@Op7Pr0 Neither of your links are valid. (Try copy/pasting yourself... it's not the "triple w" that is the problem, as I have tried with and without it. (When you don't supply them, they get added automatically.) Both cbsnews.com and foxnews.com say that your links are invalid.
@Op7Pr0 Wrong. link: home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html 1.Clinton LOWERED the debt. 2. Pushed it WAY up. 3. It has LOWERED under Obama. The source for these numbers was the Department of the Treasury, so if you have proof of your claim from a better source, please provide it.
@Op7Pr0 Do you happen to remember that Bush sent out $300 checks to all tax-payers very shortly after taking office? That's because we had all that extra money just lying around. I'd love to see those numbers that show differently, since I'm sure we all remember the checks.
soooooo Maxine Waters is protecting capitalism buy unethically bailing out her husbands bank, taking bribes and having multiple affairs? Wow! I never knew democrats could be so productive with our tax dollars!
Thanks Youngjerks for labeling yourselves by having Maxine Waters as a guest on your show and running videos like this. It leaves no doubt which side you are on.
As a member of the right-wing, I have to agree with this bill. Just pains me to see that republicans fail to see the good in this one simply because it was introduced by democrats. The political divide has become too large that it's not the political parties that are suffering anymore. The people's voices are not being heard in DC by either party. It's good to see at least some individuals are still out there for the people, regardless of political party. Hope still lives.
Rep. Rangel noted that he was “very surprised” at the West's words,” but “he doesn’t come from the political party that can talk about plantations and that type of thing.” What? Meaning only Democrats own blacks? It's time the Republican party stopped saying "all people" and let blacks know that "all" includes BLACKS. What's good for the country, is good for blacks..and all other minorities for that matter.
You forget. Say a Public company that sells 50% of it's assets to stock. Therefore why should the stock holders have more of a say than the owner management of the company. Therefor this logic is flawed. Not even most companies sell more than 50% of it's self for this reasons. The person who owned this company and brought it up should have more say because of all the risk they took than some negative share holder who actually could be a plant from another company for all we know therefor flawed.
I guess they probably make up the difference in huge bonuses for themselves. They can't very well sell off their shares and cause shares to fall; besides, it would be obvious that they're crooks.
Actually, the execs kind of DO own the companies, too. After all, they usually have stock options, which allows them to A LOT of shares of stock if the co. does well. Combine a few of these execs, and you've got majority share-ownership of the co. Or at least a very big portion that would dilute a lot of the shareholders' voices.
I'm a pretty free-market guy, but Cenk's right. The shareholders, who own even tiny fractions of a co., should have at least some say. After all, they invested IN the co.! They're providing equity to give the co. extra cash. There's a reason companies go public, after all.
I can't believe the shareholders say on executive pay bill was scrapped. If it was passed, a lot less of those failed executives would be wlaking away with millions.
But if the workers have any say, that's just CRAZY right???
Cenk, if you really think about it, the shareholders are even more sole interested in money, and while that's based on the companies profit rather than salary, It further erodes the company from providing any real long term service or responsibility. The key factor here, is the workers obviously. They have the most "invested" in the company, and truly have an interest in the future of the company.
This exposes one of thew huge ethical problems with the big bonuses. They are taken off the hides of the stockholders who are the losers in the deal. Iy is a good old boys' club robbing the stockholders.
lol he is stupid. telling companies how to run their companies is obviously something republicans wouldn't support. and maxine waters has proven time and time again that she is very stupid and is lucky to have a safe seat in congress
this bill would mean the death of capitalism, thus will bankrupt companies with millions of dollars of unneccesary expenses that we simply cant afford, and secondly this system is fine, the reason the economy crashed was because of liberals over regulation of the markets, thats why the economy of north korea is weak, thats why the soviet unions economy didnt work, and thats why dems should know central planning is not the answer
The economy was doing quite well when G.W. Bush took over and the economy tanked just as he was leaving office, but it happened because of "liberals over regulation of the markets"???
Wrong answer.
It happened because the right-wing went on a de-regulation frenzy for eight years.
At the same time, Bush was lowering taxes and spending more money.
@QCHitch wrong and wrong, the economy was in a downfall when bush took over , second regulations would not have mattered if barney frank had not pushed for the bad loans that caused the downfall, second the repubs actually pushed for regulations on the housing market as early as 2003 and dems blocked it, there are plenty of videos on youtube with proof of what i just said, so the problem is regulations and TOO much government intervention in the market
lowering taxes and spending money... An ideal advocated by Keynes. The idol of most Left Economist.
The housing bubble was a bi-partisan issue. Just look up Barney Frank/Maxine Waters and his speeches about Freddie & Fannie. 70% of subprime loans where handed out by Government institutionss. F&F, CRA, FHA
With the appointment Geitner as Treasury Secretary I would hardly call Obama as a Marxist or a revolutionary. The new boss is the same as the old boss.
well at least your a liberal willing to admit that obama is a marxist, his government is made up of admitted maoist, and that he is a revolutianary who wants to destroy america
No, it's called worker self-management and guess what: it works.
What's your argument against functionality of communism and please don't say Stalin, Mao or Paul pot! That's statist socialism and I agree it doesn't work.
I'm talking about stateless, classless, egalitarian, democratic anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism.
Yees, Titoism must be investigated thorughly. In fact, paying workers with stock, through which they eventually own the company, is another tool in the toolbox.
The so call "Asians" are the ones who have been putting food on your and the rest of America plates every day. US borrows billions a day from "Asians"
democrats are just as much a corporatist party as the republicans are! they passed nafta/GATT and nullified sarbanes/oxley which is the precursor to the financial collapse we are in. stop being partisan. go after the dems and the R's
.. ya' wanna know what Capitalism is *really* like?
When these pathetic publicly traded banks crash and stocks are down the toilet, the Federal Government will buy up their stock at 18 cents on the dollar just like any other rapacious Capitalist should. And We The People will now Own the banks .. so as a Taxpayer I expect banks to be more accountable.
