy if you agree to tax the SUPER wealthy. We'll start with the Vatican, and all their ill-gotten gains. Next we'll go after all the foundations, where the Soros, Buffets, and Gates of the world squirrel away their wealth from the taxman. And third, we'll go after all the shareholders of the FED. For every year the US Budget is not balanced, taxes on these folks go up 10%.
http://www.youtube.com/user/BrotherJohnF?feature=mhum
+ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
Just think of the revenues for municipalities, counties, and States if they taxed the non-profits and "church properties" which include apartment and office buildings.
Sigh....
Tyler, did a politician took your reserved parking space?
Damn well said, Mr. McHugh. Short, sweet, visual, and directly on target.
The question going forward is...how does Average Joe reach those Tea Party members sitting in urine soaked seats? Communicating with them will become important, as more and more of them will be elected.
Don't have an answer...mostly just wanted to tip my hat, sir.
cdad
Thanks Cdad,
I wanted to write more (always do), but there's no sense in beating up a point to people who can connect the dots themselves.
I still think there's a lot of people who don't understand which way the "wealth transfer" actually flows. The public debt ends up in the pockets of the very rich because of their parasitic nature, not because these people drive the economy.
I very much enjoy this video that George Washington linked to the other day of Michael Hudson:
http://www.therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=6000
there is fundamentally no way that higher taxes on the top 1% or on any group you want to pick can lead to "higher productivity". taxes are consumption, period. there is no effective reinvestment in the economy through taxes; what reinvestment there is is virtually guaranteed to be malinvestment. lower taxes on anyone and everyone lead to higher productivity -- end of story.
And what parallel universe did these conclusions come from....
You want higher productivity? Repeal child labor laws.
Our deficit is running at a 500 dollars per person per month clip. So what's the "productivity" factor of a family of four going two grand further in the hole month after month after month?
Way to completely misframe the discussion! Maybe you should be on CNBS.
Mark,
to start with, your assertion that the majoritymob knows best is unsupportable.
your expert, Michael Hudson, who asserts that increased taxation of the top 1% of earners will lead to "higher productivity" is a deluded idiot.
the second tier of your survey, those who chose "cut government spending" were correct.
don't think i am what CNBC is looking for.
Apparently, there's quite a bit of elitist in you. Where do I assert that the so-called "Majoritymob" knows best? I don't. What I do assert is that our country should be self-determining. So if 75% of the us decide to tax left-handed people more, that's what we should do.
Understand this - the rich are rich because they don't like to spend money creating things of value. They look for ways to outsource jobs, not create them, so they can get fatter. The easiest way to avoid the "rich tax" is by not making yourself rich. That means you spend the money, building things, creating jobs that pay decent wages. That is what makes a human being valuable to society.
Shitbags like Blankfein just want to see how many zeros they can have on their bank accounts, because it's the closest they'll ever come to feeling like men.
Mark, I know why the rich are rich. I also know that because they are rich, they have undo influence in the political process, and even if a tax increase on them were passed, there would be plenty of loopholes so that the only ones that actually paid more taxes, if any, would be the very ones who actually earn their money doing something useful. You said it yourself a few comments above, about which way the "wealth transfer flows". These people's ancestors spent a lot of time, energy and money setting up these wealth transfer flows, and they are not just going to hang their heads and start forking up income tax money because the rabble think they should.
Your assertion that if 75% of us decide to tax left-handed people more, then we should do it, is the kind of thinking that has led us to this situation. This blatant disregard for property rights is the driving mechanism behind the Progressive movement. Do you believe that the Rockefellers, Morgans, and Carnegies actually believe in any of this Progressive drivel? You are a fool if you do. These Progressive ideals are touted by the rich because they need some compelling reason to get the masses to accept the pervasive and persistent theft of a great portion of the fruits of their labors. It helps that the fools believe that this theft is occurring consistently across the economic spectrum, but you and I surely know that this is not the case.
I agree with you that most of the wealth that most of the wealthy have is ill-gotten gains, and by all rights should be confiscated and returned to its rightful owners or their descendents. But this needs to happen in a court of law, not by an expansion of the process of public theft of private property.
What needs to happen in this country is that smart guys like you start realizing that the problem is that Progressivism is a scam. In today's environment, if you espouse this view, you are immediately vilified as a racist or a far right wingnut. But when enough opinion shapers start realizing this and talking about it, eventually it will become a widespread opinion, and then you will have 75% of your survey saying "get government out of our day-to-day lives, let us keep our money and we will do just fine."
Sorry to sound dumb, but I honestly don't know what "Progressivism" is supposed to be. That's not me being funny, I don't know.
I trust the American collective. I once heard that planes are off course 95% of the time, but they still manage to reach their destination. I want the people to decide what's a scam and what isn't.
Well, let me know how that works out for you.
It's because we don't have democracy in this country, we choose between two parties whose make up is determined by the same people. this eliminates choice.
we have a kleptocracy oligarchy, which is why they are hated. they know this so are rapidly expanding th domestic security apparatus so they son't ever loose control
It has little to do with that.
Once again, it is hard to understand US citizens.
