Organizing for the poor Pt.2

[99missingperson99]

I think he disenfranchised allot of people playing the race card. I myself am a firm beleiver in workers rights and I dont think that helps our cause. the fight should be for everyone a standard of living increase. wage is subjective so a standard of living for all workers in the us. Its counter productive to argue for one group or another and playing the race card just makes you cater to a smaller audience. Why do it?

[Champraves311]

Its really unfortunate how true that is.

[Champraves311]

No there is a difference. We as the people have the power to regulate and check our government, even the that power may seem to week at times. Unfortunately, we really don't have much power over corporations. Its hard to have an economic boycott of GE when they power your home. And thats the scary thing. Recognizing this distinction is the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives.

[bbburton]

Corporations have power precisely because corporations buy politicians. Politicians create the environment that allows corps to avoid the hardships of the market place. If gov regulates the market place, and corps control gov, what do you think the outcome will look like? The harder you push gov to regulate corps, the more power corps have over the marketplace. This is destructive to free enterprise and ultimately to the consumers. The solution isn't more gov, it's less gov, less taxes, not more

[bbburton]

And why, pray tell, do you think corp's have the power that they do? It's because gov and big business are in bed together. No one owes anyone a job. At the same time, no one owes the gov their life. Real change is the change we make in our own lives. It is freedom and liberty that gives us the greatest opportunity to effect change on our lives. Gov is destroying that and replacing it with corporatism. You want a better society, then stand up for the individual. Quit trying to make gov your life

[Champraves311]

I agree with your anti-corporatism. Its true that corporations have bought out politicians for their personal interest to exploit everyday Americans. But it was under the conservatism on the right starting under Reagan that gave corporations their power under the label of "deregulation." There is good and bad Government bureaucracy. There is no need to generalize all Government intervention as bad. Overall I think far left progressives and libertarians are more alike then one would think.

[bbburton]

When it comes to personal decision making, I'd rather the gov not get involved at all. The saying that the gov that gov's least gov's best is what I know to be true. And it wasn't just the Reagan administration that corp power grew, it's been going on for a very long time. Remember the Robber Barons? The progressives are socialists, pure and simple. Libertarians are not progressives and have nothing in common. Libertarians believe in the individual, progressives believe in groups.

[Champraves311]

True but what we have in common is an understanding for the corporate threat to the little man. We both point out the dangerous authoritarianism of Government power. Progressives and liberals are more about power of the people and a weak government then an authoritarian government. That is why we both are anti-imperialist, want to reduce our military industrial complex, and never let government get the power described in the patriot act. That doesn't mean it can't provide services.

[bbburton]

If gov tries to exercise any power not expressly given it under the Constitution, such exercise is illegal. That means it can't provide any services not specifically authorized by the Constitution. Read Amend 10, that's what it states. If Obummer is such an anti authoritarian progressive, then why doesn't he bring all the troops home from around the world? Why did he reauthorized the Patriot Act? Progressives are just as militant as neo conservatives. Both pretend to care about the people.

[Champraves311]

Because Obama is not a progressive. He is a corporate puppet. The reason why his polls have gone down so much in the last 4 months is because he is losing support not as much from Republicans or Independents, but from far left liberals.

[bbburton]

Independents have left Obummer like rats from a sinking ship.

[Champraves311]

Granted. But don' think progressives are happy with him either.

[bbburton]

And what I'm saying is that it is insane to allow the gov to control society to the degree that it now does. Corporations are not the friends of the people, and gov has been co-opted by corporate America. This is just as insane as gov controlling society. The way forward is to pay homage to our founders; return to the constitution. The gov should not be involved in running our day to day lives. You want people power? Give the individual power over their own lives. Get gov out of their way.

[Champraves311]

You see this is what we agree on. Its the solution where we disagree. Working people had power pre-Reagan. Corporations were checked by Government regulation, middle class wages grew, and the progressive income tax supported public development (highway, education ect..) Post-Reagan corporations placed puppets into government regulatory and administrative positions in the bureaucracy, CEOs made hundreds of millions, while working people have seen an unsustainable stagnant wage for 30 years.

