@nbutler777 'who would enforce it?' ?? the board of governors we have now seems to work in reality as enforcement. Any entity can be governed, if Corp power is removed from the system. That power corrupts regulators and makes them virtually powerless, as happened this last time around. Greespan refused to regulate swaps and the private subprime market, he was asked to repeatedly.
Pre 1930 economics don't resemble 2011 economics. I know Paul screams to end the fed. Look at the hidden WHY?
All economies have a central bank. One you remove ours, none will trade with us due to instability. You realize why the Fed was created?
Only cons believe that if something is broken you should throw it out. Fix the Fed, stop Corporate payoffs, run for political purposes with tax payer $. But End the Fed is plain silly. Paul knows this. He still preaches it. Why? NO rules, NO supervision for the elite, that's the big plan.
@nbutler777 "if you ran this country what economic plan would support"
Mixed free markets. This is the definition for regulated markets as opposed to pure free markets. I'm sure you know this. The unregulated shadow banking system which grew larger then the regulated banking system crashed - unregualted swaps crashed, unregulated private subprimes crashed. The idea that greed regulated itself is purely silly. Those with $ use their power to make more $. Leave them alone w/ no rules?
This is what the "right" teaches - only unregualted markets. How unregulated? Watch how they wrangle to stop, amend, water down, lie to death every regulation proposed since 2008. Take the CFPB - they attack it with hatred - watch them grill Elizabeth Warren for nothing, finally getting rid of her, lying the whole time. Then watch her speech on "The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class" it will BLOW you MIND! Take that challenge for US.
@nbutler777 2012? Great question. Our government has been purchased by Corps. No player on the field is unaffected, Obama included. Until Corp lobbyists and corp campaign donations are removed from the system (the "right" opposes this), the people of America have no hope, regardless.
While Obama has been successfully labeled a socialist by the "right", his legislation is centrist with compromise at it's core. I will vote for him only as a vote against conservative policy across the board.
Yes. But you have already heard it. "...why Democrats want to raise taxes and I know why Republicans want to lower them. "
Republicans claim "jobcreators"; most of the jobs created by the Forbes top 400 are overseas, and will remain overseas until Americans choose to work for $3 an hour. Pretty plain.
Ryan = a 25% top tax rate. Democrats would like to see that go back to the pre-Bush rate of 37%.
As the Elite remove M.C. wealth, poverty spikes, we say hold them responsible.
The United States does not have a wealth tax the income tax keeps people from climbing the economic ladder.The tax code is so complex tax code compliance costs more than tax liability.At the end of the year business owners and accountants find ways to keep the business un profitable to avoid taxes
@HopeForPeaceNow You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
@HopeForPeaceNow I pay quite a bit more than 13% in taxes. Life is not fair. Ask future President Palin. I know this may burst your bubble the wealth is not evenly distributed.Jesus loitered with the lowest society could offer Prostitutes and Tax collectors.
My question is why are thjngs like that? Is it natural or is something sinister going on? As with sports of all kinds people rise to the top. We can't all be world class sportmens or Olympians. We can't all be Richard Branson. Is taking that away from them because they excel and sharing it the answer? is that right? What about poor people who get out of poverty through free commerce. Should they be punished for being successful? Do we have the right? No. It would require enforcement & theft.
"Wealth to protect power. Power to increase wealth" Di Medici
The wealth of the middle calss has, for the past 30 years been trickling up. Why? Simple. Power cvreates more wealth. More wealth protects more power. The middle class lost 2 more % of it's financial wealth in the past 6 years. The 80% had 9%, now we have 7%. That puts 2millin more of us in poverty? Why? Less and less $ resources for more people. Check out the rise in poverty in the US recently.
Miss NO-Hope, Greenspan was joined by Rubin, and Summers, influential men and members of Clinton`s Treasury. The derivatives Brooksley warned about were based on HOME mortgages. To use her name if fine by me, but YOU just guide the conversation back to square #1, the housing bubble. No bubble, no crash. No crash, no issue with derivatives, based on housing, mortgages.
@HopeForPeaceNow Derivatives have been linked since 1700 BC to commodities. Your auto policy, you betting you will crash, against a corp betting you will not, is a derivative. Your health plan. Well, probably you are on MediCaid, arent you Hope? OK, then MY health Plan. I bet I will get sick, with a corp who thinks I wont. Silly? So? The derivatives that failed were based on mortgages. You still close your eyes to Govt stopping banks who didnt make subprimes from doing business, expanding.
@HopeForPeaceNow The POINT is NOT that all derivatives are mortgage based. The point is that the derivatives that FAILED were mortgage based. AND, mortgage based derivatives ARE BACKED up by HOMES. No housing bubble, no housing collapse, no issue with mortgage backed derivatives. This is SIMPLE enough.
@luvcheney1 Insurance reserve requirements are set by States, varying between 10%- 12% of insurance premiums. Not 120%, a slight error by a power of 10.
The Federal Reserve printed Trillions upon Trillions in new money, injected into financial system, over decades. The fractional reserve banking system makes 9 new dollars for each new printed dollar injected by the Fed. The Fed more than doubled the money supply ( M-3) from 1995-2005, then YOU, Miss NO-HOPE, get all indignant that there are too many financial instruments in the financial sector? Gee, where did all that cash come from? Progressive Wilson`s Fed, that`s where.
"The fractional reserve banking system makes 9 new dollars for each new printed dollar injected by the Fed."
The Elite lend $30 for every $1 they reserve. No need for liquidity! When the vast majority of our wealth is held by the vast minority, THAT chokehold effects every tiny part of our reality, INCLUDING the gov's need to print $. The Elite teach you that gov prints $ because it's evil.
Your belief in that lie continues support for the Power Grid which chokes the middle class slowly.
@HopeForPeaceNow With the Fed fueling a bubble in housing with printed money, the fear of risk totally disappeared. That lured the public to buy homes, that they thought would go up, and banks loaned, because they thought the same. The bubble caused the stupidity, of borrowers ( you) and bankers.
I bet the lure of HOME OWNERSHIP was the culprit. We disagree in the you believe the evil is the gov. I belive the evil is the greed of the Corps HELPED by the gov. Your answer is remove the only possible police. My answer is mitigate the power of the evil.
BIG difference!
DO YOU claim that CORPS had ZERO cause in the bubble? You still forget, no liquidity is needed for leverage AND 60% of the issue laid in PRIVATE HANDS!
@HopeForPeaceNow Bubbles always have caused stupid behavior, because dumb investments look like they cant lose in a bubble. A risky home loan looked secure, because rising home prices meant there is no risk in a foreclosure, silly girl.
How bright do you have to be to realize housing will not CLIMB forever? You are saying the financial industry was just "dumb"? You buy that? Every agent I knew talked about when the housing market would collapse.
@HopeForPeaceNow Then, you and the "bright" agents should all be rich, so stop bitching. Anyone who knew it was coming, could have made a bundle. YOU CLAIM you lost your house, and $130,000. Who is the dumb bitch calling everyone else stupid? I did not lose my home, I paid cash for it, 10 years ago, with proceeds from another house I paid off 7 years before that. This crisis is for the STUPID. I refuse to participate. Refinance? BTW, $130,000 made you rich as Buffet , compared to Bolivians.
@HopeForPeaceNow Sure, I heard your boo-hoo story already. "I`m poor, but I could be rich, but its noble to be poor. I just wait till some Socialist Dictator will steal from those who DID TRY, and dump it in my lap". and, " I`m a single mother, boo- hoo. Worked in real estate 2003-2006 ( bubble), lost $130,000 in equity, and my home". THEN, you claim "everyone could see it". Of course, you didnt give the $130,000 to the poor in Bolivia, did you? Boo- hoo. Maybe a $5 check? That bounced?
@HopeForPeaceNow As a side note, I would like to say that personally, I have little capital in banks, nor have I ever, and I am almost 60. Just enough to write checks to pay electric bills, real estate taxes, etc. Physical Gold, in safekeeping, makes worries about derivatives and swaps someone else`s problem. But, they real issue is who created all this money, and the fact that a bubble makes the risky appear as a sure thing. Guess you learned the hard way. Mises wrote in the 30`s, no excuse.
"Give us this day our daily bread" "Do not store up for yourself treasure on earth" "Woe to the rich, they have already recieved their comfort" "He who looses his life for my sake, shall gain it, he who clings to his own life shall loose it. What does it profit you to gain the earth and loose your soul" "Go, give all your money to the poor" "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle..." you know the rest and whom it is I quote.
"The Fed more than doubled the money supply ( M-3) from 1995-2005, then YOU, Miss NO-HOPE, get all indignant that there are too many financial instruments in the financial sector?"
There ya go blaming the evil government. Ever wonder WHY THEY TRAIN you that the government is evil??
HOW will YOU CONTROL the ELITE once you remove government??
I bet you have no answer for that, as ther eisn't one.
You support thr rapist and call the only police evil!
@HopeForPeaceNow What Elite? I think the power hunbgry in Govt are the Elite. But, do you mean the rich, the corporations? We little guys always have controlled the corporations. We make them bug, like WalMart, instead of K-Mart. Or we destroy Hudson and Packard and Studebaker, because we like Fords. We buy coal produced electricity, because its better than chopping trees down. OMG! The trees were going to disappear! In fuel! OMG! The whales! We burnt their oil in lamps! That was close!
'What Elite? I think the power hunbgry in Govt are the Elite."
?? Does the gov OWN 93% of ALL financial wealth??
You believing that consumers control the work of Corps is exactly what they want. Milk producers STILL put BGH in millk KNOWING iot causes cancer - they just HIDE It. OIL Corps lie day after day to keep us on oil. CORPS run this country, you thinking you have some power over that LEVEL of power is simply silly.
@HopeForPeaceNow Miss No Hope, speculative, risky behavior is rampant during monetary caused bubbles. I think this is the 10th time I mention that you are all tied up in symptoms, not causes. Do you think this is the first time this ever happened?
Mr. I love dick, who wrote $60 trillion in speculative, risky contracts? The gov? Swaps are an effect? Yes, absolutely, an effect of hatred for regulation. Check out "Brooksley Born", 100% NON regulation was demanded by Greenspan in1999. Born tried to regulate the derivatives market. Foresaw the meltdown. She was fired. You call deregulation an "effect", not a cause?
@HopeForPeaceNow Miss NO- Hope, loose monetary policy always results in inflation, which is sometimes concentrated in bubbles. It also leads to risky, speculative behaviors. These behaviors are the cause of loose money. It is absurd to want to allow the printing of excessive amounts of money, then think you can regulate the effects of that away.
@HopeForPeaceNow 1) If you think there are no rules, no supervision, you are nuts. We have a tiny business in our home, have all kinds of rules, with the Govt trying to stop us from doing business. 2) If you are referring to banking, finance, that happens to be one of the most regulated businesses, and one where the govt is very involved. I TOLD YOU BEFORE DEAF WOMAN, if you dislike a business, do not go there. That is the ultimate power. Take your stinking home of the grid, burn your car, etc.