Oh liberals, expecting the greed that always get the world into problems, to bring the world back, a constant roller coaster... Conservative liberals and Reforms liberals have the same problems they both want to help (I hope?...maybe not), but they are using the wrong tools. this will happen again and again until a revolution, slow or fast, violent or not violent, of the left! Cure the Greed!!!!
jmeister and manonthemount, how can u be so wrong
gov intervention saved us from a seconds world depression, and if u actually watched this vid ud get ur answer jmeister
crazy isnt it
could u have imagined aig goin out? do u know how many people are tied to that company? do u know how many people would have been screwed? same with all those other bailouts.
the Democrats motto and philosophy is "take from the rich give to the poor" and "redistribute the wealth".... how in the fuck can anyone say they're trying to protect capitalism... ?
I would love an answer, preferably an intelligent one please.
So if Democrat's philosophy is "take from the rich and give to the poor" then the Republican philosophy is "take from the poor and give to the rich" - right?
How is that any 1 bit better?
Extremism of any kind is bad. And only fools or deceitful people use it to justify their goals.
"the Republican philosophy is "take from the poor and give to the rich" - right?"
...no? where did that come from?
"take from the rich and give to the poor" and "redistribute the wealth" is quoted word for word from Obama's own mouth and his staff in countless videos, audio recordings, and documents of legislation - can you direct me to anything regarding Republicans believing "take from the poor and give to the rich"?
Yeah, as usual another obamabot Democrat dances around a presented issue and evades. After all someone can't be expected to give a response they don't have.
Just for shits and giggles, care to point out a single piece of video, audio, or legislation that supports your view of Republicans?
have u ever heard of trickle down economics? u know what the repubs believe in, u know where u give all the money to the rich in the HOPE that they will pay out or give more to the poor.
although its not a terrible idea,. its increadibly an idealist situation where that happens, and we all know it doesnt sooo basicly the rich get richer and the poor get poorer
supply side economics or "trickle down economics" does work but u need 2things to happen
1. tax cutts
2.REAL decrease of govenment spending
supply side economics works till govenment gets bigger and we say "oo we are so rich think lets do somthing exspenisve"
and one little fact about that last state men it is true the rich are getting richer but porportionaltly their not and the people who are rich are not rich for very long like the top 50ichest people in the country changes constantly
Just curious...where did you get that their motto was those to things? A source would be nice. And not just your "idea" of their party.
And besides.... "Redistrubution of wealth" IS a very fundamental idea of TRUE capitalism. The wealth is constantly being shifted and moved around (re-distributed) in that system in its truest form. It never stays "stationary" for long. It's what allows growth. Stable growth anyway.
A good portion of the rich have contributed nothing of real value to society. Rush Limbaugh is a good example: (1) He never served in the military (nor did I), (2) He has no academic qualifications--two semesters and a summer, in which he failed everything. (3) It seems he never did a day of real work in his life. Being a DJ and a PR flak for a baseball team is not real work. Real work brings about some material change in the world--Rush Limbaugh is a professional clown/whiner.
Stock brokers and investment bankers--and other of that ilk also do no real work. Then there are people such as Donald Trump--who started with just a dream and daddy's hundred mil. And, of course, we wouldn't want to diminish Paris Hilton's lifestyle. It's more about taking from the valueless and near valueless.
I served 4 years and couldn't care less about how much the rich or poor contribute to society because they shouldn't be expected to in the United States, its called freedom and capitalism.
Believing that they should out of jealousy or some other skewed reason and penalizing them for it is socialism.
Punishing success like that belongs where it's welcomed such as communist Russia or North Korea, and maybe its supporters do as well. Do you support socialism out of jealousy?
If no one is expected to contribute, how will society work? The rallying cry of the American Revolution was "No taxation without representation," not no taxation. I've been told that both the *Bible* and the communists have one principle in common: You don't work, you don't eat. So, expecting Limbaugh and the Wall Street bunch and such others to contribute more mere money is hardly unreasonable. Label it as you like. BTW, "socialism" is not a four letter word.
Then why have police, military, fire dept.? That's socialism. I should be allowed to form a militia and go take my money back from goldman sachs. No? Oh, right, the socialist authority would stop me, who I pay for.
Government intervention is the problem, whether its bailouts or restrictive legislation. The core of the financial crisis wasn't a problem of insufficient regulation, but of too much government involvement. We should have allowed the free market to work, watched the banks fail, and endured the massive recession now instead of relegating the misery to innocent generations. The financial crisis isn't over, its sedated...
There are arguments on forums that LACK of government involvement caused the crisis. Governments create the framework in which business operates. At the extreme, a complete lack of government involvement = chaos. At the worst total involvement = communism (and no mindless comments about Obama being a commie PLEASE). Its where the government stands in the middle ground that is important. Reagan "set the bull free", others have tried to restrain it.
And the cause of the crisis was the framework. So far it looks like there won't be any prosecutions for illegal activity (unless someone out there knows better???). So the framework was the problem.
Shareholders already get to vote on board members. The problem is the incumbent board no matter how corrupt decide who goes up for election! This law does nothing really, at best will make a little easier for major shareholders to nominate candidates. Most likely though it will be so complicated and narrow that it will do nothing at all - except employ more lawyers.
We need a revolution, not another fucking sideshow!
Well said, and communicated. I wonder how much money will be spent (money that comes from company profit) to attempt to defeat this bill. If you find out, please report it!
The owners should have a say into the board, but if the company needs to fund these things then it will dig into profits. As aa shareholder I reckon monies need to be spent properly. Board members should be chosen by a vote of shareholders, thus the vote happens once and voila! democracy in action.
I've seen alot of comments on how big money rules over us. This has been going on for centuries and we still had fairly decent govt. The problem we have is a lack of concern for the public good. Idealists like the Founders, say what you will, were able to balance business interests with public interests. That all changed when a gang of assholes (Neo-cons)
If by base you mean Marx pointed out the flaws of Capitalism - sure. Smith was the first to define and make a thorough explanation of the workings of capitalism. And unlike how many of his modern supporters claim, he wasn't laissez faire. Locke a joke? lol.
Domesday is a survey, relatively little to do with modern property law. Just a source of history really.
Yeah, unfortunately, english law is one big mess. Full of outdates laws that still exist even though they aren't used pratically.
Those executive, get huge salary and bonuses all the way up until the companies bankrupt, than they go away with their million leaving the real owner with the problem... How can that even be considered a working system...