They fought for the representative type of government known as a republic (democracy is a political ideology)
Yet when they got it, they are unsatisfied with it. Very strange behaviour. A strong sign of duplicity.
A representative system is always sold as representatives rooting for the best interests of the represented. This is how it is marketed to work.
The reality is that the represented always end with being forced to root for the representatives' best interests.
The representatives system is sold as representatives aligning on the represented's best interests and in reality, it is the reverse: the represented have to align on the representatives'best interets?
The author of the article is the one who did not get it. The US republic is perfectly functional and works as expected. His expectations are unproper and he does not learn.
The politicians favour a war because it suits their best interests? The public does not? In a republic, the public is the one that must align.
This is how you thrive in a republic: by aligning your best interets on the representatives' best interests. Of course, until the day you can no longer. From which point you are toasted. But at this point, you might have made up your mind on the republic type of government and accept the consequences.
Something the US citizens seem unable to do.
Fail.
A Representative republic could enshrine any particular philosophy in its constitution. Said constitution can be as authoritarian or as freedom protecting as its writers want.
The weak link with any form of representative government is if those electing the officials ignore / disassociated the philosophy the constitutional document (and by inference, the government) is intended to protect.
In the U.S., individual liberty and the rights to the fruits thereof was the philosophy the primary author of the document was intending to protect. Where it erred was by not extending such / full protections to slaves and women.
Democracy should not be confused with freedom. Yet so many are either totally illiterate or completely maleducated by government schools to the point where both groups assume you can use the words interchangeably. Complete and utter dipshittery.
Democracy can be entirely authoritarian and can terrorize minorities left and right. The ignorance of the masses can be manipulated to no end by those very adept at working the levers of power. (Good God, the best argument against Democracy is a 5 minute converation with the average voter...)
A republic with an political body willing to protec individual liberty is one thing. What we have is a republic breaking down to partial populist democracy mixed with rapacious corporatism, with the banking-polical nexus at the top.
Forsake individual liberty as voters, and that is what you get. Period.
How do you solve it? Add a Consensualism Clause to the constitution, which protects each and every citizens right to consent or not to intrusions on his/her body and the fruits obtained thereof. End of discussion.
Either we are slaves or we are not. The War Against Slavery is not over. An early battle freed the southern slaves while slipping by a big one on the American population: The Civil War was also the war to enshrine big business in government affairs, and implicit in the victory of the North was the first step in the enslavement of all citizens of America. Over the ensuing 150 years, we've become ever less free as citizens, citizenship implied that you give up many of your liberties, far more lost today than were discussed in the Declaration of Independence.
The question for today is, how big does a plantation have to be before you call it a country?
well said, but no matter how strongly and how well you word the intent of your Constitution, the lawyers will find a way to twist and bend the words to their purposes and you will be right back where we are now.
True enough. Which is why it should be three sentences, and that's it.
doesn't matter. the lawyers would probably have an even easier time twisting three sentences that unequivocally guaranteed the right of self-determination and property than they would a large tome into some progressive nonsense that guaranteed the right of the string-pullers to skim off the top of the public treasury.
what is needed is the universal understanding that no one, no where, has the right to take one's property or interfere with one's self determination for any reason.... baaa baaaa
Try 30 seconds...
Let's add what your point is to the list of stuff I don't get.
We vote? What does that mean? It means that we choose between two bodies of real though not avowed, autocrats. We choose between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. ~ Helen Keller.
Heavy graduated tax being asked for by the people.
Hail the new soviet!
Fiftybagger's half right although mutual plunder even of the super rich will only lead to the same thing. A new super rich and a Proletariat.
I don't get it. Everyone complains how the financial elites are raping the treasury with the help of the politicians and making themselves obscenely wealthy while leaving onerous debt to be paid back by future generations.
Yet, suggest that maybe these financial elites should be taxed onerously to pay back the debt that they are creating - and everyone gets all "socialist" in your face.
What is wrong with getting those who are indirectly causing / benefitting from the accelerating deficits / taxpayer-owed debt to pay that money back?
What's wrong with that? Kind easy to tell once you remember the US mindset. Classical double bind.
In the US, the propaganda has sold rich people as a disconnected part from the rest. There is nothing wrong with being rich, so it is said. Rich is no longer a condition that could bring wrong and/or good but a condition there's nothing wrong in. So nothing being done by the rich can be characterized as wrong.
That's where you failed. You assume that something wrong can be brought by the rich, which is opposite to the US american postulate.
Stop distracting from the core point. The crux of it all is one question: “How did those who are rich come to their riches? “
Many rich come to be so by simply providing exceptional value to other in exchange for some of the purchasers produced “value”. Let’s take Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. I exchange my labor to my employer for $$s. Those dollars represent my labor. In the old world I might have exchanged my labor for apples from a farmer in exchange for working on his farm and picking apples, etc. I then could keep some apples for myself and family and exchange the extra with a tailor for a shirt, baker for some bread, etc. Money entered the marketplace as a medium of exchange, and so here I get dollars and buy an iPod from Steve Jobs from his and his employees labor. Mutual exchange for benefit of both parties. Steve has my and millions of other Apple product buyers $$ to pay his employees and acquire the tools of capital to invest and produce the latest fanboy gadgets. I have my iPod. The dollars we both have come from / are actually backed by hard work and production.