" If you think there are no rules, no supervision, you are nuts" I NEVER SAID there ARE no rules... I said, correctly, Austrian Economics calls for NO RULES. FACT.
I also asked HOW you think anyone could make coherant rules when Republicans hire Pepsi salesmen to write langue to kill bills before THEY ARE EVEN WRITTEN! Repugs oppose regulation as a rule. No valid, working regulation will ever exist as long as Repubs side with Corps, attempting to defeat any and all regulatory legislation.
Oil is not a dwindling resource, that is just silly! The Green River Formation, 95% of which is under Federal Gov control, ( which means it can NOT be developed, of course!) has estimated reserves of 1.5 TRILLION barrels, about 5 times as much as Saudi Arabia. They are in Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, which is great, since they are very low population States. The oil is impregnated in rock, therefore requires "retorting", which cooks the rock, liquifying the oil. Oil over $80 makes it economic.
@HopeForPeaceNow I guess you prefer Deep- Water drilling? Thanks though for making my point, that Oil shale costs double, but since you believe oil will cost six times as much evenutually, then that makes the 1.5 Trillion barrels in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah profitable. Then, we will have 5 times the oil Saudi Arabia has. I bet, after 100 years when that is gone, someone might have found another field? The Brazilians have found one 500 miles long.
"You know, of course, that your computer runs on fossil fuel." you
Yes. As I said, pathetic Conservative support for our continued dependence on oil is just ONE way in which your dogma stands to wipe humans from the earth.
"Enough of them craving for dead"
"It seems they will answer to their sons and daughters in time"
Harrison Stafford
Killing off humanity in the name of Republican jesus will get you one thing.
@HopeForPeaceNow The Dept of Energy reports that Nat Gas gets 24 cents subsidy per megawatt of electricity, Coal gets 44 cents. But solar gets $24.34 and wind gets $23.47. Some poor people would rather pay less for Nat Gas electricity, and have money left over to be able to have a bowl of corn flakes. Damn. Corn flakes cost a lot, because Govt wants corn in your gas tank, not on the kitchen table. Oh well, go eat dirt.
"Some poor people would rather pay less for Nat Gas electricity"
I don't think poor people are stupid enough to want to have low rates and ruin their children.
That takes a special kind of stupid.
Read the article in the New Yorker "Confounding Fathers". Princeton University scores Beck on his account of history.
"F".
Beck spins lies (Even Buckly was smart enough to realize the difference between Libs and socialists) that have been around for 50 years. Read it. Dare ya.
@HopeForPeaceNow Go stand in front of a WalMart, and ask the people if they want gas at $2.50, or $5. If you do not believe me. IF alternatives were cheaper, they would be delivered, they are NOT. OBVIOUSLY. I suppose you think we can compete, by buying higher priced energy?
@HopeForPeaceNow 1) The Great Depression was a credit collapse, 9000 banks failed. Fortunes in deposits were lost. The dollar was not destroyed, in fact, its purchasing power increased, because of falling prices. So, your point is silly, history proves it. 2) $80 oil means only oil that is profitable at $80 gets produced. $100 oil brings new supplies...... those profitable over $80, and under $100. Shell estimated $65 oil would make shale profitable. But, it is ILLEGAL, because of lunatics.
You are claiming that because the $ didn't fall in 1930 it would not have in 2008?
Is there any difference between the fiancial system in 1930 and 2008??
If US Corps renigged on 26 Trillion $ contracts across the globe and caused Global social denegration.. YOU BELIEVE the world would have kept the dollar??
Yea, dig up Colorado instead of pushing oil independance.
OY, do you wonder why NON-indoctrinated minds can not tolerate your lack of reasoning?
@HopeForPeaceNow Monetary policy. The dollar did not collapse in 1930 because the money supply was allowed to deflate, to decline. The amount of dollars was allowed to go down. The money lost in the banking system was not replaced by newly "printed" money. If you lost money in a bank, the Govt just did not do ANYTHING. This time it WAS. The money was lost this time, same as then. Its just that now, they replaced it, bailing out the system. Thats why the dollar will collapse. ( is collapsing).
@HopeForPeaceNow Actually, what was true 200 years after Christ, in Rome, is true today. The Roman Govt grew so large, under heavy taxation, that they debased their money, by reducing silver content. From 100% silver during Agustus reign, to pathetic bronze coins, washed in silver. US? Silver until 1964, pathetic zinc, washed to look like silver NOW. Wage/price controls, "Edict on Prices" under Emperor Diocletian to stop inflation ( govt caused). Just like Nixon`s controls. Failed too. Same.
American Corps selling Trillions in bad contracts.... ..... that they had NO reserves to cover ... .... by this blowing up the world's financial reality... ...causing mass financial devistation across markets..... ...mass social unrest and destruction..... ....would have had zero impact on the world basing it's financial reality on the .... dollar? Really? Based on 200 AD?? Come on!
@HopeForPeaceNow Dont be so melodramatic. Debasing currencies is exactly WHY govts, over thousands of years think THEY should control currencies! 2000 years ago, they mixed more base metal into silver. 200 years ago, they printed more currency. Today, it is electronically created. Same game, different century. It is believed inflation ran 15,000% in the third century AD. What is KNOWN is that coins were 100% at Augustus time, 90% by Nero, and .02% by 270 AD. (2/100ths of one %) That is metallugy
My question was "Would the world have kept the dollar if we had blown the entire world economy into social chaos through $60 trillion in Swaps securitized in part by $1 Trillion in subprimes"?
It seems your answer is, all Govs devalue the monetary base.
Is that a yes?
The world would have remained on the dollar regardless of the mass devistation the US caused?
US Corps could have easily renigged on $23 Trillion in contract payments?
@HopeForPeaceNow This is simple, with many historical events for you to observe, to answer your own question. Contrast the Great Depression, with the hyperinflation of the Wiemar Republic ( hyperinflation). 9000 US banks bankrupt, deposits LOST. Dollar goes on, with GREATER purchasing power. Wiemar Republic hyperinflation, currency destroyed. Now, we are inflating a "solution", the market it screaming at you, "bail out of the dollar"! Dont you listen to the market? No, you think its silly.
As I said, you oversimplify when arguing that what occured under the circumstances of the financial system in 1920 will occur in the same way in 2008.
As I said about a week ago and many times since, how much has changed in the inconnectedness/leverage/quantity of contracts sold across seas since 1920?
For your argument there must BE NO CHANGE in world financial systems since 1920. Silly.
Yet you continue to argue that same tired point day after day.
The fact that you see no difference between 1920s Germany and the Depression and the financial secor today is enough for me.
Thanks.
"Now, we are inflating a "solution", "
Wrong. We are saying DON"T BLOW THE DAMN economy up to begin with!! DEREGULATION BLEW IT UP - YOU STILL SUPPORT DEREGULATION... HOW is that hard to see? We are STUCK with some kind of fix for what REPUBS BROKE! It''s SAVE YOUR ASS time!
Having confidence in something no one should have confidence in... is silly!
Green Energy is way more expensive today, than fossil. Pushing it now means lowering our standards of living NOW. I thought you cared about the poor? Charge even more for electricity? "Rambling"? How is referring to prior historical economic calamities, caused by poor monetary policies, "rambling"? The Hammurabi Code refers to mortgages on property, loans, derivatives, bankruptcy, too. Futures contracts on commodities too, 1700 BC. Think somehow today, we are "above" all that?
@HopeForPeaceNow I already replied to this point. As oil rises, more supply comes on line, and the "green" solutions become closer to making economic sense. If oil is $82 a barrel, all oilfields that cost more than that to bring up oil, are idle. Dont you see that? At $120 barrel, many new fields become profitable, while the public slows up use, because they find the price high. More oil, less usage just means a new balance, at a higher price. Big deal. IF we let big oil go get it. You wont.
AS oil becomes harder and more expensive, as is unavoidable, we HAVE TO SWITCH!
You simply accept the slow death with out thinking. We are addicted to crack. Your answer is stay addicted. Mine is kick the habit before it kicks you.
BECAUSE of YOU YOUR children WILL FACE $500 a barrel oil.
@HopeForPeaceNow Certainly there are differences! There were 450 million ounces of Gold in Fort Knox in 1935, 261 million today, reported ( some doubt that). The dollar was convertible into Gold, at $35 in 1935, and remained convertible until 1971 ( at $42.22). There was no unfunded liability of over $100 Trillion for Social Security and MediCare. There is no reason to keep faith in the dollar, unless someone butchers the budget, and stops printing.
" which is great, since they are very low population States. The oil is impregnated in rock, therefore requires "retorting", which cooks the rock, liquifying the oil. Oil over $80 makes it economic."
Disgusting. "We should rape our planet to support oil's power base".
@HopeForPeaceNow You know, of course, that your computer runs on fossil fuel. Thats where most electricity comes from. Libs do not like nuclear. Poor people use energy too. According to the Dept of Energy, Natural gas ( fossil), Coal ( fossil), are subsidized 25 cents, and 44 cents per Megawatt hour of electricity. Solar is subsidized $25.34, and wind $23.37 per Megawatt hour. The poor can afford it. Lets rape the public. Products made in high energy cost nations wont sell. Fire workers too!
May I ask what you think will happen when oil is $500 a barrel??
AND, how do you feel about manifesting the end of humanity!
"The poor can afford "
Yes, and the oil Elite who set themsleves and their children up in riches that will last 19 generations (even if they don't make ONE more dime).... KNOWING the damn thing would NOT last forever?? They are saints as job creators/humanity killers??
@HopeForPeaceNow As oil goes up in price, folks will make changes in their usage, buy smaller vehicles. The higher prices for energy will at the same time make more expensive energy competitive. More expensive, harder to extract oil will be viable, and eventually even solar, wind may be viable. PRICE will bring new supplies, and discourage usage. More supplies, less usage equals "equilibrium". Shale has issues,, but higher oil prices will enable those issues to be addressed, and be economic.
"Being realistic and not wanting to give the government more power is not "hatred"."
This is a great one. Conservatives are taught the only enemy is gov. The fact that big oil BIULT, owns and runs our carbon based reality... that they get rich while we get dead....totally irrelevent. Polluters support Connies as they know they will get status quo and environmetal deregulation through you. IN FACT, the GOV (when run by US) IS the ONLY protection teh public has!!
The "rights" hatred of regs of ALL KINDS and 100% support of pollution in the name of wealth now and death for our children is WHAT WILL be rewarded by the Creator of the planet you are killing.
Hitler is one thing.
Creating a reality for our children where they can not sustain themselves, the ultimate end of humaity, makes Hitler look like Mother Theresa.
@HopeForPeaceNow Nuclear would be economic, if the US were allowed to develop it, like France is. It avoids the negatives of Fossil fuels. Unfortunately, it is effectively illegal, due to regulatory costs. I wonder who hates nuclear?
Waste streams, Radioactive waste, High level waste, Other waste, Power plant emissions , Radioactive gases and effluents,Boron letdown, Tritium, Uranium mining, Risk of cancer, Contrast of radioactive accident emissions with industrial emissions, Environmental effects of accidents, Windscale fire, Water usage, Waste heat, Uranium mining.
