@mumbleora, like you've done. Ha! I say you're 19 and faking age so that you can have an anecdotal response to the facts. You have not supported your arguments with anything other than "I lived through it." Like that trumps history. Go back to school kid.
I have been over this time and again with your type. Heres a short response. The demoracts of yesterday are not the ones who lynched and desegregated .The republicans of today are SURELY not the party of Lincoln (that's another story in itself, read "Forced in to greatness", Dr. Lerone Bennett)during the days of segregation, most blacks were republicans, MLK,Jackie Robinson to name a few prominent names. democrats Reagan,Strom,Jesse helms,Bull connor,lester maddox,george wallace.
@mumbleora, The Dems are still segregating. They sure aren't unifying. Any policy that elevates one person over another, purely on the basis of color, is RACIST. The Conservative Movement seeks to make the Republican Party back into the party of Lincoln, MLK, Fredrick Douglas, etc. It's been Dem-Light for awhile.
@itssoEC How are the democrats segregating? I see more diversity in there party that in the republicans. Maybe you should look a little closer at your "con" servative party, although ray charles could see it , show it to stevie wonder, and have jose feliciano see it as well that it is YOUR party with the all white audiences and members. maybe thats what you guys men by "taking back your country"It's gooten too dark? too much flavor? Well that's the worls we live in son. Join the 21st century!
@mumbleora, so much of their policy is race based. That's what I mean. Obama's election was supposed to usher in a new era of post-racism, yet he has time after time pitted different ethnic groups AGAINST each other. The Dems may have fooled most of the black population into voting for them, but they have prospered under Conservative policies. As for the "you guys" statement, my family is mixed. You sir are a bigot.
@itssoEC What do you mean "race based"? When did a bill target an ethnic group? Up until 1964 all government polices were raced based for WHITE MALES. I guess that was okay then.How about the Homestead Act? Was that charity?
@mumbleora, the Republican Party has had black leaders since it's founding in the late 1800s. the Democratic Party: (1) fought to keep blacks in slavery; (2) started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize Republicans--black and white; (3) passed the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws; (4) fought every piece of civil rights legislation from the 1860's to the 1960's; and (5) attacked Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights protesters with skin-burning fire hoses and vicious dogs.
@itssoEC Once again son, you fail to grasp the fact that the democraqtic party of the old is NOT the one of today. I already explained how they morphed into the Republican party because of Presidents Harry S. Truman and Lyndon Baines Johnson. They didn't care much for Eleanor Roosevelt either.
@mumbleora, and YOU fail to grasp the fact that 1) you kept most of the racists. and 2) the dem policies have decimated the family unit and minorities have been hit hardest. They create dependency and lower standards.
@mumbleora, here's a good list to start: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jimmy Byrnes, Hugo Black, Al Gore, Sr., Senator Robert Byrd, Senator Ernest Hollings, Jesse Jackson, Dan Rather, Cragg Hines, Al Sharpton, Representative Dick Gephardt, Andrew Cuomo, Lee P. Brown, Mary Frances Berry, Billy McKinney, Sam Ervin, Orval Faubus, Donna Brazile, VP Biden, Hillary and Bill Clinton, J. William Fulbright.
That damn Reagan. Reagan He opposed a national holiday for the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He tried to get rid of the federal ban on tax exemptions for private schools that practiced racial discrimination. And in 1988, he vetoed a bill to expand the reach of federal civil rights legislation.Congress overrode the veto.
Reagan also vetoed the imposition of sanctions on the apartheid regime in South Africa. Congress overrode that veto, too.
@mumbleora, you say Reagan opposed making Martin Luther King Day a national holiday, but The Truth: AP reported back then, “Reagan originally had expressed concern over the cost of honoring King with a national holiday, and said he would have preferred a day of recognition.”
@mumbleora, the (singular) private school that he originally opposed the ban on tax exemptions for, he later changed his mind about as more information became available.
@mumbleora, Ronald Reagan opposed voting rights act of 1965
The Truth:
Reagan opposed any federal legislation that interceded with states rights and found it to be unfair to the south and should either be implemented on all states or on none of them...his motivation was not racial in fact Reagan later extended it another 25 years in 1982
@itssoEC I don't have the time nor the patience to educate you. I will take the time and offer you this. States rights was the mantra of the dixiecrats and segregationist. It was the the underlying theme for the the civil war in every sense.