Capitalism is only their to able a few people to become richer and richer on the back of the poorer people...
America is no longer a capitalist country where a honest day's work equals an honest day's pay, it's an oligarchy where a select group of wealthy people pretty much dictate to the people and the government what to do in order to protect their own interests (see healthcare reform)
I'm not in fact an objectivist like Andrew Ryan (he's a character from a game called Bioshock by the way) and I agree with your statement in your other comment here that lobbying is a HUGE problem with the way the US operates
I know! The only problem is, we really can't be heard by our reps and senators because of course they don't want to stop getting paid by the lobbyists. What in the heck do we do then to make it illegal?
the best system would be if everyone in the country didnt vote but that will never happen so best would be to find a politican who isnt bought by lobbyists and have eveyone you know and everyone they know flood him with emails so he can build a case that would be a good start
I completely agree with you. However, a capitalist country will always lead to an oligarchy as long as bribing (aka lobbying) politicians is still legal. Obviously the people with the money reign, which actually happens a lot in history.
I wish we had a british version of young terks. Cenk, ana and JR bring their own sort of humour to serious issues and it definetly gets me thinking about politics. Since watching this I've started to learn more about whats going on in the UK politics
Well said, Cenk. However, this isn't just of interest to Americans. If the US brought in this kind of legislation, the rest of the world would follow, and we would all be better off, not at the mercy of greedy, self-serving global corporation managers.
I don't follow Cenk this time. "It impairs the board's functioning" -- right, you don't want the public making decisions on technical problems for which the board of directors is otherwise best positioned to respond.
Here's an extreme example of how it could be abused: "we shareholders demand that this antibiotics company cease all research on Darwinian evolution of bacteria colonies because evolution is a lie!"
We don't trust banks anymore, but will this legislation make new problems for us?
It is not a problem if they want to go down in flames in a matter of days, its a free country. You are free to run toward bankruptcy any time you want.
No the logic you use here is flawed. You are assuming that the motivation for owning shares is because of an agenda... surely the biggest motivation for owning shares is to make a profit. I cant imagine any large company/bank having 51% or more of its shareholders being creationists who want nothing more than a bank to become non-profit machine. Even if that did happen there would be a demand in the market for another bank to take its place
I'm confused. Why does the cooperation need the government to write a law for this? Can't they just set up their operating agreement to give shareholders the power on their own?
I think part of the problem is that there is no incentive for the company execs or board to do that. I don't understand this entire issue all that clearly, but that was my take-away from it.
It was the bailouts ! That is why we have bankruptcy laws. These bureaucrats do not know anything about how to run a business. If they did there would have been NO bailouts.
i know its annoying to see and hear, but as better people, i challenge everyone who watches TyT to ignore racist like you ignore the dead. cause half these racists are narcissist and like to have people hate them and respond to their bullshit. the other half believe their drivel. sad. focus on changing the system of inequality that we live with.
DO NOT respond to racist, because the only thing they get out of it, is you pissed off. They are dumb, knows no history, knows no politics, and say the most retarded shit like its fact or insightful. If I wanted to pretend to be better than a whole race, I wouldn't say the most ignorant and hateful things that a child's vocabulary could come up with. Turn your backs on racist like their voice doesn't exist, and can't be heard. Just thumbs down and move on, until there is a real argument!
Why do republicans hate the free market, democracy, and representation. Isn't providing money for shares and having no say ... a lot like taxation without representation ... hmmm maybe we need a "corporate tea party" ... wouldn't that be Ironic.
If it wasn't for the lobbyists money, you'd almost belief that the Republicans are against such legislations just to fuck the Democrats or just for the sake of being against it.
Indeed. I remember when I was a kid, maybe 10, my grandmother told me "there is nothing worse than a Republican. Never give them any votes". Time has proven her right.
Yeah, they "own" the company, but they're also "the little guys", and Republican politics can be nicely summarised by the statement "screw the little guys". It's about wielding it as a source of political power and controlling who has access to it.
see the suprising thing about this to me is that, whilst i'm only maybe 90% sure that this is a great bill instead of 100% sure, it's a very right wing capitalist measure, as cenk says, designed to empower the owners of business. since when did the republicans vote AGAINST the corporatocracy??????
This is a perfect example of why people become so apathetic when it comes to reforming Wall st. and Washington. It takes so much effort to get even te slightest amount of progress. The US government is so corrupt. The politicians who are supposed to represent the public trust, instead represent the corporate trust. Its just so depressing to watch...
i'm with cenk that this legislation should be passed, but the black/white, good guy/bad guy thesis seems maybe a bit extreme in this situation?
i dunno, maybe we should look at all their arguments and break them down, with less ridicule?
pshhh. don't get me wrong, some of the repulican standpoints make me want to piss in their face, but in this case, perhaps a less impassioned case would go down better to begin with. i dunno :S
Republicans hate America.
scottandrewhutchins 2 months ago
@Op7Pr0 Neither of your links are valid. (Try copy/pasting yourself... it's not the "triple w" that is the problem, as I have tried with and without it. (When you don't supply them, they get added automatically.) Both cbsnews.com and foxnews.com say that your links are invalid.
QCHitch 2 months ago
@Op7Pr0 Your link leads to a "Page not found" error.
QCHitch 2 months ago
@Op7Pr0 Wrong. link: home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html 1.Clinton LOWERED the debt. 2. Pushed it WAY up. 3. It has LOWERED under Obama. The source for these numbers was the Department of the Treasury, so if you have proof of your claim from a better source, please provide it.
QCHitch 3 months ago
Number 2 should say "Bush pushed it WAY up."
QCHitch 3 months ago
@Op7Pr0 Do you happen to remember that Bush sent out $300 checks to all tax-payers very shortly after taking office? That's because we had all that extra money just lying around. I'd love to see those numbers that show differently, since I'm sure we all remember the checks.
QCHitch 3 months ago
It's a game.
Shrunkenhead61 11 months ago
soooooo Maxine Waters is protecting capitalism buy unethically bailing out her husbands bank, taking bribes and having multiple affairs? Wow! I never knew democrats could be so productive with our tax dollars!