Our streams and rivers are 100% cleaner than they were 50 years ago and we didn't have to break anyone's bank to get it done. At the other end of the spectrum, Cali's restrictive environmental land use regs have made the cost of homes and apartments skyrocket. Do you want affordable housing for the poor - or not?
"Our streams and rivers are 100% cleaner than they were 50 years ago"
REALLY?? Please send me a cite for that.
I love it. I state that Conservetive policies will kill us through pollution and you tell me Cali has too many environmetal regs... get the irony??
"In the last five years alone, chemical factories, manufacturing plants and other workplaces have violated water pollution laws more than half a million times leading to cancer, birth defects and other illnesses." NY Times
@HopeForPeaceNow Ask the poor, if they want higher electric, transportation costs. Thats why "alternatives" are subsidized, no one wants to pay extra. The Oil Shale, in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, which is off- limits ( along with much of Alaska, shallow water, much of the Gulf, nuclear, etc) is enough for 205 years. Figure 20 million barrels a day used, with 1.5 Trillion off limits, means if we did NOT import, and did not use, or produce oil from any other source, it lasts 205 years. Peak Oil?
" Ask the poor, if they want higher electric, transportation costs."
No. YOU ask the poor if they want to own less and less every year, if they want to see more and more poor in this country while the Corps that run this country rape the worker, over pay the CEO and drive us all into slavery in the name of patriotism!
AT what cost?? Extraction will cause devistation in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado.
Do you care? Go look at the mountain tops in West Virginia.
IF WE put ourselves to it 100%, we could solve our critical problem wisely. Ocean currents can be tapped. ACTUAL Innovation is blocked by the established power grid.
@HopeForPeaceNow Any "green" solution would be a reality, right now, if it made sense. By that I mean that it could be competitive to the present costs of present supplies of energy. It is NOT competitive today, and focing it onto the market just means we spend more on energy, and less on everything else. Most folks dont want LESS OF EVERYTHING else! Our industries would be less competitive, more jobs lost to "green" energy!
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "IF WE put ourselves to it 100%, we could solve our critical problem wisely."
All-or-nothing thinking is never wise. Why would you want to make poor people poorer right NOW when it's not even a small stretch of the imagination that we WILL develop the technology to harness or produce other sources of energy in less than 100 years - plenty of time to spare!
Yea, I know.. Conservatives would rather be dead than poor. The argument that we can't afford sustainability should have one result... we should all STOP having children... how cruel to damn them to your future.
Yes, we can't focus 100% on iol independance because it will make us poor.
Oil WILL be $500 a Barrel BY 2050, AS i SAID to you before.
Question: What do your "net worth" stats include? For example, Bill Gates' net worth includes physical assets, plants, equipment, etc. that are necessary to produce products. In addition there is the value of stocks and stock investments. My point being that a percentage of the "net worth" of large and small businesses is necessary to run the business and EMPLOY people. How does Microsoft "steal" from YOU?
Also... any company that is publicly traded is also publicly owned by investors. Many of those investors are just "regular people" who own IRAs, 401Ks, have a Pension Fund, Mutual Fund, etc.
And if anyone is "stealing" from the taxpayer, it's Government Employee UNIONS that have garnered outrageous Pensions at age 50-55!
@HopeForPeaceNow re: Domhoff says "There is thus no need for one big planning apparatus. Instead, the planning tools within a reconstructed market system are simply taxes, subsidies, government purchases, and regulation."
That one statement aptly sums up the inherent contradiction in egalitarian visions of "equality". It still takes a central bureacracy to make the decisions about "taxes, subsidies, government purchases, and regulation". That's what we have NOW.
May I ask, when a minority owns 93% of a total, WHAT CONTROL does the MAJORITY HAVE over that power apart from gov?? AE would answer "natural business cycles, consumerism, supply & demand and innovation SHOULD replace gov in ensuring that power does not become ulitimate. Yet, when the power grid itself OWNS 93% of the total, ARE the AE controllers enough??
Does the public have the needed power over the Elite by consumerism alone when they own 7% of the total equation?
@HopeForPeaceNow "....when a minority owns 93% of a total, WHAT CONTROL does the MAJORITY HAVE over that power apart from gov?"
Not much when the government is in bed with the money. That's Crony Capitalism. The more government usurps its Constitutional powers, the less power the People have. Egalitarian theory assumes "if only the right people were in charge" they would return the power to the people. But in reality, power and money corrupt and - there are no "right people".
Great reason to get gov OUT of bed / the Elite. Removal of Corp campaign contributions and lobbyists is job one. 100% OPPOSED by Conservatives. How hard do y'all defend the SCOTUS "citizens untited" ruling? Listen to your reps defend it.
The more the gov serves the Corps, the less it serves the people, unless you believe they havethe same agenda - no regs, low taxes for the very rich, removal of aide for poverty CAUSED by the trickle UP of our total wealth (Connies blame laziness!) FOR the 80%?
You're missing the big picture if you think K-street isn't equal opportunity, "level playing field", Cronyism or that it only runs to the Right. Check out the REAL FACTS about campaign contributions on OpenSecrets and you will see that there is a RIVER of money flowing towards Capital Hill buying influence and favors Right AND Left.
Also check out "Funding Liberalism With Blue-Chip Profits" by David Hogberg and Sarah Haney. In 2004, Corporate foundations gave almost 60 Million to the politcal LEFT, while the political RIGHT received just over 4 Million.
I think we agree though! Get the special interests out of the Government. But I would add - Get the Government OUT of private enterprise, stop with the social engineering and return to LIMITED Government power - as enumerated in the CONSTITUTION.
Man, are trying to claim that the "right" has no such ties? Look up the Kochs. own the 2nd largest oil polluter and pay the TPS bill to get the DEREGULATION they want, so they can pollute unabetted!!!
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "The Conservatarian answer is remove all rules and supervision from that 20%."
"Conservatarian"?
Constitutional Conservatives do NOT believe in "removing all rules" - and the "supervision" part of your statement is too vague to respond to. In any case, where in the Consitution does it talk about the Government "supervising" private property? How 'bout you get to keep the money you earn, and so does the other guy?
COnservetarian is AYn Rand pumped up on "remove all regulation" steroids fed by the "right".
It is 100% removal of all rules and supervision from the Elite who own, built and run our Corps and financial system and own 93% of our total financial wealth.
That IS the Libertarian/AE/Conservative agenda.
That IS liassez faire. Look it up, please.
Yes, you earn the same as you did in 1958 (adjusted).
The "other guy" got a 73% pay raise. Flat tax is inane.
May I ask, when a minority owns 93% of a total, WHAT CONTROL does the MAJORITY HAVE over that power apart from gov?? AE would answer "natural business cycles, consumerism, supply & demand and innovation SHOULD replace gov in ensuring that power does not become ulitimate. Yet, when the power grid itself OWNS 93% of the total, ARE the AE controllers enough??
Does the public have the needed power over the Elite by consumerism alone when they own 7% of the total equation?
@HopeForPeace "NowAmazing how Americans love to support the very system that makes them poor everyday ..."
California is mosty liberal, mostly democratic, taxed to death and still BANKRUPT. As a California voter, what are you folks supporting that has destroyed your economy?
No need for sarcasm. You had said that Americans love to support the system that makes them poorer... and I was just wondering what SYSTEM that was in California. Perhaps more helpful SOLUTIONS could be found if voters stop getting played by Party Politics and start looking at POLICIES. Do a search for "Should We Let California Go Bankrupt?" - on RealClearMarkets.
policies OF THE "RIGHT": Warmongering, corporatism, abolition of aide for the poor, removal of minimum wage laws and unions and the right to bear arms. For many that's Gospel Truth. Comprehensive environmental and financial deregulation, profit margins in warmaking, Pax Americana, Tax cuts for the very rich, death by pollution, the coming end of oil and proliferation of nuclear arms.
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "... that NOT the platform of the Conservative base?Yes, I left out the jailing of gays"
No, jailing gays is not the platform of the "Conservative base". Abortion is muddier but we'll never get anywhere arguing the all-or-nothing extremes.
Conservative: The fundamentalist base DeMint, Ensign, Brownback and more are all members of the "Family" (Look up Jeff Sharlet) who 100% support and promote Uganda's legislation that gays must be jailed. The new laws they promote state that if you HARBOR gays, you also face prison. That is 100% fact. I hope you will try to debunk it by researching. You will find it altogether true. DeMint is the backbone of TP politcal power.
This is your C Street base. judgemental adulterers Ensign, Sanford +
Your theory about the origins of the TP are just plain wrong. It's not even one cohesive group - although low side polls show 60% of the American People agree with the basic goals of greater fiscal responsibility and LIMITED government as ENUMERATED IN THE CONSTITUTION.
All you had to do was put Koch bros in your earch and READ!
"..2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that their network is known as the Kochtopus." New Yorker
In the early 90s Bush hired Luntz to coin "climate change". It made it much easier for people to not support the idea that man has impact on the earth. Hatred for Envornmental regs could be sold more easily with trhat term.
Now you see the TP and the "right" fighting hard to ensure we are dead instead of poor, as now we are too poor to fix when (again) Bush/Connies broke!
So I was right. No matter what it's called, you say humans are responsible for end-times gloom and doom of the planet - no room for other OPINIONS about the FUTURE and how much we can actually do about the warming cycle that exists today. There is no "war on the environment" but there are surely political extremists on the Left who have latched onto "the environment" - using fear as a means to promote their own POLITICAL agendas through "human-oppressive" environmental regs.
Yes, you are "right". Conservative Christians. in the name of Republican jesus, DEFEND Corporations RIGHT to rape the planet for profit, regardless of the reality that our children will NOT raise theirs.
Yes, if you believe that God teaches you should make profit today at the peril of future generations and that "christians" have the right to kill off humanity for profit, then you ARE fullfiling prophesy....
The reality that oil will continue to be more expensive and diffcult to produce, while Conservatives cling to a carbon BASED REALITY, is no opinion.
The fact that the top 20% of us OWN 93% our financial wealth, remove an additional .12% more every year and "christians" SUPPORT NO rules and supervision FOR THAT 20%, is not an opinion.
The fact that the US defends our interests in other countries with bullets for profit, occupying and supporting killers when it is OUR interest (Bin LADEN, Taliban, Contras, Suarto, Baby Doc.. + ) WHILE the "right" supports nuclear proliferation, is NO opinion!
ONE nuclear exchange in the Middle East (We support Israel who HAS Nukes and Will use them) will create Nuclear Fall through out the Middle East and Europe.
TP originated in 2007 by Paulers. YOU can find out when the Kochs got involved by READING! Kochs have the second largest oil pollouter in the US and Spend Mills on the TP ensuring your regulation hatred will allow them to pollute your own children to death.
Sorry, you're just wrong. In fact, in the beginning, there was much discussion among the locals here about not wanting to be aligned with ANY established political group. Consequently, not everyone you might see as a "TP'er" thinks exactly the same way about each and every issue.