[bbburton]

Fraud is crime, and that is the only regulation that has proven effective time and time again. Regulations that are intended to inhibit fraud have only made detecting it harder, and punishment weak. Look who writes the regulations; those who are to be regulated. Progressive taxes is an oxymoron. The more gov prints and borrows money, the greater the inflation. The poor and middle class are the ones who suffer. If taxing was the solution, then why is education more expensive than ever?

[Champraves311]

Printing and borrowing money has nothing to do with a nation taxing its people. The problem with the education system is not its expense but its ineffectiveness (which is more of a cultural and racial problem) and partially due to its lack of funding. Education has become more expensive because the means to teach our children has become more costly (labs, computers ect..) When our public education system was successful in the 60s, the highest tax rate was twice as high as it is now.

[bbburton]

Quite the opposite. Printing and borrowing money creates inflation, an indirect tax. Inflation is directly related to costs for everything, goods and services, including education. Education is not more expensive because of costs, computers are cheaper today then ever before.

[Champraves311]

Your definition of the word tax is what is causing confusion here. You define inflation has an indirect tax but just because there is a consumer loss does not mean its a tax since the Government is not generating revenue. The cost per child in the education system today is much much more today then it was 40 years ago (adjusted for natural inflation of GDP growth). Computers are cheaper now then they were 10 years ago, but I was referring to the pre-Reagan, when education was properly funded.

[bbburton]

Whenever gov interference in the free market, through regulation, or banking, or the Federal Reserve, increases the cost of goods and services, that is a tax. It is a tax because the gov benefits from creating the money and using it first before its value is inflated. This inflated value is what consumers must pay for those same goods and services that, unrelated to market conditions, that were cheaper before gov interference. You need to adjust your concept of what a tax is and isn't.

[bbburton]

Your explanation for the increase in the cost of education is faulty. How in the world does natural inflation of the GDP growth have anything to do with education costs? Nothing. Inflation is the result of too many dollars chasing the same amount of goods. There is nothing natural about that. I'd just as soon see the Dept. of Ed eliminated, and let the states handle education. I'm sure this is something we will continue to disagree about.

[Champraves311]

Government borrowing and printing money comes from government spending too much money and not funding which is exactly what Reagan and Bush did, and why the two of them created large national deficits. You can't lower taxes and raise spending (especially when the spending goes to militarizing contras or starting two wars that kill hundreds of thousands of people.) An analysis of the Gini Coefficient Index of inequality in the last 50 years will confirm my remarks.

[bbburton]

There is no intrinsic value to money. The more gov borrows and prints, the less valuable money becomes. Deficit spending is simply deferring debt to the future. The only sane thing to do is to substantially reduce spending; you can't spend your way out of debt. The only way to reduce spending is to reduce taxes, and quit borrowing and printing money. What the gov doesn't have, it can't spend.

[ArcticSlicer]

Besides Williams constantly referring to the "racist right" this is a pretty good interview. While it is true there are racists in the right who are critiquing Obama because of his race; they aren't the majority. Most of his criticism has more to due with partisanship than it does with race.

[bbburton]

And you are stuck with the insane notion that if the gov only continues what it has been doing for the last 50 years all of our problems would be solved. If you can't grasp the absurdity of that course of action, then how in the world do you account for te gov's utter failure to accomplish it's stated goals? How insane is to blame the gov while at the same time inviting more of the same?! That is exactly what you are promoting. And all in the name of preserving a little democracy. Insane.

[TheFelixxRevolution]

Man you make some good points,i just don't think its right to suggest that people living in poverty are trying to bring the rest of us down

[bbburton]

What I'm suggesting is that we follow the constitution, stop the welfare state, stop the war state, put the military industrial complex back in the box where it belongs, end corporatism, return to sound money, let parents raise their families without gov interference, end NAFTA and CAFTA, and bring all our troops home from around the world. Do these things, and poverty will be a thing of the past. Continue going along with the current gov program, and we all live in a police state, and be poor.