Thanks Youngjerks for labeling yourselves by having Maxine Waters as a guest on your show and running videos like this. It leaves no doubt which side you are on.
edawg00 1 year ago
As a member of the right-wing, I have to agree with this bill. Just pains me to see that republicans fail to see the good in this one simply because it was introduced by democrats. The political divide has become too large that it's not the political parties that are suffering anymore. The people's voices are not being heard in DC by either party. It's good to see at least some individuals are still out there for the people, regardless of political party. Hope still lives.
kickdamonkey 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Rep. Rangel noted that he was “very surprised” at the West's words,” but “he doesn’t come from the political party that can talk about plantations and that type of thing.” What? Meaning only Democrats own blacks? It's time the Republican party stopped saying "all people" and let blacks know that "all" includes BLACKS. What's good for the country, is good for blacks..and all other minorities for that matter.
vechorik 6 months ago
Comment removed
kickdamonkey 1 year ago
0bama's Health Care Bill... Do you back his administration?? See my you tube channel page and Know exactly why Americas opinons are needed !!!
Wilone328 1 year ago
The title of this sounds the an oximoron?
CamoJackv2 2 years ago
You forget. Say a Public company that sells 50% of it's assets to stock. Therefore why should the stock holders have more of a say than the owner management of the company. Therefor this logic is flawed. Not even most companies sell more than 50% of it's self for this reasons. The person who owned this company and brought it up should have more say because of all the risk they took than some negative share holder who actually could be a plant from another company for all we know therefor flawed.
InstantClassic9 2 years ago
I guess they probably make up the difference in huge bonuses for themselves. They can't very well sell off their shares and cause shares to fall; besides, it would be obvious that they're crooks.
FromBoomTown 2 years ago
Actually, the execs kind of DO own the companies, too. After all, they usually have stock options, which allows them to A LOT of shares of stock if the co. does well. Combine a few of these execs, and you've got majority share-ownership of the co. Or at least a very big portion that would dilute a lot of the shareholders' voices.
whoo689 2 years ago
I'm a pretty free-market guy, but Cenk's right. The shareholders, who own even tiny fractions of a co., should have at least some say. After all, they invested IN the co.! They're providing equity to give the co. extra cash. There's a reason companies go public, after all.
I can't believe the shareholders say on executive pay bill was scrapped. If it was passed, a lot less of those failed executives would be wlaking away with millions.
whoo689 2 years ago
Motion to officially make "OF COOOOUUUUUURSE!" Cenk's catchphrase.
dylantuzyk 2 years ago 2
It's already one of them for me. Along with "Come on, come on, come on, come on...." over and over.
IpponDropkick 2 years ago
Repubs always talk about "small businesses in America" while passing tax policies that let corporations step in and destroy any small competition.
TheDuckofLaw 2 years ago
I know right.
dylantuzyk 2 years ago
But if the workers have any say, that's just CRAZY right???
Cenk, if you really think about it, the shareholders are even more sole interested in money, and while that's based on the companies profit rather than salary, It further erodes the company from providing any real long term service or responsibility. The key factor here, is the workers obviously. They have the most "invested" in the company, and truly have an interest in the future of the company.
But I guess Im just a CRAZY commi eh?
tunesoutmyear 2 years ago
No more Capitalism.
No more Democracy.
Only Plutonomy exists in the U.S.
m22k3yt 2 years ago
50% of the revenue is completely retarded
How the fuck do they expect to conver costs
TheFunkyDomination 2 years ago
It's all about the bonuses
TheFunkyDomination 2 years ago
There is really no explanation except managerial and board incompetence for the state of US auto manufacturers.
The Japanese do fine in the US and pay a higher wage scale.
The whole US elite is terminally incompetent.
They need to be eliminated as quickly as possible.
mopsius 2 years ago 2
The Right Wing has to be terminated.
It really is as simple as that.
mopsius 2 years ago
Maxine Waters is a brilliant analyst what is wrong with the US.
mopsius 2 years ago
This exposes one of thew huge ethical problems with the big bonuses. They are taken off the hides of the stockholders who are the losers in the deal. Iy is a good old boys' club robbing the stockholders.
julian7650 2 years ago
lol he is stupid. telling companies how to run their companies is obviously something republicans wouldn't support. and maxine waters has proven time and time again that she is very stupid and is lucky to have a safe seat in congress
UberSciFiNerd 2 years ago
this bill would mean the death of capitalism, thus will bankrupt companies with millions of dollars of unneccesary expenses that we simply cant afford, and secondly this system is fine, the reason the economy crashed was because of liberals over regulation of the markets, thats why the economy of north korea is weak, thats why the soviet unions economy didnt work, and thats why dems should know central planning is not the answer
tehant1liberal 2 years ago
The economy was doing quite well when G.W. Bush took over and the economy tanked just as he was leaving office, but it happened because of "liberals over regulation of the markets"???
Wrong answer.
It happened because the right-wing went on a de-regulation frenzy for eight years.
At the same time, Bush was lowering taxes and spending more money.
QCHitch 2 years ago 6
-Someone with a brain...
tommypickles09 2 years ago
@QCHitch wrong and wrong, the economy was in a downfall when bush took over , second regulations would not have mattered if barney frank had not pushed for the bad loans that caused the downfall, second the repubs actually pushed for regulations on the housing market as early as 2003 and dems blocked it, there are plenty of videos on youtube with proof of what i just said, so the problem is regulations and TOO much government intervention in the market
thevansleaving 1 year ago
@QCHitch except obama bailed out the car companies. did he not? you think that was free?
sk8erfreak9242 11 months ago
@QCHitch
lowering taxes and spending money... An ideal advocated by Keynes. The idol of most Left Economist.
The housing bubble was a bi-partisan issue. Just look up Barney Frank/Maxine Waters and his speeches about Freddie & Fannie. 70% of subprime loans where handed out by Government institutionss. F&F, CRA, FHA
Salvysahagun 5 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck capitalism!!! Obama is like me a Marxist revolutionary,
none of you idiots realize that Capitalism does nothing for people but keep them poor while the rich get richer.
Viva Obama!!!
leftwingmarxist 2 years ago
With the appointment Geitner as Treasury Secretary I would hardly call Obama as a Marxist or a revolutionary. The new boss is the same as the old boss.