@HopeForPeaceNow asks, "Are you saying I am wrong that Koch's pay for the TP??"
Yes. The Koch's support a variety of conservative causes and candidates but had nothing to do with the initial - and decentralized - organization of LOCAL GROUPS of like-minded people who share "Tea Party" goals.
If you doubt the veractiy of that claim, find the group closest to you and give the contact person a call. Politely ask "how did you get started"?
@HopeForPeaceNow "Did you read Republican resume before you decided that only Republicans create smaller govs?"
Never said that. I've been talking about the goals of the Tea Party, not the Republicans. TP goals are what the Repub Party USED TO BE about. That said, it's a given that Dems are for BIG Government - and it's killing us.
Under Clinton AFTER the Repubs took over Congress. Obama could take a lesson on what true Bi-Partisanship looks like. It isn't facilitated by derision and doesn't include bribes.
"Enacted in 1990, in FY 1991, the Federal deficit was 4.5% of GDP, and by FY 2000, the Federal surplus was 2.4%.[3] Total Federal spending as a percentage of GDP decreased each year from FY1991 through FY 2000, falling from 22.3% to 18.4%.
(Here come the Repubs) Deficits, though, returned by the last year PAYGO was in effect: There was a "return to deficits ($158 billion, 1.5% of GDP) in 2002".
Clinton inherited the economic momentum of the Reagan era and a decade of relative peace in the world following the end of the Cold War. Bush inherited 9-11.
'Clinton inherited the economic momentum of the Reagan era"
Republican LIE!
FACT: "A major problem with the economy at the time was the issue of the massive deficit and the problem of government spending. In order to address these issues, in August 1993, Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 which passed Congress without a single Republican vote." Instituted Paygo & reduced the DEFICIT.
Check my front page for Repub record on FISCAL RESPOSIBILITY!
In fact, I would suggest the majority OF the problems we face today are BECAUSE of that platform.
How did deregulation work out for us? $60 TRILLIOn in Swaps, $1 Trillion in bad loans. Yet the "right" lies about that day after day, blaming CRA (9% of total SPs) and F&F who owned 40% of Sp's and WAS regulated vs the private market owning 60% of SPs and UNregulated.
Yet, though a constant barrage of lies, this is covered up and the "right" kindles hatred of regulation!
@ConservativeClarity Again, which of these is NOT a foundation of the Conservative platform:
Comprehensive environmental and financial deregulation, profit margins in warmaking, Pax Americana, Tax cuts for the very rich, death by pollution, the coming end of oil and proliferation of nuclear arms for us and our friends?
Plainly, Conservatives support our further relience on oil and reject change. Their base is oil filled, and the culprits for attaching us TO a dwindling resource. Yes or nop?
You believe the Conservative platform includes moving us into a non-carbon based reality??
" not "tax cuts for the wealthy".
Wow. I though it applied to the higher earners, also. Thanks for clarifying.
So, again, which of those is NOT a Conservative platform??
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "You believe the Conservative platform includes moving us into a non-carbon based reality?"
It's all about PROCESS. Constitutional Consrervatives don't believe in the Government FORCING reality. Carbon-based or not.
Taxes: Keeping the Bush tax cuts for EVERYONE - at least for another year - and reigning in spending. Many Constitutional Conservatives favor a flat tax, e.g. consumption tax.
You are mixed up. CORPORATIONS force reality... Ex... OIL fights EVERY DAY for it's market share, KNWOING that doing so will spell death for our grandchildren. Do they care? Of course not. They get rich now, you get dead later. By 2050 oil will be $500 a barrel = end of reality as we know it. Do they care? No, they lie day after day, indoctineate poor Americans into support and continue to FIGHT ANY change!!
WHO has the power to stop them?? GOV and GOV ONLY!
We all HAVE to support "further reliance on oil" until other options are viable. Bet I've saved more natural resources by driving the same gas-guzzling SUV for 16 years than someone who buys the latest, greatest and greenest every year or two. Solar panels can't be manufactured without using natural resources and, for now, leaving some nasty chemical playgrounds in China.
Yes, we need to conserve our planet, but there is no such thing as a "non-carbon based reality".
"We all HAVE to support "further reliance on oil" until other options are viable"
Reality: HOW WILL aNYTHING ELSE become viable when Conservatives FIGHT to remain oil addicted??
" Bet I've saved more natural resources by driving the same gas-guzzling SUV for 16 years than someone who buys the latest, greatest and greenest every year or two." Thanks, that one is going in my book.
@HopeForPeaceNow says "Reality: HOW WILL aNYTHING ELSE become viable when Conservatives FIGHT to remain oil addicted?"
False premise. But we've been round this circle before. Innovation is maximized through free market competition - not your tax dollars and punitive "incentives"
@nbutler777
Why? NO rules, NO supervision for the elite, that's the big plan.
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
@nbutler777 'who would enforce it?' ?? the board of governors we have now seems to work in reality as enforcement. Any entity can be governed, if Corp power is removed from the system. That power corrupts regulators and makes them virtually powerless, as happened this last time around. Greespan refused to regulate swaps and the private subprime market, he was asked to repeatedly.
Pre 1930 economics don't resemble 2011 economics. I know Paul screams to end the fed. Look at the hidden WHY?
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
@nbutler777
All economies have a central bank. One you remove ours, none will trade with us due to instability. You realize why the Fed was created?
Only cons believe that if something is broken you should throw it out. Fix the Fed, stop Corporate payoffs, run for political purposes with tax payer $. But End the Fed is plain silly. Paul knows this. He still preaches it. Why? NO rules, NO supervision for the elite, that's the big plan.
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
@nbutler777 "if you ran this country what economic plan would support"
Mixed free markets. This is the definition for regulated markets as opposed to pure free markets. I'm sure you know this. The unregulated shadow banking system which grew larger then the regulated banking system crashed - unregualted swaps crashed, unregulated private subprimes crashed. The idea that greed regulated itself is purely silly. Those with $ use their power to make more $. Leave them alone w/ no rules?
F no.
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
" Leave them alone w/ no rules?"
This is what the "right" teaches - only unregualted markets. How unregulated? Watch how they wrangle to stop, amend, water down, lie to death every regulation proposed since 2008. Take the CFPB - they attack it with hatred - watch them grill Elizabeth Warren for nothing, finally getting rid of her, lying the whole time. Then watch her speech on "The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class" it will BLOW you MIND! Take that challenge for US.
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
@nbutler777 2012? Great question. Our government has been purchased by Corps. No player on the field is unaffected, Obama included. Until Corp lobbyists and corp campaign donations are removed from the system (the "right" opposes this), the people of America have no hope, regardless.
While Obama has been successfully labeled a socialist by the "right", his legislation is centrist with compromise at it's core. I will vote for him only as a vote against conservative policy across the board.
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
@nbutler777 I'm pretty much going on this comment you made.
.. "don't tax the poor and tax the rich even more.... then you are just foolish."
"You have no idea what I believe.I never said I wanted the Republicans tax plan to pass.Stop assuming."
Maybe I took it wrong. Were you saying that taxing the rich was "foolish"?
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
Yes. But you have already heard it. "...why Democrats want to raise taxes and I know why Republicans want to lower them. "
Republicans claim "jobcreators"; most of the jobs created by the Forbes top 400 are overseas, and will remain overseas until Americans choose to work for $3 an hour. Pretty plain.
Ryan = a 25% top tax rate. Democrats would like to see that go back to the pre-Bush rate of 37%.
As the Elite remove M.C. wealth, poverty spikes, we say hold them responsible.
You don't.
HopeForPeaceNow 7 months ago
@nbutler777 Yea, that's what they teach you.
The few who own 93% of our financial wealth should pay less tax than those who own 7%.
Warren Buffet pays less in income tax than his secretary.
THAT is the definition of foolish.
Before Reagan the top tax bracket was over 60%.
Today it's 35%, conservatives hope to bring that down to 25%. Their excuse is that the more money he rich have, the more jobs they create.
Yet we LOSE jobs even as we give tax cuts. They store the wealth, plainly.
HopeForPeaceNow 8 months ago
I want my W Bush/B Hussain Bamako Tax cut!
AthenasConquest 11 months ago
The United States does not have a wealth tax the income tax keeps people from climbing the economic ladder.The tax code is so complex tax code compliance costs more than tax liability.At the end of the year business owners and accountants find ways to keep the business un profitable to avoid taxes
AthenasConquest 1 year ago
@AthenasConquest
Yes, tax code is crucial.
DO you support 20% of Americans owning 93% of financial wealth?
5 years ago they owned 91%. 60 years ago they owned 80%.
Is wealth trickling up or down??
What effect does owning less wealth have on the middle class?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
AthenasConquest 1 year ago
@AthenasConquest Are you claiming CHrist now?
Yes, The elite have romoved 13% of our wealth.
Who is taking whose stuff?
CAn you subtract 7 from 20? I have been over this before.
You are the robbed in support of the robber.
Not me. Jesus does not teach that the ELite should remove the wealth of the poor, which is what you support.
How will you answer on That Day?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow I pay quite a bit more than 13% in taxes. Life is not fair. Ask future President Palin. I know this may burst your bubble the wealth is not evenly distributed.Jesus loitered with the lowest society could offer Prostitutes and Tax collectors.
AthenasConquest 1 year ago
@AthenasConquest
Yes, Athena... you like likley pay a higher percentage than Buffet whose stack of hundreds is 3 miles high. Literaly.
As I said.
Did Jesus say "The rich shoud prey on the poor"?
There is a test on that question at the end. Best of luck with that.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Jesus said, "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God."
AthenasConquest 11 months ago
My question is why are thjngs like that? Is it natural or is something sinister going on? As with sports of all kinds people rise to the top. We can't all be world class sportmens or Olympians. We can't all be Richard Branson. Is taking that away from them because they excel and sharing it the answer? is that right? What about poor people who get out of poverty through free commerce. Should they be punished for being successful? Do we have the right? No. It would require enforcement & theft.
Underground906 1 year ago
"Wealth to protect power. Power to increase wealth" Di Medici
The wealth of the middle calss has, for the past 30 years been trickling up. Why? Simple. Power cvreates more wealth. More wealth protects more power. The middle class lost 2 more % of it's financial wealth in the past 6 years. The 80% had 9%, now we have 7%. That puts 2millin more of us in poverty? Why? Less and less $ resources for more people. Check out the rise in poverty in the US recently.
Google "who rules america"!!!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
Miss NO-Hope, Greenspan was joined by Rubin, and Summers, influential men and members of Clinton`s Treasury. The derivatives Brooksley warned about were based on HOME mortgages. To use her name if fine by me, but YOU just guide the conversation back to square #1, the housing bubble. No bubble, no crash. No crash, no issue with derivatives, based on housing, mortgages.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
Mr. I Love dick:
Derivatives have always been linked to Bonds, interest rates and so on, NOT JUST mortgages.
NO DERIVATIVES + NO SUBPRIMES = NO Housing Bubble
Done.