[TheFelixxRevolution]

I count agree more i think i miss understood what you were saying in you're first comment my apologies

[ShaktipatSeer]

My race is Human

[xxashyy]

This guy is a hypocrite calling people racist that disagrees with his anti white "progressive" plans for America. He talks about supporting the"people of color". What there aren't poor whites in the country?

[bbburton]

The Dept of Ed has been a great success; literacy rates have plummeted since its creation. How about wages? Ever since the Dept of Labor was created, wages have risen and the cost of living has more than doubled the rise in wages. How about commerce. Ever since the Dept of Commerce was created more jobs have been lost to outsourcing. Your grasp of the facts is sorely lacking. The answers do not lay with more gov, but with less gov. And you can blame the public for putting up with this crap.

[bbburton]

Why do you think poverty has increased in this country? It's because of the war on poverty that began with FDR and expanded under LBJ. Don't you think that the amount of money the gov has spent per person over the last forty plus years would have put a dent in the numbers of people living below the poverty line? Actually, the war on poverty has been a huge success by gov standards; there are more poor people since LBJ coined the term the great society. Scholastic achievement has also gone down.

[bbburton]

No, all it would take is to let workers keep the money they earn. It's not the rich that are stealing from the poor, it's the gov stealing from everyone who works for a living. Why is education so shitty? It's because the gov is involved in education instead of parents. Why do prices go up? It's because the Fed Reserve prints so much money; it's called inflation. You really need to start paying attention to what the gov is feeding you if you ever want to solve the problem of poverty.

[blackiron60]

Education is about breaking children away from their parents and their families and integrating them into the wider society as citizens. It's too much intervention and control from parents that stunts the growth of children. You are clearly a privatization fanatic - if we followed your advice we'd all be living in barbarism and savagery with every individual competing with every other individual and every family against every family. That's no way to live - that's why we have a society.

[bbburton]

And you are clearly a product of gov indoctrination. Do you really think the gov has a greater interest in the welfare of children then their parents?! How banal. If we followed your advice, we'd all be slaves to our gov masters. Society is a product of free association, not mandated indoctrination.

[flyhead2]

This is getting into silly semantics; Williams tarred criticism of his preferred policies as coming from the 'racist right'; i'm not deaf.

(By the way, getting into a debate with bbburton is feeding the troll.Please starve him of the attention he craves, the guy is a leach)

[flyhead2]

Wrong. Anyone who uses emotive terminology to surplant reason is untrustworthy, be it Tony Blair, Bush, Obama, Glen Beck or anyone else.

There are surely bigots amongst those criticising Obama but using broad brush strokes just to stifle argument is a symptom of the dumbing down and Orwellian Nuspeak that leads us into disaster.

That's why I think that Williams is an arse.

[Plum369]

plus that, according to the Mayan long count calendar, we are moving out of the age of power, and into the age of ethics. He should rename his group, power is already obsolete.

[Plum369]

I think the rise of socialist sentiment is in reaction to fascism. When business has government in its pocket, people get fed up with being taken advantage of and socialism is one expression of that. I am not a socialist but I can understand why people would be.

[DeraJa]

what does it mean to have a right to employment?

[flyhead2]

The 'racist right' cliché is tedious and simply undermines any intelligent debate. I cannot take this person seriously at any level.

[flyhead2]

bbburton is a troll, ignore him.

[thetimman00]

Wow what a 'tard.

[bbburton]

More crap from TRNN. Here's what they are saying. Those who have jobs, take care of their families, pay their taxes, and generally are successful in taking personal responsibility for themselves, are now going to be forced to take responsibility for those who have failed to have any responsibility for themselves or their families. Progressives are socialists, pure and simple. Instead of raising themselves up, they want to bring everyone down to their level of poverty. Pathetic.

[TheFelixxRevolution]

lol stfu burton

[bbburton]

Take that penis out of your mouth, and you might learn something instead of self gratification.

[TheFelixxRevolution]

ok i could go on to tell you why your so wrong but clearly your ignorance level is to high for you to be talked to......

[bbburton]

You could go on, alright, but being right is not within your abilities, or level of understanding. You're still talking with that penis in your mouth, and your contentment with self gratification is what stops you from understanding anything.