I have no problem with Steve Jobs being one rich bastard for what all he and his company does. The fact that he sold his company and bought it back and saved it goes to prove only a handful of people are sufficiently adept at being stewards of so much capital, and as such there importance is not to be discounted to a healthy economy. In a healthy economy, we all exchange value for value, and prices reflect the rational interpretation of value via prices at every given moment as best can be discerned.
Enter the other rich: Those who get their wealth by F’ing over other people in the way, forcing them either directly or through lobbying efforts via the government to purchase product from them or through them. Take bankers, who long ago received the political privilege of legally counterfeiting via fractional reserve banking, to today with the modern counterparts – the many guised money shufflers on Wall Street, Investment banks to hedge funders, etc., all of whom depend on the Fed to print money to enable them to leverage out the wazoo and earn a fat $50 mil bonus a .000x basis point move on $XXXXXX billion assets acquired through leverage enabled by the Fed inventing credit right out of thin air.
Shit. Give the two of us a $$ printing press, and pretty quickly we could both have $50 million bonuses by running a few $billion dollar deals financed from our little operation. (Hey?!? We’re just stimulating the economy, right?) You’d have to be a real fucking moron not to be in a position to own a 100 ft Ferretti docked at the MYC within a few years.
Of course, you have all other sorts of neo-fascist behavior going on by corporatists of all stripes. Their lobbyists funnel $ mega millions in their directions by regulating this way and that. Add to that special interest of all sorts, and a government that has been allowed to co-opt untold amounts of wealth from its population both directly via taxation and indirectly via monetization of its debt (directly via the Fed or indirectly via normal UST purchases by those benefitting from the money printing spigot previously noted above)… And co-opt untold amounts of freedoms and rights, thus forcing average Joe’s and Mary’s to funnel their consumerism to the direct benefit of this group or that, which of course includes Wall Street, etc.
But we don’t want to forget the silent parasites which produce nothing of real value other than that which is required to be in compliance with the authorities: consultants who are experts in artificial govt created technocracy. Thin tax experts, estate planners, lawyers, experts in this or that archaic area of government rules or regulations. It’s shit piled high upon shit piles comprised of shit piles.
So how do you earn your wealth? Do you actually produce something someone would actually buy if they weren’t forced to buy it? Do you benefit from drinking from the trough overflowing with $$$’s flooding out of the Federal Reserve via the financial system? Are you one of those who profit from finance that enables the market to most efficiently allocate scarce resources among actors, or are you just another parasite who is in the business of finances purely for the sake of finance, hacking your own pound of flesh as a toll against those who are really producing product and service people genuinely want?
That’s the crux of it. I don’t care if your rich or poor. Are you a parasite or not? That’s the relevant question. We have to eliminate parasites, especially the worst first. But none should be exempt.
Wll stated RH. The justness of a society is measured by the degree to which value-added is returned in compensation. We are unjust.
Good stuff, Ron.
I think many, many Americans already recognize exactly what you are saying. That's why so many want to see the rich taxed higher. If over 70% of us already agree on that, why doesn't it happen?
What pisses me off is people like David Tepper like to pretend they're existence is every bit as important as Steve Jobs. Which is as retarded as saying I'm as good as Lebron James....
Well, that’s the dilemma: “taxing the rich” doesn’t discern between wealth creators and wealth parasites. Taxing the rich no doubt will redistribute some of the loot pilfered by the latter group, but then what? Stick it into the black hole of Congress?
It’d be one thing if it was guaranteed to retire outstanding debt, but that’ll be the day I invent a time machine and an invisibility serum so I can take things into my own hands. Worse yet, the wealth producers -- the very people you need to help pull this economy out of its nosedive, they're getting pounds of flesh hacked away from their efforts.
Taxing works so long as your productive base isn't narrower than your parasitic class. Unfortunately that pyramid inverted long ago, and we're only compounding the problem by effectively monetarily hacking away at the productive class whose hard work backs all the dollars spent by the money printing redistributionistas.
So in that, 70% of Americans are horribly misguided if they want to take down the good with the bad. A better way out of this would be to end the Fed and start treating fractional reserve banking as the Ponzi fraud it truly is. Then, you’d also have to cut back tremendously on all the parasitism in govt.
The simplest and, frankly, quickest / only way out pronto is to add a Consensualist Amendment to the constitution. Really, our constitution should have three core pillars:
1. Nobody can force you to do anything without your consent.
2. Recognition that individuals are the sole owners of their own body and mind, and that they are forever entitled to the byproducts of their creation / fruits of their efforts derived thereof, and that any other system is a form of slavery. (e.g. taxing is in the end, claiming higher ownership to your labor just like slavery, only after the fact by striking at the fruits of your efforts.)
3. The government’s only job is to protect individuals from others encroachment / violations against number 1 (and not preemptively).
Thanks gmak, that's exactly the discussion we need to have.