Xcept that you MAY finanlly ADMIT that 60% of the Subprime mess and 100% of derivatives was made possible ONLY B Y 100% LACK of REGULATION
Nah, can't admit that - it undermines your whole "Only the gov" is to blame argument!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Derivatives have been linked since 1700 BC to commodities. Your auto policy, you betting you will crash, against a corp betting you will not, is a derivative. Your health plan. Well, probably you are on MediCaid, arent you Hope? OK, then MY health Plan. I bet I will get sick, with a corp who thinks I wont. Silly? So? The derivatives that failed were based on mortgages. You still close your eyes to Govt stopping banks who didnt make subprimes from doing business, expanding.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
Yea.
And Insurance has a 120% reserve requirement. Come on.
Try again.
Are you actually claiming that 100% of CDOs were linked only to Subprimes?? Can you cite that?
You still close your eyes to the private market INVENTING Alt-A loans.
DO you believe that without gov's help they would have never been invented?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow The POINT is NOT that all derivatives are mortgage based. The point is that the derivatives that FAILED were mortgage based. AND, mortgage based derivatives ARE BACKED up by HOMES. No housing bubble, no housing collapse, no issue with mortgage backed derivatives. This is SIMPLE enough.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1 Insurance reserve requirements are set by States, varying between 10%- 12% of insurance premiums. Not 120%, a slight error by a power of 10.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
The Federal Reserve printed Trillions upon Trillions in new money, injected into financial system, over decades. The fractional reserve banking system makes 9 new dollars for each new printed dollar injected by the Fed. The Fed more than doubled the money supply ( M-3) from 1995-2005, then YOU, Miss NO-HOPE, get all indignant that there are too many financial instruments in the financial sector? Gee, where did all that cash come from? Progressive Wilson`s Fed, that`s where.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
"The fractional reserve banking system makes 9 new dollars for each new printed dollar injected by the Fed."
The Elite lend $30 for every $1 they reserve. No need for liquidity! When the vast majority of our wealth is held by the vast minority, THAT chokehold effects every tiny part of our reality, INCLUDING the gov's need to print $. The Elite teach you that gov prints $ because it's evil.
Your belief in that lie continues support for the Power Grid which chokes the middle class slowly.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow With the Fed fueling a bubble in housing with printed money, the fear of risk totally disappeared. That lured the public to buy homes, that they thought would go up, and banks loaned, because they thought the same. The bubble caused the stupidity, of borrowers ( you) and bankers.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
I bet the lure of HOME OWNERSHIP was the culprit. We disagree in the you believe the evil is the gov. I belive the evil is the greed of the Corps HELPED by the gov. Your answer is remove the only possible police. My answer is mitigate the power of the evil.
BIG difference!
DO YOU claim that CORPS had ZERO cause in the bubble? You still forget, no liquidity is needed for leverage AND 60% of the issue laid in PRIVATE HANDS!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Bubbles always have caused stupid behavior, because dumb investments look like they cant lose in a bubble. A risky home loan looked secure, because rising home prices meant there is no risk in a foreclosure, silly girl.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
Silly dick lover:
How bright do you have to be to realize housing will not CLIMB forever? You are saying the financial industry was just "dumb"? You buy that? Every agent I knew talked about when the housing market would collapse.
Real Estate agents knew more than wall street??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Then, you and the "bright" agents should all be rich, so stop bitching. Anyone who knew it was coming, could have made a bundle. YOU CLAIM you lost your house, and $130,000. Who is the dumb bitch calling everyone else stupid? I did not lose my home, I paid cash for it, 10 years ago, with proceeds from another house I paid off 7 years before that. This crisis is for the STUPID. I refuse to participate. Refinance? BTW, $130,000 made you rich as Buffet , compared to Bolivians.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
The hate always comes out.
If you knew my life you might feel like shit for your words. You are so far off.
As I said.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Sure, I heard your boo-hoo story already. "I`m poor, but I could be rich, but its noble to be poor. I just wait till some Socialist Dictator will steal from those who DID TRY, and dump it in my lap". and, " I`m a single mother, boo- hoo. Worked in real estate 2003-2006 ( bubble), lost $130,000 in equity, and my home". THEN, you claim "everyone could see it". Of course, you didnt give the $130,000 to the poor in Bolivia, did you? Boo- hoo. Maybe a $5 check? That bounced?
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow As a side note, I would like to say that personally, I have little capital in banks, nor have I ever, and I am almost 60. Just enough to write checks to pay electric bills, real estate taxes, etc. Physical Gold, in safekeeping, makes worries about derivatives and swaps someone else`s problem. But, they real issue is who created all this money, and the fact that a bubble makes the risky appear as a sure thing. Guess you learned the hard way. Mises wrote in the 30`s, no excuse.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
"Give us this day our daily bread" "Do not store up for yourself treasure on earth" "Woe to the rich, they have already recieved their comfort" "He who looses his life for my sake, shall gain it, he who clings to his own life shall loose it. What does it profit you to gain the earth and loose your soul" "Go, give all your money to the poor" "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle..." you know the rest and whom it is I quote.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
" Mises wrote in the 30`s, no excuse."
You follow Mises, I follow Jesus.
We shall see.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
"The Fed more than doubled the money supply ( M-3) from 1995-2005, then YOU, Miss NO-HOPE, get all indignant that there are too many financial instruments in the financial sector?"
There ya go blaming the evil government. Ever wonder WHY THEY TRAIN you that the government is evil??
HOW will YOU CONTROL the ELITE once you remove government??
I bet you have no answer for that, as ther eisn't one.
You support thr rapist and call the only police evil!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow What Elite? I think the power hunbgry in Govt are the Elite. But, do you mean the rich, the corporations? We little guys always have controlled the corporations. We make them bug, like WalMart, instead of K-Mart. Or we destroy Hudson and Packard and Studebaker, because we like Fords. We buy coal produced electricity, because its better than chopping trees down. OMG! The trees were going to disappear! In fuel! OMG! The whales! We burnt their oil in lamps! That was close!
luvcheney1 1 year ago
'What Elite? I think the power hunbgry in Govt are the Elite."
?? Does the gov OWN 93% of ALL financial wealth??
You believing that consumers control the work of Corps is exactly what they want. Milk producers STILL put BGH in millk KNOWING iot causes cancer - they just HIDE It. OIL Corps lie day after day to keep us on oil. CORPS run this country, you thinking you have some power over that LEVEL of power is simply silly.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
"1995-2005" Gee why didn't Bush protest??
"indignant that there are too many financial instruments "
Tell me that Swaps were NOT "weapons of financial mass destruction"? (Whose quote is that?)
You belittle the obvious reality!
"financial instruments in the financial sector? Gee, where did all that cash come from? Progressive Wilson`s Fed, that`s where."
I think this is the 4th time I reminded you liquidity is not needed in 40/1 leverage. Can't figure that out yourself?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Miss No Hope, speculative, risky behavior is rampant during monetary caused bubbles. I think this is the 10th time I mention that you are all tied up in symptoms, not causes. Do you think this is the first time this ever happened?
luvcheney1 1 year ago
Mr. I love dick, who wrote $60 trillion in speculative, risky contracts? The gov? Swaps are an effect? Yes, absolutely, an effect of hatred for regulation. Check out "Brooksley Born", 100% NON regulation was demanded by Greenspan in1999. Born tried to regulate the derivatives market. Foresaw the meltdown. She was fired. You call deregulation an "effect", not a cause?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Miss NO- Hope, loose monetary policy always results in inflation, which is sometimes concentrated in bubbles. It also leads to risky, speculative behaviors. These behaviors are the cause of loose money. It is absurd to want to allow the printing of excessive amounts of money, then think you can regulate the effects of that away.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
How is removing all rules and supervision FROM those who built, own and run our reality and who OWN 93% of all our wealth..
... an answer??
PPUULLLLLLEEAAASSSEEEEEEE?????????????
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow 1) If you think there are no rules, no supervision, you are nuts. We have a tiny business in our home, have all kinds of rules, with the Govt trying to stop us from doing business. 2) If you are referring to banking, finance, that happens to be one of the most regulated businesses, and one where the govt is very involved. I TOLD YOU BEFORE DEAF WOMAN, if you dislike a business, do not go there. That is the ultimate power. Take your stinking home of the grid, burn your car, etc.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
" If you think there are no rules, no supervision, you are nuts" I NEVER SAID there ARE no rules... I said, correctly, Austrian Economics calls for NO RULES. FACT.
I also asked HOW you think anyone could make coherant rules when Republicans hire Pepsi salesmen to write langue to kill bills before THEY ARE EVEN WRITTEN! Repugs oppose regulation as a rule. No valid, working regulation will ever exist as long as Repubs side with Corps, attempting to defeat any and all regulatory legislation.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
You think consumers have ultimate power when Corps own 70% of total profits and all media outlets??
I TOLD YOU BEFORE DEAF MAN, 93% ownership IS POWER.
How they get y'all to fail to see that is beyond me.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
Still waiting on this one:
"How is removing all rules and supervision FROM those who built, own and run our reality and who OWN 93% of all our wealth..
... an answer??"
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
Oil is not a dwindling resource, that is just silly! The Green River Formation, 95% of which is under Federal Gov control, ( which means it can NOT be developed, of course!) has estimated reserves of 1.5 TRILLION barrels, about 5 times as much as Saudi Arabia. They are in Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, which is great, since they are very low population States. The oil is impregnated in rock, therefore requires "retorting", which cooks the rock, liquifying the oil. Oil over $80 makes it economic.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
luvcheney:
"Oil is not a dwindling resource, that is just silly!"
Wow. I never cease to marvel at how they get y'all to support the end of America.
Oil shale is 40% more toxic in extraction at double the cost.
OIl WILL be $500 a barrel by 2050.
Just another way Conservative dogma will cause the end of humanity.
Prolifferation of nulclear arms, Pax Americana & "holy wars", death by unabetted pollution, financial predation.
Take your pick, you support them all.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow I guess you prefer Deep- Water drilling? Thanks though for making my point, that Oil shale costs double, but since you believe oil will cost six times as much evenutually, then that makes the 1.5 Trillion barrels in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah profitable. Then, we will have 5 times the oil Saudi Arabia has. I bet, after 100 years when that is gone, someone might have found another field? The Brazilians have found one 500 miles long.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
'OIl WILL be $500 a barrel by 2050." me
"You know, of course, that your computer runs on fossil fuel." you
Yes. As I said, pathetic Conservative support for our continued dependence on oil is just ONE way in which your dogma stands to wipe humans from the earth.
"Enough of them craving for dead"
"It seems they will answer to their sons and daughters in time"
Harrison Stafford
Killing off humanity in the name of Republican jesus will get you one thing.
Fire!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow The Dept of Energy reports that Nat Gas gets 24 cents subsidy per megawatt of electricity, Coal gets 44 cents. But solar gets $24.34 and wind gets $23.47. Some poor people would rather pay less for Nat Gas electricity, and have money left over to be able to have a bowl of corn flakes. Damn. Corn flakes cost a lot, because Govt wants corn in your gas tank, not on the kitchen table. Oh well, go eat dirt.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
"Corn flakes cost a lot, because Govt wants corn in your gas tank, not on the kitchen table"
Yes, the government are the bad guys. The Corps have nothing to do with this reality.