States rights is being tlaked about now with these new "con" servatives. Seceding from the union is again being talked about by southern govenors.
@itssoEC executive?? So that automatically puts you in a special category that makes you correct on what you say? i have met many people with book sense but no common sense. I have met many people who have never entered a high school classroom let alone a collegecampus that had more brains than than many who have degrees.At 43 you still need schooling young man. I saw first hand many of the things you only read about.
@mumbleora, I have had more than a logical response to all your bs. You have not shown more than a regurgatory level of understanding. You are only showing your extraodinary level of ignorance.
@mumbleora , I don't havetime to point out all your bs. You continue to bear false witness. You have a lack of facts, principles, or logic. I can't even come to the conclusion that you are older than 19 based on the lack of substance.
@mumbleora, as for apartheid, Reagan preferred a policy of "constructive engagement." which held that quiet diplomacy, contact with oppositionist bodies, application of fair employment practices under the Sullivan Principles by American companies operating in South Africa, assistance programs to train Africans, and public statements endorsing reform would do more to undermine apartheid than would confrontational measures, including sanctions and disinvestment.
@shadowgeyser I completely agree with you what i am talking about is what happens in a fraudulent situation. in the specific example i raised i was talking about deception which i think we can all agree would exist regardless of the socio economic systems that are put in place. what you say about regulatory agencies is true, you can have industry standards that people are aware of and that would help them make an informed decision but in an anarcistic society you wouldnt have criminal courts.
@shadowgeyser I agree but libertarianism generally espouses small government. the courts police army etc. to protect the sovereign rights of each individual. true capitalism still needs to be protected from basic fraud. e.g. I open the box to find a spanner instead of a bumper bar. (sorry that was a dig at my friend.)
and we the people made the wrong decision. all in the name of apologizing for enslaving blacks 150yrs ago. now looks like we have to contend with a nuclear jihadi iran
2.)I only support equal representation in government,& estate & capital gains taxes for the top 1% of the population & welfare erosion,er,reform for the poor working class is anything but,& all the data on wealth disparity in this county confirms this.
All that being said,though,notwithstanding the fact that I voted for the Green Party this past election,I won't vote anymore;i'm an anarchist & my attitude is--"I can do bad all by myself";I don't need the government & capitalsim for that.
What you would do? You would do better, as would everyone if the flaws and the failure were flushed out. That doesn't look like it is going to happen. Now we're all subsidizing companies that destroy money.
I'd follow the advice of Jim Rogers to go into inflation hedges and essential goods. Like agriculture. The spot price for silver is fairly low, oil is going up and gold should be taking of soon too as well.What we can be sure of with these policies, just like in the 70s, is massive inflation
Who listens to Thomas Sowell these days or any other day for that matter. I'm surprised (not really ) he's still around. I had hoped he had disappeared with Nixon, but I see he is only trotted out on special occasions to give aid and comfort to a certain type of people.
@mumbleora, like the Dems trotted out Obama? Obama has never been in charge of anything prior and certainly has never been accountable. Truth is Sowell has been here the whole time. The mainstream media ignore anyone that doesn't fit their agenda.
@itssoEC He's in charge now and I'm lovin' it!Sowell HAS been here all the time and as I said, you don't hear from him unless it's to attack a black person, that's when he's trotted out and after he's barked or i should say "yelped" he's put back in the basement until next time. If they respected his "brillance"why haven't dixiecrats, I mean repub. offered him a cabinet post, or asked for his advice? Because though he may be intelligent, his worth to them is his attacks. Thank you very much.
@mumbleora, I think you have the parties mixed. The Republicans have far more appointments of color, mostly because they want the best person (i.e. Condie). The Dixiecrats, like Carter, stayed in the Dem Party. I believe that with the Conservative wave that is taking back the Republican Party you'll see more of people like TS.
@itssoEC Nope. I'm clear on the dixiecrats and how Strom thurmond, jesse helms etc, etc, switched from democrat to republican, reagan to republican etc,etc, after Truman (democrat) desegregated the armed forces finally when LBJ signed the civil rights and voting rights act, they ALL jumped ship and became republicans. Read a book son. I lived through it.