GorgonLuvs8008135 2 years ago
A Marxist?!
Obama isn't even a liberal.
He is all talk. Just another corporate bourgeoisie liar.
CollateralSandwich 2 years ago
well at least your a liberal willing to admit that obama is a marxist, his government is made up of admitted maoist, and that he is a revolutianary who wants to destroy america
tehant1liberal 2 years ago
Obama is no Marxist unfortunately.
If he were a Marxist he would know more economics.
He is Bambi in the headlights so far.
mopsius 2 years ago
Fuck both the owners and the managers. How about giving workers the right to manage their own productive labor?
Grindermetalhead 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Its called "communism", and guess what. It doesnt work
sansez 2 years ago
No, it's called worker self-management and guess what: it works.
What's your argument against functionality of communism and please don't say Stalin, Mao or Paul pot! That's statist socialism and I agree it doesn't work.
I'm talking about stateless, classless, egalitarian, democratic anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-communism.
Grindermetalhead 2 years ago
Yees, Titoism must be investigated thorughly. In fact, paying workers with stock, through which they eventually own the company, is another tool in the toolbox.
mopsius 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Better start getting use to, the Asian way,
what they really do,isn't what they say
Asian ideas may not seem quite so suitable,
cause; it's often difficult, when trying to be inscrutable
Asians are a problem-because they are not white
a foreign invader in America,that will never be right
But America has decided to opt for diversity
and accept Asians,like Niggers,and their perversity
Hold on to you asses,you ain't seen nothing yet
Obama will appoint him and that's a real sure bet
TheHauptsturmfuhrer 2 years ago
"Asians are a problem-because they are not white"
The so call "Asians" are the ones who have been putting food on your and the rest of America plates every day. US borrows billions a day from "Asians"
sansez 2 years ago
"But America has decided to opt for diversity and accept Asians,like Niggers,and their perversity".
You forgot to mention people like yourself.
sansez 2 years ago
democrats are just as much a corporatist party as the republicans are! they passed nafta/GATT and nullified sarbanes/oxley which is the precursor to the financial collapse we are in. stop being partisan. go after the dems and the R's
snappa52 2 years ago
Obama Zombies out there, which are a joke to all of us that realize the true nature of what is happening.
You are blinded by reasons that are no longer relevant. Your Democratic? antics are ridiculous just as the counter Republican antics.
Its FAKE. These puppet parties do not run the country, no less the world.
RomeoMD25 2 years ago
.. ya' wanna know what Capitalism is *really* like?
When these pathetic publicly traded banks crash and stocks are down the toilet, the Federal Government will buy up their stock at 18 cents on the dollar just like any other rapacious Capitalist should. And We The People will now Own the banks .. so as a Taxpayer I expect banks to be more accountable.
milkgodnl 2 years ago
Oh liberals, expecting the greed that always get the world into problems, to bring the world back, a constant roller coaster... Conservative liberals and Reforms liberals have the same problems they both want to help (I hope?...maybe not), but they are using the wrong tools. this will happen again and again until a revolution, slow or fast, violent or not violent, of the left! Cure the Greed!!!!
fun505 2 years ago
jmeister and manonthemount, how can u be so wrong
gov intervention saved us from a seconds world depression, and if u actually watched this vid ud get ur answer jmeister
crazy isnt it
could u have imagined aig goin out? do u know how many people are tied to that company? do u know how many people would have been screwed? same with all those other bailouts.
gameingbomb 2 years ago
the Democrats motto and philosophy is "take from the rich give to the poor" and "redistribute the wealth".... how in the fuck can anyone say they're trying to protect capitalism... ?
I would love an answer, preferably an intelligent one please.
thejmeister88 2 years ago
So if Democrat's philosophy is "take from the rich and give to the poor" then the Republican philosophy is "take from the poor and give to the rich" - right?
How is that any 1 bit better?
Extremism of any kind is bad. And only fools or deceitful people use it to justify their goals.
Fig1024 2 years ago
good point.
reaganomics ruined us until the surplus during the clinton years (not saying it was clinton that did it)
extremism is awful
CooperLordOfAll 2 years ago
"the Republican philosophy is "take from the poor and give to the rich" - right?"
...no? where did that come from?
"take from the rich and give to the poor" and "redistribute the wealth" is quoted word for word from Obama's own mouth and his staff in countless videos, audio recordings, and documents of legislation - can you direct me to anything regarding Republicans believing "take from the poor and give to the rich"?
thejmeister88 2 years ago
aha, so you are still capable of reason. May I suggest you try the same question on your original statement about Democratic philosophy.
And if you are not past the point of lying to yourself, you should see how silly it was of you to say that.
Fig1024 2 years ago
Yeah, as usual another obamabot Democrat dances around a presented issue and evades. After all someone can't be expected to give a response they don't have.
Just for shits and giggles, care to point out a single piece of video, audio, or legislation that supports your view of Republicans?
I'll go first with my view of Democrats:
video: BRPbCSSXyp0
audio: iivL4c_3pck
legislation: hr3200
your turn :]
thejmeister88 2 years ago
have u ever heard of trickle down economics? u know what the repubs believe in, u know where u give all the money to the rich in the HOPE that they will pay out or give more to the poor.
although its not a terrible idea,. its increadibly an idealist situation where that happens, and we all know it doesnt sooo basicly the rich get richer and the poor get poorer
does that answer ur question wel enough?
gameingbomb 2 years ago
supply side economics or "trickle down economics" does work but u need 2things to happen
1. tax cutts
2.REAL decrease of govenment spending
supply side economics works till govenment gets bigger and we say "oo we are so rich think lets do somthing exspenisve"
and one little fact about that last state men it is true the rich are getting richer but porportionaltly their not and the people who are rich are not rich for very long like the top 50ichest people in the country changes constantly
GodAthie 2 years ago
US motto:
From each according to need, to each according to excess.
mopsius 2 years ago
Just curious...where did you get that their motto was those to things? A source would be nice. And not just your "idea" of their party.
And besides.... "Redistrubution of wealth" IS a very fundamental idea of TRUE capitalism. The wealth is constantly being shifted and moved around (re-distributed) in that system in its truest form. It never stays "stationary" for long. It's what allows growth. Stable growth anyway.