You are not alone. In fact, the majority of people already recognize it. The point I wanted to make is that most of us already accept the rich as parasites. I'm sick of hearing that "But, but if you tax the rich, it will ruin everything...." and the mush-minded, bullshit reasoning that follows.
Considering the massive fail the theories of those in charge have been, you really have to show me that taxing the rich will really ruin everything.
I suspect it will only ruin things for the unproductive rich. Those who are rich on merit will be just fine I think.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Try again.
"Ashamed of the many frailties they feel within, all men endeavor to hide themselves, their ugly nakedness, from each other, and wrapping up the true motives of their hearts in the specious cloak of sociableness, and their concern for the public good, they are in hopes of concealing their filthy appetites and the deformity of their desires." -
Bernard Mandeville
“Trees outstrip most people in the extent and depth of their work for the public good. “ ~Sara Ebenreck
i've got to say that i am against any tax increase as the money has been stolen and i wish not to give them any more to steal. why reinforce a bad system?
however, at least a tax increase would represent the will of the people for once. unfortunately, i believe it will also represent the will of the shadow government and ruling elites, too.
had these monkeys listened to any poll during the crisis, we would be further from disaster. they didn't. they moved in the direction wished by our shadow government.
push back, my friends. push back.
RonnieHonduras has it exactly right - do you produce anything of value or are you a parasite. Those who produce deserve whatever rewards the market is willing to offer them and should be taxed only moderately as part of paying for a civil society. Those who simply scam others to obtain wealth should have that wealth confiscated through taxation. How do you accomplish this? Through writing a tax code that rewards productivity and penalized parasitism. How do you do that? By putting a government in place that works for the good of the whole society rather than for special interests. How do you do that? So far in history it hasn't ever seemed to work except maybe for the first few years of the United States when we actually had a constitution and the states ruled themselves and there was really no such thing as a Federal government. Is there any realistic hope of abolishing the Federal system? Not really, unless of course a decapitation strike on DC by a Jihadi nuke somehow miraculously happens while Congress is in session. Even that might not do it, but it sure would open a window of opportunity for the states to re-assert their primary status.
As I recall the British considered the Continental Army nothing more than a bunch of terrorists. Not only would they not stand and fight, and instead hid behind stone walls and trees and picked off redcoats marching along in their indominable formations. And even more incredibly, those savages even went so far as to shoot British officers! Now the occupiers drive black suburbans instead of wearing red coats, and they dare to call themselves Americans, but the they still have exactly the same agenda as the British Empire - enslave the natives and drain the economy. And so far it seems to be working just fine, since nobody is shooting the privates much less the officers. And of course the bankers behind the Empire remain invulnerable, as always.
Your points are well-taken. What I was trying to get at in this article is a whole lot of people already agree on this point, yet we are being treated as a minority. WTF?
I don't think Americans want "circuses and cake" for themselves, they just don't want to get stuck with the bill for the record bonuses being paid out on Wall Street.
I wanted to point out that there's way more people who feel this way than CNBS would have you believe.
Mark, i very much liked your editorial. i posted it for others to see.
It is debt-based money, however, which creates our perpetual indebtedness; this is the primary challenge we face as it allows a ruling class to hold (and front-run) our bonds as eternal debt-slavemasters. Many of these slavemasters are not even U.S. citizens, so they cannot be taxed on the income. Further, when you read the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, you will learn that, not only does this ruling class have a private monopoly, but they have written into law that all of this interest income to the private Federal Reserve Banking cartel is TAX-FREE. Its all right there in black and white print.
How rich people allocate their capital is up to them. If they place it with the wrong individuals, via the bond market or stock market, then they risk losing. Even after a few generations, a fool and their money will soon part. EXCEPT when they can play by a different set of rules.
these very same ruling elite populate our government, and steer the very tax dollars you wish to collect from them right back into their own coffers. Further, you are hurting the florist down the street who is making $250,000 per year. The small-time millionaires (with a little 'm') of America are the 'middle class' in comparison to these ruling elites who are worth tens and hundreds of millions and billions. Further, small-time American millionaires are the only individuals who have the extra time to better understand how the rest of the once-free people in America are getting shafted by the ruling elites. In essence, the small business person is the threat to the ruling elite who would rather he or she work for a corporation and fall into line. So it is no wonder that the true middle class, the little millionaires, are being aggressively targeted in class warfare that NEVER touches the parasitical criminals at the top of the food chain.
you and I have paid a line-item tax on our pay, called the Social Security Tax, for quite some time. Yet, this money is gone. Why? It was raided by the ruling elites by front-running the bond market and giving government contracts to their crony friends. Of course, virtually none of these individuals even pay taxes, but rather harbor their monies in offshore accounts in far off places as they govern our country from unelected seats, and who view us quite correctly as their livestock.
For this reason, I respectfully disagree with 'raising taxes' as solution to our deficit dilemma. We require, instead, a revolution. Starve the beast. End the income tax (if favor of a consumption tax at the point-of-sale?). End the private Federal Reserve Banking monopoly. End debt-based money of any kind. Return to the U.S. Constitutional Republic which made our country once-great.
You and I see things the same in many respects, except one, I think.