Does that level of silly ever get old to you?
You blame the only possible police and let the thieves go.
Do YOU beleive the Founders wanted Corps and the Elite to rule with no rules and no supervision?
Did THEY hate government... and create government??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
"Some poor people would rather pay less for Nat Gas electricity"
I don't think poor people are stupid enough to want to have low rates and ruin their children.
That takes a special kind of stupid.
Read the article in the New Yorker "Confounding Fathers". Princeton University scores Beck on his account of history.
"F".
Beck spins lies (Even Buckly was smart enough to realize the difference between Libs and socialists) that have been around for 50 years. Read it. Dare ya.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Go stand in front of a WalMart, and ask the people if they want gas at $2.50, or $5. If you do not believe me. IF alternatives were cheaper, they would be delivered, they are NOT. OBVIOUSLY. I suppose you think we can compete, by buying higher priced energy?
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
Ok, Cheney:
I'm hoping for your answer on:
1.Why would the world keep the dollar when we let everything fail, including entire other countries, as you propose??
2.WHAT will happen to the US when we REFUSE to innovate, remain depenendent on oil and it reaches $500 a barrel by 2050, as you propose?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow 1) The Great Depression was a credit collapse, 9000 banks failed. Fortunes in deposits were lost. The dollar was not destroyed, in fact, its purchasing power increased, because of falling prices. So, your point is silly, history proves it. 2) $80 oil means only oil that is profitable at $80 gets produced. $100 oil brings new supplies...... those profitable over $80, and under $100. Shell estimated $65 oil would make shale profitable. But, it is ILLEGAL, because of lunatics.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
" The dollar was not destroyed"
You are claiming that because the $ didn't fall in 1930 it would not have in 2008?
Is there any difference between the fiancial system in 1930 and 2008??
If US Corps renigged on 26 Trillion $ contracts across the globe and caused Global social denegration.. YOU BELIEVE the world would have kept the dollar??
Yea, dig up Colorado instead of pushing oil independance.
OY, do you wonder why NON-indoctrinated minds can not tolerate your lack of reasoning?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Monetary policy. The dollar did not collapse in 1930 because the money supply was allowed to deflate, to decline. The amount of dollars was allowed to go down. The money lost in the banking system was not replaced by newly "printed" money. If you lost money in a bank, the Govt just did not do ANYTHING. This time it WAS. The money was lost this time, same as then. Its just that now, they replaced it, bailing out the system. Thats why the dollar will collapse. ( is collapsing).
luvcheney1 1 year ago
So, you are still claiming that the US could blow up the World Economy, cause social unrest and remain the world's currency?
Youa re cvlaiming that the same financial reality existed in 1930 that exists today?
No relevent changes have occured in the structure of the Global financial system since 1930?
Whatever we did in 1930 would work the same today?
What was true in 1930 is true today?
Thank about that for a minute.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Actually, what was true 200 years after Christ, in Rome, is true today. The Roman Govt grew so large, under heavy taxation, that they debased their money, by reducing silver content. From 100% silver during Agustus reign, to pathetic bronze coins, washed in silver. US? Silver until 1964, pathetic zinc, washed to look like silver NOW. Wage/price controls, "Edict on Prices" under Emperor Diocletian to stop inflation ( govt caused). Just like Nixon`s controls. Failed too. Same.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
"200 years after Christ, in Rome, is true today."
Yes, I am sure you would proport that nothing has changed in the financial secor since 200 AD.
And if America had caused financial and social ruination across the world, no country would protest the dollar as the world currency.
You prove to me everyday how dangerous is this brainwashing perpetrated on the masses by Corporate media and stoke my fires to slay that beast!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Dont be so melodramatic. Debasing currencies is exactly WHY govts, over thousands of years think THEY should control currencies! 2000 years ago, they mixed more base metal into silver. 200 years ago, they printed more currency. Today, it is electronically created. Same game, different century. It is believed inflation ran 15,000% in the third century AD. What is KNOWN is that coins were 100% at Augustus time, 90% by Nero, and .02% by 270 AD. (2/100ths of one %) That is metallugy
luvcheney1 1 year ago
My question was "Would the world have kept the dollar if we had blown the entire world economy into social chaos through $60 trillion in Swaps securitized in part by $1 Trillion in subprimes"?
It seems your answer is, all Govs devalue the monetary base.
Is that a yes?
The world would have remained on the dollar regardless of the mass devistation the US caused?
US Corps could have easily renigged on $23 Trillion in contract payments?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow This is simple, with many historical events for you to observe, to answer your own question. Contrast the Great Depression, with the hyperinflation of the Wiemar Republic ( hyperinflation). 9000 US banks bankrupt, deposits LOST. Dollar goes on, with GREATER purchasing power. Wiemar Republic hyperinflation, currency destroyed. Now, we are inflating a "solution", the market it screaming at you, "bail out of the dollar"! Dont you listen to the market? No, you think its silly.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
As I said, you oversimplify when arguing that what occured under the circumstances of the financial system in 1920 will occur in the same way in 2008.
As I said about a week ago and many times since, how much has changed in the inconnectedness/leverage/quantity of contracts sold across seas since 1920?
For your argument there must BE NO CHANGE in world financial systems since 1920. Silly.
Yet you continue to argue that same tired point day after day.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
The fact that you see no difference between 1920s Germany and the Depression and the financial secor today is enough for me.
Thanks.
"Now, we are inflating a "solution", "
Wrong. We are saying DON"T BLOW THE DAMN economy up to begin with!! DEREGULATION BLEW IT UP - YOU STILL SUPPORT DEREGULATION... HOW is that hard to see? We are STUCK with some kind of fix for what REPUBS BROKE! It''s SAVE YOUR ASS time!
Having confidence in something no one should have confidence in... is silly!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
Green Energy is way more expensive today, than fossil. Pushing it now means lowering our standards of living NOW. I thought you cared about the poor? Charge even more for electricity? "Rambling"? How is referring to prior historical economic calamities, caused by poor monetary policies, "rambling"? The Hammurabi Code refers to mortgages on property, loans, derivatives, bankruptcy, too. Futures contracts on commodities too, 1700 BC. Think somehow today, we are "above" all that?
luvcheney1 1 year ago
"Pushing it now means lowering our standards of living NOW."
What does ignoring it now mean for our children?
If WE can't afford to fix it now, how will THEY when oil is $500 a barrel?
Seems I am waiting still for your answer on how THAT will effect our economy/poor/foreign policy?
Talk about the draft!!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow I already replied to this point. As oil rises, more supply comes on line, and the "green" solutions become closer to making economic sense. If oil is $82 a barrel, all oilfields that cost more than that to bring up oil, are idle. Dont you see that? At $120 barrel, many new fields become profitable, while the public slows up use, because they find the price high. More oil, less usage just means a new balance, at a higher price. Big deal. IF we let big oil go get it. You wont.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
". As oil rises, more supply comes on line"
Sorry, this is moronic.
AS oil becomes harder and more expensive, as is unavoidable, we HAVE TO SWITCH!
You simply accept the slow death with out thinking. We are addicted to crack. Your answer is stay addicted. Mine is kick the habit before it kicks you.
BECAUSE of YOU YOUR children WILL FACE $500 a barrel oil.
War and desolation is your answer for them.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
"Pushing it now means lowering our standards of living NOW" you
"It seems they will answer to their sons and daughters in time.
For now they say, "Go away children go away". Groundation
How WILL you answer your 5 children when they ask, "Why did you sell out our future for your own riches and convenience"?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
American Corps selling Trillions in bad contracts....
..... that they had NO reserves to cover ...
.... by this blowing up the world's financial reality...
...causing mass financial devistation across markets.....
...mass social unrest and destruction.....
....would have had zero impact on the world basing it's financial reality on the
.... dollar?
Really?
Based on 1930??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Certainly there are differences! There were 450 million ounces of Gold in Fort Knox in 1935, 261 million today, reported ( some doubt that). The dollar was convertible into Gold, at $35 in 1935, and remained convertible until 1971 ( at $42.22). There was no unfunded liability of over $100 Trillion for Social Security and MediCare. There is no reason to keep faith in the dollar, unless someone butchers the budget, and stops printing.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
You are flipping around all over the place. I have no idea what you are rambling about now.
Maybe that there is not enough gold in America to reconnect to gold monetarily. Not that logic or reason or fact would apply.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
" which is great, since they are very low population States. The oil is impregnated in rock, therefore requires "retorting", which cooks the rock, liquifying the oil. Oil over $80 makes it economic."
Disgusting. "We should rape our planet to support oil's power base".
Sick.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow You know, of course, that your computer runs on fossil fuel. Thats where most electricity comes from. Libs do not like nuclear. Poor people use energy too. According to the Dept of Energy, Natural gas ( fossil), Coal ( fossil), are subsidized 25 cents, and 44 cents per Megawatt hour of electricity. Solar is subsidized $25.34, and wind $23.37 per Megawatt hour. The poor can afford it. Lets rape the public. Products made in high energy cost nations wont sell. Fire workers too!
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
May I ask what you think will happen when oil is $500 a barrel??
AND, how do you feel about manifesting the end of humanity!
"The poor can afford "
Yes, and the oil Elite who set themsleves and their children up in riches that will last 19 generations (even if they don't make ONE more dime).... KNOWING the damn thing would NOT last forever?? They are saints as job creators/humanity killers??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow As oil goes up in price, folks will make changes in their usage, buy smaller vehicles. The higher prices for energy will at the same time make more expensive energy competitive. More expensive, harder to extract oil will be viable, and eventually even solar, wind may be viable. PRICE will bring new supplies, and discourage usage. More supplies, less usage equals "equilibrium". Shale has issues,, but higher oil prices will enable those issues to be addressed, and be economic.
luvcheney1 1 year ago
Oh, yippee, another comment on why oil dependance is economical.
I caught a bit on Fox on how stupid it is for US auto makers to make fuel efficient cars as Americans LOVE their trucks.
"The higher prices for energy"
Is that NOT a reason to switch NOW??
Hmmm, why do we NOT switch? Connie love for big oil??
Nahhh.
You seem to argue to keep the same course we have now and think about the future later.
Support the switch to Green??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
2/3s of our reality is carbon based.
THAT is teh reality the oil power base set up. No care for the fact that it would kill the nation to remain that way.
Even today they teach poor jeuveniles lie after lie to CONTINUE that system. With 100% HATRED for becoming carbon independent.
You are ready to rape the country for the benefit of this generation and ruination of the next!
You will receive your due reward.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says "With 100% HATRED for becoming carbon independent.....You will receive your due reward."
Being realistic and not wanting to give the government more power is not "hatred".
The only "hatred" in this discussion seems to be coming from you.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
"Being realistic and not wanting to give the government more power is not "hatred"."