DrtyFck 2 years ago
"Those *to* things", should have been "Those TWO things". Sorry for the typo.
DrtyFck 2 years ago
A good portion of the rich have contributed nothing of real value to society. Rush Limbaugh is a good example: (1) He never served in the military (nor did I), (2) He has no academic qualifications--two semesters and a summer, in which he failed everything. (3) It seems he never did a day of real work in his life. Being a DJ and a PR flak for a baseball team is not real work. Real work brings about some material change in the world--Rush Limbaugh is a professional clown/whiner.
newdarnaccount 2 years ago
Stock brokers and investment bankers--and other of that ilk also do no real work. Then there are people such as Donald Trump--who started with just a dream and daddy's hundred mil. And, of course, we wouldn't want to diminish Paris Hilton's lifestyle. It's more about taking from the valueless and near valueless.
newdarnaccount 2 years ago
Oh, Adam Smith and Abraham Lincoln both believed labor was superior to capital. The Republicans now believe that capital is superior to labor.
newdarnaccount 2 years ago
I served 4 years and couldn't care less about how much the rich or poor contribute to society because they shouldn't be expected to in the United States, its called freedom and capitalism.
Believing that they should out of jealousy or some other skewed reason and penalizing them for it is socialism.
Punishing success like that belongs where it's welcomed such as communist Russia or North Korea, and maybe its supporters do as well. Do you support socialism out of jealousy?
thejmeister88 2 years ago
yea poor people working hard and getting paid shitty and living in shitty places are just jealous. how petty.
Ivan951 2 years ago
If no one is expected to contribute, how will society work? The rallying cry of the American Revolution was "No taxation without representation," not no taxation. I've been told that both the *Bible* and the communists have one principle in common: You don't work, you don't eat. So, expecting Limbaugh and the Wall Street bunch and such others to contribute more mere money is hardly unreasonable. Label it as you like. BTW, "socialism" is not a four letter word.
newdarnaccount 2 years ago
Then why have police, military, fire dept.? That's socialism. I should be allowed to form a militia and go take my money back from goldman sachs. No? Oh, right, the socialist authority would stop me, who I pay for.
shadowcnidarian 2 years ago
Government intervention is the problem, whether its bailouts or restrictive legislation. The core of the financial crisis wasn't a problem of insufficient regulation, but of too much government involvement. We should have allowed the free market to work, watched the banks fail, and endured the massive recession now instead of relegating the misery to innocent generations. The financial crisis isn't over, its sedated...
manonthemount 2 years ago
"The financial crisis isn't over, its sedated... "
-Very true sir.
DrtyFck 2 years ago
State and municipal banruptcies are just beginning to kick in.
mopsius 2 years ago
There are arguments on forums that LACK of government involvement caused the crisis. Governments create the framework in which business operates. At the extreme, a complete lack of government involvement = chaos. At the worst total involvement = communism (and no mindless comments about Obama being a commie PLEASE). Its where the government stands in the middle ground that is important. Reagan "set the bull free", others have tried to restrain it.
880873 2 years ago
And the cause of the crisis was the framework. So far it looks like there won't be any prosecutions for illegal activity (unless someone out there knows better???). So the framework was the problem.
880873 2 years ago
Shareholders already get to vote on board members. The problem is the incumbent board no matter how corrupt decide who goes up for election! This law does nothing really, at best will make a little easier for major shareholders to nominate candidates. Most likely though it will be so complicated and narrow that it will do nothing at all - except employ more lawyers.
We need a revolution, not another fucking sideshow!
jimwal2008 2 years ago
I wonder if a republican came up with this if the democrats would be against it?
jamesyoun 2 years ago
....... and the politicians are asking why businesses are moving their businesses offshore? I know nowhere in the world where such a system occurs.
tarpumpphillips 2 years ago
crapitalism must be must be destroyed!
robertrulebirtannia 2 years ago
great now the ridiculously stupid system of capitalism will become the moderately stupid system of capitalism.
ufster81 2 years ago
whorrible, that needs to be in the dictionary, who's with me?
Capitalocracy 2 years ago
Well said, and communicated. I wonder how much money will be spent (money that comes from company profit) to attempt to defeat this bill. If you find out, please report it!
fret2424 2 years ago
The owners should have a say into the board, but if the company needs to fund these things then it will dig into profits. As aa shareholder I reckon monies need to be spent properly. Board members should be chosen by a vote of shareholders, thus the vote happens once and voila! democracy in action.
880873 2 years ago
hardly democracy when one rich guy who happens to be the CEO owns 40% of the shares...
no wait.. your right, american democracy in action.
WHYCANTIFINDONE 2 years ago
;-)
Thats still a majority vote. The bigger shareholders have the bigger say. My one share shouldn't hold the power of your 10000 shares 'eh?
880873 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
FUCK OFF PROGRESSIVE!!!!!!
kidluna 2 years ago
Compelling argument....no wait.....
880873 2 years ago
YOU IDIOTS! I AM TALKING ABOUT THE PROGRESSIVE ADVERTISEMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Insurance Company. yall with me now?
kidluna 2 years ago
What? You don't want to save on car insurance?
moebigsley1976 2 years ago
The Progressive ads that play before every video. does it not annoy anyone else?
kidluna 2 years ago
Not this one because it was Jim Gaffigan.
ourlucidream 2 years ago
decided public and private interests were the same.
trajan74 2 years ago
I've seen alot of comments on how big money rules over us. This has been going on for centuries and we still had fairly decent govt. The problem we have is a lack of concern for the public good. Idealists like the Founders, say what you will, were able to balance business interests with public interests. That all changed when a gang of assholes (Neo-cons)
trajan74 2 years ago 4
Why do people still vote and believe in the Republican party?
harr77 2 years ago 2
Ignorance, fear or tradition usually.
Link4587452 2 years ago
When Cenk does anlysis like this, I want to nominate him for the Edward R Murrow award. Nicely done, TYT
torremalku 2 years ago 3
just proves how much free market fundamentalists dont understand capitalism.
Xteenrebel 2 years ago
Capitalism is founded on property laws - Alan Greenspan (libertarian).