I believe our government should be obliged to honor the will of the people, and not second guess it. The "tax the rich" poll is only one example. Let's take it back a step. What percentage of Americans would agree to allowing the government to borrow $500 per person, per month?
Not many.
So why are we doing it?
Personally, I support taxing the rich, and here's why. The truly productive rich will understand the tax scheme. If you make ten million dollars, we're taking 9, right? You don't have to earn that money, you can pay your workers more, invest in better equipment, expand...or pay an enormous tax bill.
interesting thoughts, Mark. I posted your article precisely because I agree with you regarding the will of the people, with the caveat that i am personally against any tax increase as the money has been stolen and i wish not to give them any more to steal. Your other points are great ones, too. Which is to say: had these monkeys in Congress listened to any poll during the crisis, we would be further from disaster. they didn't. they moved in the direction wished for by our shadow government.
Yes, as you quite eloquently point out, at least a tax increase represents the will of the people for once. Unfortunately, i believe it will also represent the will of the shadow government of our ruling elites, too, who pay no taxes anyway and wish to distance themselves further from anyone who may be upwardly mobile. In other words, empowering the federal government is ultimately making us poorer and the ruling elites more powerful. Its a rigged system from start to finish already. consider this:
This is a modern-day feudal system, quite literally based on bloodline. I'll explain how this works more again in a moment, but first consider these thoughts:
Utilizing wealth and income to capitalize industry in private stocks and bonds creates even more jobs than do government works that will never even last in the long-run and only restrict growth. Taxes take capital away from productive use. For example, if you buy stock in an upstart company and it begins to succeed and create jobs, when they come back to you for a second round of financing to expand quickly, then you are happy to add capital to the investment which creates even more jobs. In other words, the market finances the expansion through peaceful, free trade. On the other hand, taxes are government force, and government programs cannot finance themselves like the aforementioned by definition. Any government 'job creation' is a "broken window fallacy" that only takes money from the private sector. Consider this, we have $14 Trillion currently tied up in U.S. Treasury debt. If this exact capital was reallocated to the private sector then every man, woman, and child could have a helicopter in their backyard with the additional wealth and opportunity as the cost of business borrowing would be so much lower, and so many more jobs would be created. More jobs for the same amount of workers means any skilled labor can demand higher wages.
Mark, i do not believe that i can change your mind, because you have dug in your heels on this one. however, i am not sure that you are fully understanding my point about how the federal government bond market simply exists to enslave us. I'm willing to learn from you; are you willing to learn from me? Understand, Mark, that we can never have a pay-as-you-go Federal government because money does not enter circulation until it is traded for interest-bearing Treasury Bonds to the private Federal Reserve Bank monopoly. Therefore, to eliminate the deficit would be to eliminate our money supply. Impossible BY DESIGN!!
Please, my friend, read what I (re) wrote one more time, and then we can agree to disagree:
The ruling elite populate our government. they are not hurt by taxes. in fact, quite the opposite, as raiding government coffers is their primary business. its a rigged game, and has been since the creation of the private Federal Reserve Banking cartel and the Income Tax in 1913. It grew even worse upon removal from the gold standard in 1971. The federal government bond market exists for our enslavement and nothing more. The promises were lies. Only now, decades after these promises were made, some folks are beginning to wake up to the heist. While still others remain in a slumber and are kept from revolting with a little bit of bread and some circuses, or because their willful ignorance will not allow them to see past what they were taught in government schools in favor of what truly is.
It is debt-based money which creates our perpetual indebtedness; this is the primary challenge we face as it allows a ruling class to hold (and front-run) our bonds as eternal debt-slavemasters. Many of these slavemasters are not even U.S. citizens, so they cannot be taxed on the income. Further, when you read the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, you will learn that, not only does this ruling class have a private monopoly, but they have written into law that all of this interest income to the private Federal Reserve Banking cartel is TAX-FREE. Its all right there in black and white print.
How 'rich' people allocate their capital in the private sector is up to them. If they place it with the wrong individuals, via the private bond market or stock market, then they risk losing. Even after a few generations, a fool and their money will soon part, EXCEPT when that fool can play by a different set of rules, including both (1) having the 'legal' ability to counterfeit money when others cannot and (2) having a privatized monopoly on a debt-based money system which serves to enslave an entire nation of people who must use this corporate currency as 'legal tender for all debt public and private' and who must become indebted to their debt-slavemasters simply in order to get it this 'legal tender'.
A distinct ruling elite populates our government (and also works in the shadows), steering right back into their own foreign accounts the very same tax dollars that you wish to collect from them. Further, when you advocate tax rate increases, you are hurting the successful florist or restaurant owner down the street, for example, who may make around $250,000 per year respectively and respectfully. These small-time millionaires (with a little 'm's) of America are the true 'middle class' in comparison to the ruling elites who are worth tens and hundreds of millions and billions. Further, small-time American millionaires are the only individuals who have the extra time to better understand how the rest of the once-free people in America are getting shafted by the ruling elites. In essence, the small business person is the threat to the ruling elite who would rather he or she simply work for a corporation and fall into line under the fascist oligarchy. So it is no wonder that the true middle class, the 'little millionaires', are being aggressively targeted in class warfare that NEVER touches the parasitical criminals at the top of the food chain.
you and I have paid a line-item tax on our pay, called the Social Security Tax, for quite some time. Yet, this money is gone. Why? It was raided by the ruling elites by front-running the bond market and giving government contracts to their crony friends. Of course, virtually none of these individuals even pay taxes, but rather harbor their monies in offshore accounts in far off places as they govern our country from unelected seats via their campaign puppets. They view us quite literally as their debt-slave livestock.