This is a great one. Conservatives are taught the only enemy is gov. The fact that big oil BIULT, owns and runs our carbon based reality... that they get rich while we get dead....totally irrelevent. Polluters support Connies as they know they will get status quo and environmetal deregulation through you. IN FACT, the GOV (when run by US) IS the ONLY protection teh public has!!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "IN FACT, the GOV (when run by US) IS the ONLY protection teh public has!!"
If by US, you mean "We the People", I absolutely agree! (we've been around this circle before)
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
"100% HATRED for becoming carbon independent.....You will receive your due reward."me
Being realistic and not wanting to give the government more power is not "hatred".you
For you, energy independance is "giving the gov more power"???
Anything "green" is Commie?
Do you see how your dogma WILL KILL America, literaly??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow "For you, energy independance is "giving the gov more power"?
Don't be silly.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
The "rights" hatred of regs of ALL KINDS and 100% support of pollution in the name of wealth now and death for our children is WHAT WILL be rewarded by the Creator of the planet you are killing.
Hitler is one thing.
Creating a reality for our children where they can not sustain themselves, the ultimate end of humaity, makes Hitler look like Mother Theresa.
I'm NOT complicit!!
I TRIED TO WARN YOU!!!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Nuclear would be economic, if the US were allowed to develop it, like France is. It avoids the negatives of Fossil fuels. Unfortunately, it is effectively illegal, due to regulatory costs. I wonder who hates nuclear?
luvcheney1 1 year ago
" I wonder who hates nuclear? "
Gee, lets replace carbon dependence with cancer.
That sounds like a perfect Conservative idea!
"DEREGULATE NUCLEAR"
Great Connie bumper sticker!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
Yea, lets replace oil with this:
Waste streams, Radioactive waste, High level waste, Other waste, Power plant emissions , Radioactive gases and effluents,Boron letdown, Tritium, Uranium mining, Risk of cancer, Contrast of radioactive accident emissions with industrial emissions, Environmental effects of accidents, Windscale fire, Water usage, Waste heat, Uranium mining.
Just the highlights.
Lets answer pollution with greater pollution.
Only in Connie land.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Our streams and rivers are 100% cleaner than they were 50 years ago and we didn't have to break anyone's bank to get it done. At the other end of the spectrum, Cali's restrictive environmental land use regs have made the cost of homes and apartments skyrocket. Do you want affordable housing for the poor - or not?
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
"Our streams and rivers are 100% cleaner than they were 50 years ago"
REALLY?? Please send me a cite for that.
I love it. I state that Conservetive policies will kill us through pollution and you tell me Cali has too many environmetal regs... get the irony??
"In the last five years alone, chemical factories, manufacturing plants and other workplaces have violated water pollution laws more than half a million times leading to cancer, birth defects and other illnesses." NY Times
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Ask the poor, if they want higher electric, transportation costs. Thats why "alternatives" are subsidized, no one wants to pay extra. The Oil Shale, in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, which is off- limits ( along with much of Alaska, shallow water, much of the Gulf, nuclear, etc) is enough for 205 years. Figure 20 million barrels a day used, with 1.5 Trillion off limits, means if we did NOT import, and did not use, or produce oil from any other source, it lasts 205 years. Peak Oil?
luvcheney1 1 year ago
" Ask the poor, if they want higher electric, transportation costs."
No. YOU ask the poor if they want to own less and less every year, if they want to see more and more poor in this country while the Corps that run this country rape the worker, over pay the CEO and drive us all into slavery in the name of patriotism!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@luvcheney1
"is enough for 205 years"
AT what cost?? Extraction will cause devistation in Wyoming, Utah, Colorado.
Do you care? Go look at the mountain tops in West Virginia.
IF WE put ourselves to it 100%, we could solve our critical problem wisely. Ocean currents can be tapped. ACTUAL Innovation is blocked by the established power grid.
With YOUR personal support!
Look at your comments!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow Any "green" solution would be a reality, right now, if it made sense. By that I mean that it could be competitive to the present costs of present supplies of energy. It is NOT competitive today, and focing it onto the market just means we spend more on energy, and less on everything else. Most folks dont want LESS OF EVERYTHING else! Our industries would be less competitive, more jobs lost to "green" energy!
luvcheney1 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "IF WE put ourselves to it 100%, we could solve our critical problem wisely."
All-or-nothing thinking is never wise. Why would you want to make poor people poorer right NOW when it's not even a small stretch of the imagination that we WILL develop the technology to harness or produce other sources of energy in less than 100 years - plenty of time to spare!
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
Yea, I know.. Conservatives would rather be dead than poor. The argument that we can't afford sustainability should have one result... we should all STOP having children... how cruel to damn them to your future.
Yes, we can't focus 100% on iol independance because it will make us poor.
Oil WILL be $500 a Barrel BY 2050, AS i SAID to you before.
ANY THOUGHTS on how THAT will effect the POOR??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
Question: What do your "net worth" stats include? For example, Bill Gates' net worth includes physical assets, plants, equipment, etc. that are necessary to produce products. In addition there is the value of stocks and stock investments. My point being that a percentage of the "net worth" of large and small businesses is necessary to run the business and EMPLOY people. How does Microsoft "steal" from YOU?
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
Also... any company that is publicly traded is also publicly owned by investors. Many of those investors are just "regular people" who own IRAs, 401Ks, have a Pension Fund, Mutual Fund, etc.
And if anyone is "stealing" from the taxpayer, it's Government Employee UNIONS that have garnered outrageous Pensions at age 50-55!
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
Crack me up.
The bottom 80% owns 8.9 % of all stocks, bonds and mutual funds.
Financial wealth includes all retirements funds MINUS real estate value...
... 20% of us OWN 93% of THAT in America today.
PUKE!
Yea, workers are the theifs, those who have 3 mile high stacks of hundreds are no problem.
Really?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
Look up "Who Rules America". Take syou 3 minutes to answer your own question.
By Prof.William Domhoff. Then let me know.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow re: Domhoff says "There is thus no need for one big planning apparatus. Instead, the planning tools within a reconstructed market system are simply taxes, subsidies, government purchases, and regulation."
That one statement aptly sums up the inherent contradiction in egalitarian visions of "equality". It still takes a central bureacracy to make the decisions about "taxes, subsidies, government purchases, and regulation". That's what we have NOW.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
May I ask, when a minority owns 93% of a total, WHAT CONTROL does the MAJORITY HAVE over that power apart from gov?? AE would answer "natural business cycles, consumerism, supply & demand and innovation SHOULD replace gov in ensuring that power does not become ulitimate. Yet, when the power grid itself OWNS 93% of the total, ARE the AE controllers enough??
Does the public have the needed power over the Elite by consumerism alone when they own 7% of the total equation?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow "....when a minority owns 93% of a total, WHAT CONTROL does the MAJORITY HAVE over that power apart from gov?"
Not much when the government is in bed with the money. That's Crony Capitalism. The more government usurps its Constitutional powers, the less power the People have. Egalitarian theory assumes "if only the right people were in charge" they would return the power to the people. But in reality, power and money corrupt and - there are no "right people".
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
Great reason to get gov OUT of bed / the Elite. Removal of Corp campaign contributions and lobbyists is job one. 100% OPPOSED by Conservatives. How hard do y'all defend the SCOTUS "citizens untited" ruling? Listen to your reps defend it.
The more the gov serves the Corps, the less it serves the people, unless you believe they havethe same agenda - no regs, low taxes for the very rich, removal of aide for poverty CAUSED by the trickle UP of our total wealth (Connies blame laziness!) FOR the 80%?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
You're missing the big picture if you think K-street isn't equal opportunity, "level playing field", Cronyism or that it only runs to the Right. Check out the REAL FACTS about campaign contributions on OpenSecrets and you will see that there is a RIVER of money flowing towards Capital Hill buying influence and favors Right AND Left.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Also check out "Funding Liberalism With Blue-Chip Profits" by David Hogberg and Sarah Haney. In 2004, Corporate foundations gave almost 60 Million to the politcal LEFT, while the political RIGHT received just over 4 Million.
I think we agree though! Get the special interests out of the Government. But I would add - Get the Government OUT of private enterprise, stop with the social engineering and return to LIMITED Government power - as enumerated in the CONSTITUTION.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
Man, are trying to claim that the "right" has no such ties? Look up the Kochs. own the 2nd largest oil polluter and pay the TPS bill to get the DEREGULATION they want, so they can pollute unabetted!!!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
" But in reality, power and money corrupt and - there are no "right people". ConservativeClarity
Yet, you have no issue with 20% of us owning 93% of our total wealth??
How do you vote THEM out??? You can't, they OWN IT...... PERSONAL PROPERTY..
The Conservatarian answer is remove all rules and supervision from that 20%.
Greed will regulate itself. The evidence of Swaps not withstanding.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "The Conservatarian answer is remove all rules and supervision from that 20%."
"Conservatarian"?
Constitutional Conservatives do NOT believe in "removing all rules" - and the "supervision" part of your statement is too vague to respond to. In any case, where in the Consitution does it talk about the Government "supervising" private property? How 'bout you get to keep the money you earn, and so does the other guy?
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@Conservative
COnservetarian is AYn Rand pumped up on "remove all regulation" steroids fed by the "right".
It is 100% removal of all rules and supervision from the Elite who own, built and run our Corps and financial system and own 93% of our total financial wealth.
That IS the Libertarian/AE/Conservative agenda.
That IS liassez faire. Look it up, please.
Yes, you earn the same as you did in 1958 (adjusted).
The "other guy" got a 73% pay raise. Flat tax is inane.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "..have no issue with 20% of us owning 93% of our total wealth?"
I have no issue with each of us owning 100% of our own wealth.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
May I ask, when a minority owns 93% of a total, WHAT CONTROL does the MAJORITY HAVE over that power apart from gov?? AE would answer "natural business cycles, consumerism, supply & demand and innovation SHOULD replace gov in ensuring that power does not become ulitimate. Yet, when the power grid itself OWNS 93% of the total, ARE the AE controllers enough??
Does the public have the needed power over the Elite by consumerism alone when they own 7% of the total equation?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeace "NowAmazing how Americans love to support the very system that makes them poor everyday ..."
California is mosty liberal, mostly democratic, taxed to death and still BANKRUPT. As a California voter, what are you folks supporting that has destroyed your economy?
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
?? Ever hear of Enron?? Cali was in the Black just 10 years ago.... the power shortage of 10 year ago, created by Enron, drained our coffers long ago.
Anyone notice we had a REPUBLICAN GOV for the past 8 years??? nah.
Because caLI IS A BROKE, Republican policy is valid.
Try something else.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow "Try something else"
No need for sarcasm. You had said that Americans love to support the system that makes them poorer... and I was just wondering what SYSTEM that was in California. Perhaps more helpful SOLUTIONS could be found if voters stop getting played by Party Politics and start looking at POLICIES. Do a search for "Should We Let California Go Bankrupt?" - on RealClearMarkets.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
policies OF THE "RIGHT": Warmongering, corporatism, abolition of aide for the poor, removal of minimum wage laws and unions and the right to bear arms. For many that's Gospel Truth. Comprehensive environmental and financial deregulation, profit margins in warmaking, Pax Americana, Tax cuts for the very rich, death by pollution, the coming end of oil and proliferation of nuclear arms.