This legislation is about improving property laws. To return control to the property owners.
Luxmans 2 years ago 2
Actually the whole concept of property in the US has to be revised.
The present system is based on the British, which is a conquest model.
mopsius 2 years ago
I have no idea what the property laws are like in the US let alone in my own country (UK).
I'm simply talking about the economic philosophy behind capitalism.
Luxmans 2 years ago
Capitalism: Marx and Ricardo are the base. Smith is a sad fraud. Locke is a bad joke.
Property theory in the UK, though few know it because it is covered up so much, starts with the Domesday Book.
mopsius 2 years ago
US property theory--like so much else--is a complete mess.
mopsius 2 years ago
If by base you mean Marx pointed out the flaws of Capitalism - sure. Smith was the first to define and make a thorough explanation of the workings of capitalism. And unlike how many of his modern supporters claim, he wasn't laissez faire. Locke a joke? lol.
Domesday is a survey, relatively little to do with modern property law. Just a source of history really.
Yeah, unfortunately, english law is one big mess. Full of outdates laws that still exist even though they aren't used pratically.
Luxmans 2 years ago
You are wrong about Smith--read Murray Rothbard's analysis--he was mostly a plagiarist and what was his own was wrong.
And Rothbard is no leftist.
Philosophically Locke is a treasury of clownish mistakes, nicely capitalized upon by Kant and the Germans.
Somehow economic ideas and ideas of property rooted in Adam and Eve just don't persuade.
mopsius 2 years ago
Domesday established the whole island and everything in it as owned by Guillaume. That is the starting point.
mopsius 2 years ago
whoreable people lol thats republicans and a good number of democrats in a nut shell
Lightren 2 years ago
Comment removed
MrMostGo 2 years ago
Wouldn't Ron Paul support this bill?
ponyboy316 2 years ago
what does Ron Paul even represent any more?
TheZaz003 2 years ago 3
A district in Texas. Sometimes I with him. Most times I am not.
dinobrya 2 years ago
This is a no brain-er... I'm so sick of this kind of stuff from large corporations... and government.
redasscd 2 years ago
Those executive, get huge salary and bonuses all the way up until the companies bankrupt, than they go away with their million leaving the real owner with the problem... How can that even be considered a working system...
Capitalism is only their to able a few people to become richer and richer on the back of the poorer people...
EckoStream 2 years ago
Owners having a say over who runs their company? Why that's Communism!
MaryJesusJoseph 2 years ago
im wondering when it was decided being fair and openminded was deemed socialist and communist but being a greedy evil snake of a human is good
Lightren 2 years ago 7
I was joking--being sarcastic about how Fox News will spin this story. I realize I should have written (I am being sarcastic) in the post.
MaryJesusJoseph 2 years ago
oh i know dont worry was kust stating a point
Lightren 2 years ago
America is no longer a capitalist country where a honest day's work equals an honest day's pay, it's an oligarchy where a select group of wealthy people pretty much dictate to the people and the government what to do in order to protect their own interests (see healthcare reform)
TayGizzle 2 years ago
I'm inclined to agree with you.
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?
No! says the man in washington, it belongs to the government! No! says the man in Moscow, it belongs to the people!
No! says the man in the Vatican, it belongs to God!
I'm Andrew Ryan, and If you're reading this in my voice you just lost the game.
AspectOfBardiel 2 years ago
I believe a man is entitled to the sweat of his brow, unless there is no water for the rest to sweat.
MLadyAzzera 2 years ago
I'm not in fact an objectivist like Andrew Ryan (he's a character from a game called Bioshock by the way) and I agree with your statement in your other comment here that lobbying is a HUGE problem with the way the US operates
AspectOfBardiel 2 years ago
I know! The only problem is, we really can't be heard by our reps and senators because of course they don't want to stop getting paid by the lobbyists. What in the heck do we do then to make it illegal?
MLadyAzzera 2 years ago
the best system would be if everyone in the country didnt vote but that will never happen so best would be to find a politican who isnt bought by lobbyists and have eveyone you know and everyone they know flood him with emails so he can build a case that would be a good start
Lightren 2 years ago
I completely agree with you. However, a capitalist country will always lead to an oligarchy as long as bribing (aka lobbying) politicians is still legal. Obviously the people with the money reign, which actually happens a lot in history.
MLadyAzzera 2 years ago
I wish we had a british version of young terks. Cenk, ana and JR bring their own sort of humour to serious issues and it definetly gets me thinking about politics. Since watching this I've started to learn more about whats going on in the UK politics
PoeticParkour 2 years ago
I wonder why TYT hasn't made a vid about the playground supervising license in Walford UK
A woman got fined for playing with her children in a playground in Walford, UK
The parents should supervise their children outside the playground perimeter
LOL
I wonder why TYT hasn't made a vid about this
If they don't, fuck them
Miskatakeable 2 years ago
Please see "Solid Gold Cadillac".
ibwilliamsi 2 years ago
Well said, Cenk. However, this isn't just of interest to Americans. If the US brought in this kind of legislation, the rest of the world would follow, and we would all be better off, not at the mercy of greedy, self-serving global corporation managers.
arlosdad 2 years ago
I don't follow Cenk this time. "It impairs the board's functioning" -- right, you don't want the public making decisions on technical problems for which the board of directors is otherwise best positioned to respond.
Here's an extreme example of how it could be abused: "we shareholders demand that this antibiotics company cease all research on Darwinian evolution of bacteria colonies because evolution is a lie!"
We don't trust banks anymore, but will this legislation make new problems for us?
RaminHAL9001 2 years ago
It is not a problem if they want to go down in flames in a matter of days, its a free country. You are free to run toward bankruptcy any time you want.
tommysch 2 years ago
But how about having your secretary run you towards bankruptcy.
LddStyx 2 years ago
No the logic you use here is flawed. You are assuming that the motivation for owning shares is because of an agenda... surely the biggest motivation for owning shares is to make a profit. I cant imagine any large company/bank having 51% or more of its shareholders being creationists who want nothing more than a bank to become non-profit machine. Even if that did happen there would be a demand in the market for another bank to take its place
dagorian86 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey guys, subscribe to my show, The Third Hour. A progressive talk show similar to The Young Turks.