For this reason, I respectfully disagree with 'raising taxes' as a solution to our deficit dilemma. We require, instead, a revolution. Starve the beast. End the income tax (perhaps in favor of a consumption tax at the point-of-sale). End the private Federal Reserve Bank monopoly. End debt-based money of any kind. Return to the U.S. Constitutional Republic which once made our country great and our ancestors free to live and prosper.
http://www.zerohedge.com/forum/why-raising-taxes-rich-means-nothing
First of all, thanks for the respectful tone of your reply. I'd always rather discuss things civilly.
I agree with your thinking on every last point, including taxation, but I don't think we should be trying to stick it to people making $250K. That's not what I consider wealthy.
Please remember, the idea I'm advocating is honoring the will of the people. The American people are distracted and misinformed, but not stupid or self destructive. They've been systematically excluded from the processes of government and that is the focal point of my discontent. Most Americans are still honorable people, even the GE scientists I mention elsewhere. I never said that they were stupid or useless, they're captured inside a bad system, and they are afraid to leave it, so they never want to address the bigger issues (where does money come from, etc.).
I have found that most otherwise highly intelligent people have no idea how much interest rates effect the "prices" of houses. How can that be? Because if you don't seek out that information, no one will present it to you. I am 100% sure that our so-called debt auctions are completely fraudulent and most people (even the smart ones here at ZH) refuse to accept it.
Our economic collapse is a mathematical certainty. There's nothing taxation or spending cuts can do to avoid it now. Economically, we're toast. In my opinion, the main reason we got here is because our elected officials made decisions they were simply not authorized to make. Unforgivable
I want recognition of system failure as soon as possible. Comprehending the severity of the situation is step one. What's worse, Americans realizing and coming to terms the futility of higher taxation, or allowing our self-appointed masters to continue engineering the middle class into oblivion?
The people most able to help us won't until they feel the noose around their own necks. They're still doing OK, so most don't see a problem with the status quo. This is really a key point. When they suddenly feel the heat, they'll start paying attention and hopefully, they will start screaming for real reform and justice. That to me is a better outcome than what Bernanke and friends have in store.
What I don't like to here anyone say, or even think is: "Well, the will of the people is obviously wrong, so let's ignore it." And as much as I respect your knowledge and opinions, I'm very uncomfortable that you are comfortable overriding the majority. I see it as the seed of Tyranny. The waitress in the parable had good intentions too.
It's easier to override bad decisions than it is to change minds, but in the long run that is what makes men slaves, I think. No one every said this "liberty and justice for all" stuff was gonna be easy.
Thanks again for your thoughtful reply.
my friend, I 100% agree with you except for one major point that you continue to raise.
I NEVER ONCE said this. I am NOT comfortable over-riding the majority - EVER, except in cases where the U.S. Constitution requires more votes than the simple majority, or in the case of individual civil liberties. Remember, the majority of Germans elected a Nazi leader and decided to take from the Jews, so I make an exception in places where our U.S. Constitutional Republic protects us all from government by the majority.
Anyway, I simply stated my opinion on the matter, which places me in the 30% minority (I just disagree with the majority, which is my prerogative). That is all. I'm allowed to engage in vocal dissent even when I am over-ruled. It happens from time to time. I agree with being peacefully over-ruled. However, I will state that more understanding is needed by our citizens, just as you are saying, and I am simply using my dissent as a platform from which to be heard.
So, in essence, you just mis-interpreted that rather large difference as to what I am stating. - again, just my opinion being over-ruled, and it probably won't be the last time. ;)
Like you, as long as we have the First Amendment along with the Second Amendment to protect our First Amendment, I trust the process.
Keep up the great work, my friend! Thanks for the feedback.
- Chopper
OK, I got you now.
Maybe I'm naive, but apparently I have more faith in the majority than most. I think we've gotten into far more trouble ignoring the Joe Sixpack collective than listening to it. I'm far more worried about what the elites will do to us than I am us voting for another third reich (at least for now).
....and it's OK to disagree, as you eloquently pointed out.
Mark
+1
"RonnieHonduras has it exactly right - do you produce anything of value or are you a parasite. Those who produce deserve whatever rewards the market is willing to offer them and should be taxed only moderately as part of paying for a civil society."
As I recall (I was just a wee lad back then), his message was mainly interpretted as free license to scorn welfare moms and other layabouts. Those drains on the system are pennies compared to the wealth-without-contribution that comprises an enormous swath of the financial "services" sector. Surely you're not talking about taxing those poor, hard-working big-time, swindlers. Weren't they some of Ronnie's biggest fans at the time? Oh, the irony!