NO? Am I wrong??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says "Am I wrong?"
Yes. Hyperbole and simplisitc talking points make for a very one-dimensional view of the problems we're facing... and no solutions.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
I asked, is that NOT the platform of the Conservative base?
Yes, I left out the jailing of gays (check Uganda) and abolition of abortion.
Tell me which of those is NOT a tenet of the "right"?
How simplistic is "Obama is a socialist"?
Not only simplistic, but erroneous, yet repeated innumerable times a day by "right" voices!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "... that NOT the platform of the Conservative base?Yes, I left out the jailing of gays"
No, jailing gays is not the platform of the "Conservative base". Abortion is muddier but we'll never get anywhere arguing the all-or-nothing extremes.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
Conservative: The fundamentalist base DeMint, Ensign, Brownback and more are all members of the "Family" (Look up Jeff Sharlet) who 100% support and promote Uganda's legislation that gays must be jailed. The new laws they promote state that if you HARBOR gays, you also face prison. That is 100% fact. I hope you will try to debunk it by researching. You will find it altogether true. DeMint is the backbone of TP politcal power.
This is your C Street base. judgemental adulterers Ensign, Sanford +
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
How did we get from wealth distribution to conspiracy theory?
PS - The TP's political power comes from the CONSTITUTION - as in "We the People".
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
How did we start calling public knowdledge consipracy?
The TP comes from the Koch Bros and the Corporate need for a voting base to further their agenda.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Your theory about the origins of the TP are just plain wrong. It's not even one cohesive group - although low side polls show 60% of the American People agree with the basic goals of greater fiscal responsibility and LIMITED government as ENUMERATED IN THE CONSTITUTION.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
All you had to do was put Koch bros in your earch and READ!
"..2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that their network is known as the Kochtopus." New Yorker
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
IOW's - you believe there are no other opinions/policies besides Obama's and the environmental Left? No room for discussion?
Pardon a bit of my own sarcasm in reply, but I thought liberals were supposed to be open-minded.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
" the environmental Left"
In the early 90s Bush hired Luntz to coin "climate change". It made it much easier for people to not support the idea that man has impact on the earth. Hatred for Envornmental regs could be sold more easily with trhat term.
Now you see the TP and the "right" fighting hard to ensure we are dead instead of poor, as now we are too poor to fix when (again) Bush/Connies broke!
YOU started the war on the environment!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
So I was right. No matter what it's called, you say humans are responsible for end-times gloom and doom of the planet - no room for other OPINIONS about the FUTURE and how much we can actually do about the warming cycle that exists today. There is no "war on the environment" but there are surely political extremists on the Left who have latched onto "the environment" - using fear as a means to promote their own POLITICAL agendas through "human-oppressive" environmental regs.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
Yes, you are "right". Conservative Christians. in the name of Republican jesus, DEFEND Corporations RIGHT to rape the planet for profit, regardless of the reality that our children will NOT raise theirs.
Yes, if you believe that God teaches you should make profit today at the peril of future generations and that "christians" have the right to kill off humanity for profit, then you ARE fullfiling prophesy....
.....you prove who it is you actualy serve.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
"OPINIONS about the FUTURE".
The reality that oil will continue to be more expensive and diffcult to produce, while Conservatives cling to a carbon BASED REALITY, is no opinion.
The fact that the top 20% of us OWN 93% our financial wealth, remove an additional .12% more every year and "christians" SUPPORT NO rules and supervision FOR THAT 20%, is not an opinion.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
The fact that the US defends our interests in other countries with bullets for profit, occupying and supporting killers when it is OUR interest (Bin LADEN, Taliban, Contras, Suarto, Baby Doc.. + ) WHILE the "right" supports nuclear proliferation, is NO opinion!
ONE nuclear exchange in the Middle East (We support Israel who HAS Nukes and Will use them) will create Nuclear Fall through out the Middle East and Europe.
Can you define Nuclear Fall?
It will be our END!
SUPPORT IT??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
TP originated in 2007 by Paulers. YOU can find out when the Kochs got involved by READING! Kochs have the second largest oil pollouter in the US and Spend Mills on the TP ensuring your regulation hatred will allow them to pollute your own children to death.
100% FACT! READ, man, READ!!! LOOK IT UP!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Sorry, you're just wrong. In fact, in the beginning, there was much discussion among the locals here about not wanting to be aligned with ANY established political group. Consequently, not everyone you might see as a "TP'er" thinks exactly the same way about each and every issue.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
"Sorry, you're just wrong. "
Are you saying I am wrong that Koch's pay for the TP??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HopeForPeaceNow asks, "Are you saying I am wrong that Koch's pay for the TP??"
Yes. The Koch's support a variety of conservative causes and candidates but had nothing to do with the initial - and decentralized - organization of LOCAL GROUPS of like-minded people who share "Tea Party" goals.
If you doubt the veractiy of that claim, find the group closest to you and give the contact person a call. Politely ask "how did you get started"?
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
"greater fiscal responsibility and LIMITED government "
Did you read Republican resume before you decided that only Republicans create smaller govs?
Look at history. It's like hiring the felon to run the bank!
Historically, NO REPUBLICAN HAS EVER REDUCED THE DEFICIT OR DEBT!
Hmm,, the DEMOCRATS DID!!! HAHA!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HopeForPeaceNow "Did you read Republican resume before you decided that only Republicans create smaller govs?"
Never said that. I've been talking about the goals of the Tea Party, not the Republicans. TP goals are what the Repub Party USED TO BE about. That said, it's a given that Dems are for BIG Government - and it's killing us.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "Hmm,, the DEMOCRATS DID!!! HAHA!
Under Clinton AFTER the Repubs took over Congress. Obama could take a lesson on what true Bi-Partisanship looks like. It isn't facilitated by derision and doesn't include bribes.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
"Under Clinton AFTER the Repubs took over "
Wrong.
"Enacted in 1990, in FY 1991, the Federal deficit was 4.5% of GDP, and by FY 2000, the Federal surplus was 2.4%.[3] Total Federal spending as a percentage of GDP decreased each year from FY1991 through FY 2000, falling from 22.3% to 18.4%.
(Here come the Repubs) Deficits, though, returned by the last year PAYGO was in effect: There was a "return to deficits ($158 billion, 1.5% of GDP) in 2002".
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Clinton inherited the economic momentum of the Reagan era and a decade of relative peace in the world following the end of the Cold War. Bush inherited 9-11.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
'Clinton inherited the economic momentum of the Reagan era"
Republican LIE!
FACT: "A major problem with the economy at the time was the issue of the massive deficit and the problem of government spending. In order to address these issues, in August 1993, Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 which passed Congress without a single Republican vote." Instituted Paygo & reduced the DEFICIT.
Check my front page for Repub record on FISCAL RESPOSIBILITY!
OXYMORON!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
"Bush inherited 9-11. "
Bush was WARNED for 8 MONTHS that Bin Laden was coming to the US with blood on his agenda.
He did ZERO about the warnings as his admin declared Saddam Hussein/IRAQ (WHo had ZERO involvement in 9/11) to be the ONLY threat to the US.
Read "Against All Enemies" Richard Clark
Under WHOSE adminstration did WE START the Taliban and Al Queda?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
In fact, I would suggest the majority OF the problems we face today are BECAUSE of that platform.
How did deregulation work out for us? $60 TRILLIOn in Swaps, $1 Trillion in bad loans. Yet the "right" lies about that day after day, blaming CRA (9% of total SPs) and F&F who owned 40% of Sp's and WAS regulated vs the private market owning 60% of SPs and UNregulated.
Yet, though a constant barrage of lies, this is covered up and the "right" kindles hatred of regulation!
Try Pax Americana next?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity Again, which of these is NOT a foundation of the Conservative platform:
Comprehensive environmental and financial deregulation, profit margins in warmaking, Pax Americana, Tax cuts for the very rich, death by pollution, the coming end of oil and proliferation of nuclear arms for us and our friends?
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
Sorry, but the "coming end of oil" isn't even a platform and the rest are still hyperbole. Just one example that's currently on the table:
Extending the Bush tax cuts (for everyone) during this recession is not "tax cuts for the wealthy".
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
Conservative:
Plainly, Conservatives support our further relience on oil and reject change. Their base is oil filled, and the culprits for attaching us TO a dwindling resource. Yes or nop?
You believe the Conservative platform includes moving us into a non-carbon based reality??
" not "tax cuts for the wealthy".
Wow. I though it applied to the higher earners, also. Thanks for clarifying.
So, again, which of those is NOT a Conservative platform??
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow says, "You believe the Conservative platform includes moving us into a non-carbon based reality?"
It's all about PROCESS. Constitutional Consrervatives don't believe in the Government FORCING reality. Carbon-based or not.
Taxes: Keeping the Bush tax cuts for EVERYONE - at least for another year - and reigning in spending. Many Constitutional Conservatives favor a flat tax, e.g. consumption tax.
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
You are mixed up. CORPORATIONS force reality... Ex... OIL fights EVERY DAY for it's market share, KNWOING that doing so will spell death for our grandchildren. Do they care? Of course not. They get rich now, you get dead later. By 2050 oil will be $500 a barrel = end of reality as we know it. Do they care? No, they lie day after day, indoctineate poor Americans into support and continue to FIGHT ANY change!!
WHO has the power to stop them?? GOV and GOV ONLY!
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
@HopeForPeaceNow
We all HAVE to support "further reliance on oil" until other options are viable. Bet I've saved more natural resources by driving the same gas-guzzling SUV for 16 years than someone who buys the latest, greatest and greenest every year or two. Solar panels can't be manufactured without using natural resources and, for now, leaving some nasty chemical playgrounds in China.
Yes, we need to conserve our planet, but there is no such thing as a "non-carbon based reality".
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
"We all HAVE to support "further reliance on oil" until other options are viable"
Reality: HOW WILL aNYTHING ELSE become viable when Conservatives FIGHT to remain oil addicted??
" Bet I've saved more natural resources by driving the same gas-guzzling SUV for 16 years than someone who buys the latest, greatest and greenest every year or two." Thanks, that one is going in my book.
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HopeForPeaceNow says "Reality: HOW WILL aNYTHING ELSE become viable when Conservatives FIGHT to remain oil addicted?"
False premise. But we've been round this circle before. Innovation is maximized through free market competition - not your tax dollars and punitive "incentives"
ConservativeClarity 1 year ago
@ConservativeClarity
We will either create a "non-carbon based reality" or we will create NO reality for our children.
Tell me, when gas is $500 a barrel, and we made no attempt to stop oil giants from running our reality.... what will happen in America???
Thoughts on foreign policy? How that will effect industry, prices??
Will America RUN on $7.00 a gallon gas??
WHO FIGHTS THE CHANGE?????????
HopeForPeaceNow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HopeForPeaceNow says, Tell me, when gas