@mumbleora, I'm in my 40's and though I didn't live through it, I was also not exposed to the level of propaganda that you evidently gave into. Truman did issue the executive order to desegregate the millitary, but it wasn't inforced until Ike took action to effectively end segregation in the military and then pushed passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. FDR & Truman rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission.
@itssoEC First of all. F*** Reagan!Let's establish that first.When he went to Philadelphia Mississippi the where 2 whites and one black civil rights workers, Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman, and James Chaney were shot to death and buried in an earthen dam, and declared he was for states rights the very fuel used to feed discrimination, he solidified in my mind and others where he stood.
I also lived through his years as Gov of Calif. I don't have the time to educate you on many of
@mumbleora,Johnson and Kennedy voted against 1957 CRA. From inception the Reps were the anti-slavery party. They amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom, citizenship &the vote, passed civil rights laws in the 1800’s that were overturned by Dems when they took over Congress in 1892. Dems also enacted the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. It took Reps nearly 6 decades to finally achieve passage of civil rights legislation in the 1950’s and 1960s.
@itssoEC Your other comments but I will say this. You say I'm exposed to propaganda that I lived through or lived closer to the time of the event as opposed to you who came late and probably have the view of Republican majority leaders Palin, Limbaugh, and Beck.
@mumbleora, Don't you dare invoke the name of Reagan in that manner. The so-called “Dixiecrats” in the 1948 national election, formed 3rd party – the State’s Rights Dem Party – most remained Dems for all local and state elections. Strom Thurmond can rot. He jumped ship due to conservative move of his constituents. I'll give you him & Helms is probably one of the main reasons this view of Reps is fostered. He was a strange mix of views. Definitely flawed, but correct on many issues.
@mumbleora, The Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. The Democratic Party has never apologized for their horrific atrocities and racist practices. The Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Dems, and their primary goal was to intimidate and terrorize African American voters, Reps who moved South to protect African Americans and any other whites who supported them.
@mumbleora, For the 40+ years that Dems have been running black communities, they have turned those areas into wastelands. Buildings are dilapidated, teen pregnancy is at an all time high, school drop out rate is 50% and 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock. In his book “Dreams from My Father”, President Barack Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as “plantation politics”. So, don't be so dismissive and condescending.
@itssoEC That damn Reagan. Reagan He opposed a national holiday for the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He tried to get rid of the federal ban on tax exemptions for private schools that practiced racial discrimination. And in 1988, he vetoed a bill to expand the reach of federal civil rights legislation.Congress overrode the veto.
Reagan also vetoed the imposition of sanctions on the apartheid regime in South Africa. Congress overrode that veto, too.
@itssoECYou're the one who said "don't you daretalk about reagan" I guess I wouldn't want him discussed either. Reagan is a standard bearer for you guys and is the reason for this whole mess called new conservatism and he makes you guys go nuts resulting in tears,chokin up, red eyes, and advanced cases of flatulence.
@itssoEC The swith occured when LBJ sided with minorities to turn these upside down laws right side up. Read a book son. Read a great general history "from slavery to freedom", John Hope Franklin's classic for starters.
@itssoEC Do you think that welfare was only for blacks? That it was created for less than 12% of the population? I know welfare gets painted with a black face but believe me MANY non blacks and whitwes benefit from it just like the civil rights laws freed white women from the dependency of white men making white men having to compete more fairly with his sister mother and daughters.
@itssoEC That's exactly where your type looses tough WITH reality. Many people have used welfare to keep them afloat to recover and get on their feet. Would you have them starve in the land of plenty just to please you?What did your parent (s) do when they lost their job and couldnt get money to keep your family alive?Just like in any sector you have people who abuse systems but the majority don't. Some people exceed the speed limits, do you change the law to fit them?
@mumbleora, On apartheid, he hated it, but preferred a policy of "constructive engagement." which held that quiet diplomacy, contact with oppositionist bodies, application of fair employment practices under the Sullivan Principles by American companies operating in South Africa, assistance programs to train Africans, and public statements endorsing reform would do more to undermine apartheid than would confrontational measures, including sanctions and disinvestment.
@mumbleora, MLK, Jr. was a Republican to the day he died. Reagan reversed his position on Bob Jones U after he took a better look at the situation. Admitting you were wrong is difficult, but he did just that.