Politicians do listen to their paying customers: the lobbyists of the rich.
the ruling elite populate our government. they are not hurt by taxes. in fact, quite the opposite, as raiding government coffers is their primary business. its a rigged game, and has been since the creation of the private Federal Reserve Banking cartel and the Income Tax in 1913. It grew even worse upon removal from the gold standard in 1971. The federal government bond market exists for our enslavement and nothing more. The promises were lies. Only decades after they were made are some folks waking up to the heist. others are still in a slumber and kept from revolting with a little bit of bread and some circuses.
anyone who believes that the wealthy parasites are going to allow themselves to be taxed is deluded.
All the polls show is that Americans love government as long as someone else pays for it, and they're in complete denial about how many "someone elses" are out there. The problem is that the American people want three contradictory things:
1. They want lots of government services.
2. They don't want to pay for it in taxes.
3. They don't want their currency destroyed.
Sorry, America, you have to drop one of those three. This post reminds me of the cartoon posted recently where the guy got his home foreclosed by the bank. I don't remember anyone forcing the guy to borrow a skillion dollars at a variable interest rate. No one makes you borrow from the banks and live outside your means. So add that to things Americans want:
1. They want to borrow skillions of dollars to buy shit they can't afford.
2. They don't want to pay their debts.
3. They don't want either a recession or inflation.
Again, gotta drop one of the three.
Nothing I disagree with there, Fearsome.
We shouldn't be ordering more drinks until we figure out who's paying for them.
But again, what I was trying to illustrate here is how the will of the people is being ignored. Shouldn't the citizens have some say in our path to destruction?
How many Americans are cool with Trillion + dollar annual deficits? How many were cool with TARP? How many were cool with Bernanke?
What I'm learning is Americans are both smarter and more responsible as a group than many people give them credit for. I think most of us want to hash out who's gonna pay for what sooner rather than later. Deficit spending impedes the painful learning process that we need to go through, agreed. But ignoring the will of 70% of the people is contemptible under any circumstances.
What you have described is actually the Government itself. Those attributes are the model that has been built and set forth as a way of civil life in these United States. The citizenry cannot be blamed for following the predatory, greedy example set by its governors... not completely anyway.
Well I can tell you one thing for certainty. The people they voted in, don't realize they are unamerican. They will be pissed on soon enough, every Queen of England, nuts on your face, fascist, unamerican sophistry filled, monetarist Tea Partier, as well as any democrat who toes Nero's fascist right wing line. Sound unrealistic? You just haven't been paying attention recently, not to mention back in school. These people tend to form into dipshits swayed by sophistry.
Here's a clue incoming freshman.
If you do something a Keynesian wants, the American People will roll you
If you do something an Austrian wants, like Ron Paul, the American People will not just hate you, they'll string you up. *because the austrian's bring the actual death by wishing to save the system (which cannot be saved....dumbshits) by cutting everything people need to live and not go apeshit*
So the main thing is, act like an American. Not a monetarist. Not a corporatist. Not a person filled with sophistry as facts.
Too bad the vast majority of our elected officials are at least one of the above. Including the clueless unamerican nuts on your face Queen of england's East India corporate tea party.
Americans don't like it, even tea partiers don't. They're just too stupid to see they are backing what they hate. (gee sort of like bush..but they only admitted to it when? oh yeah...AFTER he left...fucktards)
So the tea party can lie to itself. The democratic party can lie to itself. But in the end, they can't lie to the American people and expect to get away with it. Or espouse lies because they are fucktard imbocile who doesn't know otherwise, see again, Ron Paul, Michelle Bachman, and any democrat who looks the other way as they turn more republican fascist batshit crazy. Like Barack 'the limp chicken cock' NerO-bummer.
We now have a no-intelligence committee with Bachman on there.
The speaker of the house passes bribery checks on the house floor
Yes, this is the new normal, it's worse than the old normal, but somehow got a clean slate. Why? Someone bought into a bowl of sophistry and didn't notice it tasted like shit. PeaPartiers anyone? Fucking idiots. Tea Party, welcome to 2000, and here's some remedial stuff from even last week since it escaped you.
The tea party is so out of touch with real american values it's unreal. It's like saying Forrest Gump is the smartest person in the world. Or Bill Clinton, the most faithful. Yes if Clinton was a tea partier, they would claim he was faithful. No? Well I haven't seen them get one thing more correct than that. Not a fucking one.
Right wing centrists
Right wing republicans
Right wing tea partiers
Right wing corporations
Right wing monetarists
Right wing democrats
Right wing banksters
So can we actually get something other than right wing?
..and no, not some Bullshit Green (brown) sophistry. If you like nature, pass NAWAPA.
But instead we have the right wing, bitching about the right wing, saying that right wing will solve our problems. I think I just defined insanity.
These fucktards elected along all aisles needs to realize that they are completely and utterly surrounded by sophistry...aka bullshit.
Their republican party, their tea party, their democratic party, will all ask them to do unamerican things. Will they? You bet'cha.
Because these morons don't know anything about governing, they just want the perks of being called 'guvner'.
All of what they base their judgments on, complete bullshit.