TheThirdHour 2 years ago
It's called regulation. The government has done it before only about a million times.
aquaknot 2 years ago
Owner who don't run their own companies? That's sucks. I think that this legislation sounds reasonable. Like Cenk says "Go forward."
checkurself 2 years ago
I'm confused. Why does the cooperation need the government to write a law for this? Can't they just set up their operating agreement to give shareholders the power on their own?
krebul 2 years ago
I think part of the problem is that there is no incentive for the company execs or board to do that. I don't understand this entire issue all that clearly, but that was my take-away from it.
DoomTone11 2 years ago
Can they? Yes. Will they? No.
The government has the right and the responsibility to do this because these are publicly traded stocks regulated by the SEC.
ibwilliamsi 2 years ago
It was the bailouts ! That is why we have bankruptcy laws. These bureaucrats do not know anything about how to run a business. If they did there would have been NO bailouts.
iwillspyonyou 2 years ago
Problem is they did know.
Once you can destroy the economy if you fail the govt won' tet you. So you take ludicrous risks and when you do fail BAILOUTS!
Yay easy wins no llosses who would not play the l;oser way.
adolthitler 2 years ago
i know its annoying to see and hear, but as better people, i challenge everyone who watches TyT to ignore racist like you ignore the dead. cause half these racists are narcissist and like to have people hate them and respond to their bullshit. the other half believe their drivel. sad. focus on changing the system of inequality that we live with.
hollaboutit 2 years ago
DO NOT respond to racist, because the only thing they get out of it, is you pissed off. They are dumb, knows no history, knows no politics, and say the most retarded shit like its fact or insightful. If I wanted to pretend to be better than a whole race, I wouldn't say the most ignorant and hateful things that a child's vocabulary could come up with. Turn your backs on racist like their voice doesn't exist, and can't be heard. Just thumbs down and move on, until there is a real argument!
hollaboutit 2 years ago
The GOP have been owned by corporations for DECADES
pooyan6969 2 years ago
Sleep with your sister lately?
pooyan6969 2 years ago
Cenk this is an old ideal brought up in 85 during the Reagan admin and it was stopped then
Pleblian 2 years ago
watch?v=G6HWfiRWtDk&feature=player_embedded
Pleblian 2 years ago
Why do republicans hate the free market, democracy, and representation. Isn't providing money for shares and having no say ... a lot like taxation without representation ... hmmm maybe we need a "corporate tea party" ... wouldn't that be Ironic.
hassleoffa 2 years ago 2
Am I imagining things, or have TYT's newst videos suddenly gotten a LOT more views? Usually it's less than 2000 within 24 hours, I think...
LoryLandskipper 2 years ago
If it wasn't for the lobbyists money, you'd almost belief that the Republicans are against such legislations just to fuck the Democrats or just for the sake of being against it.
IHSchwingo 2 years ago
whoooore...ible...
xD
Drey4ltur 2 years ago
Does anyone know why do all the TYT vids I've watched today have funny vocal effects?!
veganmetalmilitia 2 years ago
nothing on my end.
LoryLandskipper 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I have come to find that The Young Turks are filemed and funded by Robert Greenwald(Brave New) a known communist and by the Communist party USA.
{Robert Greenwald believes ina one world goverment,one world leader,one world money,no religion,depopulation of the Earth}
MrSTANDFORAMERICA 2 years ago
Get fucked
EnhancementSmoker 2 years ago
practice what you preach
MPGfanatic 2 years ago
Of coooooouuurse they object.... don't give ppl w/ less money more power! That'd be obsurd.
KhymeraB 2 years ago
So I'm curious, who the hell set up this system where the owners don't get to say who works for them?
DrQuijano 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey guys, subscribe to my show, The Third Hour. A progressive talk show similar to The Young Turks.
Watch and Subscribe, more videos on the way tommorow!
TheThirdHour 2 years ago
People that own millions in stocks in a company wouldn't be lazy about letting a company know what they want in the least.
DeterminedGoat 2 years ago
Every objective economic indicator performs better under Democratic presidents than under Republican presidents. EVERY ONE
Stock returns, GDP growth, budget deficits, job creation, income growth. And on and on.
Republicans are just bad for the economy.
Richardgwm 2 years ago 2
Republicans aren't bad for the ecomony jackass.
They're bad for America.
MrTommyjackson 2 years ago
Indeed. I remember when I was a kid, maybe 10, my grandmother told me "there is nothing worse than a Republican. Never give them any votes". Time has proven her right.
DrQuijano 2 years ago 2
Yeah, they "own" the company, but they're also "the little guys", and Republican politics can be nicely summarised by the statement "screw the little guys". It's about wielding it as a source of political power and controlling who has access to it.
Wolfau5 2 years ago
see the suprising thing about this to me is that, whilst i'm only maybe 90% sure that this is a great bill instead of 100% sure, it's a very right wing capitalist measure, as cenk says, designed to empower the owners of business. since when did the republicans vote AGAINST the corporatocracy??????
kokorochris 2 years ago
This is a perfect example of why people become so apathetic when it comes to reforming Wall st. and Washington. It takes so much effort to get even te slightest amount of progress. The US government is so corrupt. The politicians who are supposed to represent the public trust, instead represent the corporate trust. Its just so depressing to watch...
gunslinger107 2 years ago 4
"The politicians who are supposed to represent the public trust, instead represent the corporate trust."
I think that last word should be "lust."
8blkcat 2 years ago
my backup reply explains the flaw in this...
Sometimes Cenk says a smart thing or two, but this is very bad, read the reply to my own comment.
lordvalgarX 2 years ago
dude i've decided i need to look into this issue further to clarify what i think. this video doesn't do the issue in its totality justice. soz cenk.
up2trix 2 years ago
i'm with cenk that this legislation should be passed, but the black/white, good guy/bad guy thesis seems maybe a bit extreme in this situation?
i dunno, maybe we should look at all their arguments and break them down, with less ridicule?
pshhh. don't get me wrong, some of the repulican standpoints make me want to piss in their face, but in this case, perhaps a less impassioned case would go down better to begin with. i dunno :S
up2trix 2 years ago