So I don't think they're going fare ANY better than the last congress. They're just as stupid, out of touch, and poorly informed as the last congress. (well actually MORE stupid, MORE out of touch, and even MORE POORLY informed)...those are the facts. But it doesn't matter if it's more/less, is it the same relative thing? Sure is.
So wake up and smell the coffee. They will, when they're thrown out. You see we're already mostly at a 2014 election cycle, even 2016.
I said it a year ago. 2010 was already fucked, because everyone running, was status quo or clueless. You need people that actually know what's going on, which is about 0 of them. The ones most clueless, the tea party unamerican scumbags have no clue whats going on, and no clue how badly they are about to screw up the U.S.
People want sanity, not austerity.
They want Gov't to do good, not just be afraid of them doing bad.
They wan fair rules, along with current rules enforced, not deregulation.
They want an end of monetarism, not the continuation (or like the tea party, be beholden to it)
Oh yes, I can look out at that fucktard filled new congress, and see that we still have 100 percent of the job ahead to do. Because the candidates who won, don't know the issues. Especially the tea party and republicans. Crazy gave them an extra TWO helpings.
So two years from being voted out, the fucktards should be enjoying these days while they can. Reality is going to boot them in their fascist unamerican faces soon enough. You can't be a monetarist AND an patriot. Ron and the Tea, you're simply monetarists, which preclude you from being patriots. You can change, I just know you're too stupid to. Espcially since you still think you won, because you know better. You don't, and that's how far the land of truth and liberty has fallen. People are such dumbasses they don't even know it.
It's like Jerry Springer. (besides the fake thing)(Do these people realize how stupid they are???)
Neither does the tea party especially, but same goes for republicans, democrats, centrists, and Nero.
When the dust settles on this one everything will be different.
Patriots are for Glass-Steagall
Non-patriots aren't.
There is no other deliniation. Glass-Steagall yes = patriot tendancies
Glass-Steagall no = monetarist anti-american tendancies.
American's don't think like American's anymore, and they don't even realize it. We think like British monetarists, so wake up.
Then realize where you get your ideas from, are they British monetarists? Yes.
So do they want to stay in power? They want to stay in congress? They want to help America?
Quit voting like a British Monetarist. Because THAT'S how BOTH SIDES + cum in your mouth and face party THINK.
THEY THINK AND ACT AND VOTE LIKE BRITISH IMPERIALIST MONETARISTS.
It runs very deep, to the core of just about everything now.
Until that is gone, like by electing your local LaRouche candidates, and/or smart candidates (which I don't see very many others, like 0, but they are out there and will eventually show up).
We currently have a bunch of no-nothings. We also must remember, you can't govern, if your belief is that there should be no governement.
Isn't that like making the person who doesn't know how to cook, be the main chef, before a big family dinner?
Well, we got a congress full of these dipshits. Unamerican to the core, because that's what they've been taught. That unamerican things, somehow, are really american. They aren't. You aren't. It was all a lie.
Since the candidates haven't gotten the memo, or the clue yet, 2012, 2014, 2016??? It sure in the HELL DID NOT HAPPEN, this past november. We went backwards, not forwards. If we let fascist unamerican pauls in, we'll go even further back. But our destiny even without him is back because Nero is in charge. But as bad as Nero is, Paul would be worse. Plus the Barack Paul presidency of sophistry induced austerity to save our so unamerican british monetary system makes so much sense.
Congress is clueless, and just got more so. We have a backwoods fucktard as our head of science, we have the dumbest bitch (and oldest) on the planet heading our education (and this lady is twice as stupid as palin), again Michelle Bachman on the no-intelligence committee, we still got anti-science Eric Holder by Obama. We have Susan 'QoE' Rice and her South Sudan flag waving. The idiocy we have in charge is worse than under Bush.
At least now I know where I can find an idiot, should I ever need one. Just go to congress, pick any member. They'll do fine. That's a fact, even if people are too stupid to realize it. Doesn't make it not real. It's VERY REAL. The dunce in the corner, who believes in anti-american monetarism is now in charge, and the opposition?????? they believe the same bullshit sophistry.
Good luck. Somehow I already know this won't end well. Because kids and knives usually don't. Just like Children and matches.
stop deluding yourself with the left/right paradigm
The fact is that capital is subject to the law of supply and demand. The problem is that we all want enormous supplies of capital and are willing to begrudge it to anyone else, on the assumption that when we get our own, nobody will begrudge us.
The problem is that it requires debt, ie. demand for capital, to maintain its value.
Until we come to understand the economy can only support as much stored wealth as can be effectively invested in those able to maintain or increase the value implied by it and that investing it unproductively, whether excess riches for the wealthy, excess populations of the unproductive, excess security for the state, etc, all decrease the overall wealth of society. Then there is the issue of how much growth the environment and resources will sustain and how to keep it at a level which doesn't overwhelm those limits.
Blaming the rich alone for these problems is like blaming the eye of the hurricane for the damage done by the hurricane. They are more the lucky recipients of the system then the creators of it. They are as much a function of the environment, as the poor. Lions no more control biology than wildebeests. When the ecosystem collapses, the top predators are often the more vulnerable species.