@itssoEC MLK and Robinson discribed themselves as "Rockefeller Republicans"
Reagan inferred to Dr. King as a communist, just like Hoover, just like "con"servatives call President Obama a communist. Reagan got the votes he needed and said what he had to to stay elected. Hypocrite that he was.
@mumbleora, it was JFK that inferred he was a communist and had him under surveillance. President Obama is a Marxist that is settling for a more European style Socialism. He surrounds himself w/ more of the same as well as fans of Mao.
@itssoEC I'm no big fan of JFK but I would rather have him than Reagan. At least he was on the road to change once he saw how vicious kings detractors were.
@mumbleora, the Associated Press reported back then, “Reagan originally had expressed concern over the cost of honoring King with a national holiday, and said he would have preferred a day of recognition.” Also, when asked at a press conference if he agreed with then-Senator Jesse Helms’s (R., N.C.) claims that sealed FBI files implicated some of King’s associates as Communists, Reagan said: “We’ll know in about 35 years, won’t we?” Reagan telephoned Mrs. King to apologize for that comment.
@itssoEC His books have been out there prominately for years. For you not to be familiar with it AND these factsby him and other black historians would lead me to believe you must not have respected them enought o pick it up and read it. I am not a racist, but a 300 year victim of racist. Yes I said VICTIM, but many good people mainly black and many white have fought to make me and other whites free. Read a book son.
@mumbleora, I'm a present day victim of racism, you racist. For you to assume anything about what I have read or not read is foolish. I didn't assume that you have not read from the opposing view. However, I believe your view of the facts are skewed.
@itssoEC Or do you apply the standing law? So do you take away the program that help the manybecause of the few whoabuse it? I don't know what a nerd is, that must be a valley girl term.I don't play Dungeons & Dragons. That's kind of satanic I understand. Finally I just believe in the concept of Ma'at.
@mumbleora, Interesting question. It MAY be to late to just wipe away some programs, but we can do things to phase out such programs. W2 in WI set the example and was eventually cloned by the US Congress. What did we do BEFORE these programs? Charitable organizations, religious or otherwise, and family. Since the govt programs had such a negative influence on families, it will take awhile to get back to that.
@mumbleora, as for D&D, I was illustrating my point that you're out of touch. As for Ma'at, the counterfeit of the True God and Judge, she is satanic. False gods can make true statements, but will ultimately take you off the correct path. Satan himself quotes scripture, but skews it to fit his needs.
@itssoEC The concept of Maat. (truth, justice, righteousness,and reciprocity) is not satanic. The concepts are central to all eastern religions, concepts strived for but not always reached. Also the ancient Kamites believed in only one true god, and these "angels" only powers of god. Anyway I'm getting off track, I'm just correcting your misinformation, but read the classic "Ancient Egypt, the Light of the World" by the great Gerald Massey to get your mind right. before calling thing satanic son
@mumbleora, like I said, "False gods can make true statements." Yes, good concepts. True statements to suck you into worship of a FALSE god. Ma'at will end in the lake of fire.
I love TS and just finished his book "Applied Economics" (5*+++). However, I still dont get his stance on the "Iranian situation". Much like McCain's perpetual war/ocuppation philosophy.
Who listens to Thomas Sowell these days or any other day for that matter. I'm surprised (not really ) he's still around. I had hoped he had disappeared with Nixon.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
and don't forget to add sarah palin. Glenn Beck, rush limbaugh, sean hannity, ted haggard and john hagee to your list. At least 3 of which are college drop outs .... talk about pathetic.
being a college dropout doesnt make things 'pathetic'...
having socialist beliefs in a country of which is supposed to stand for INDIVIDUAL Rights is pathetic...this is why i listed those i listed...not because of their education level or lack there of.
Anyone who believes that another individual has a inherent Right to MY labor/property is a treasonous individual to this Country and should be viewed and treated as such should they impose that belief upon me by force...i.e. LAW.
uh huh ....... I like the way the word treason is conveniently bantered about as if you actually understand what it means in relation common law rights in western democracies. you're utterly illiterate, and who would want to take that from you?
Obama/Bush/FDR/Lincoln/etc...all fall into this category with the legislation that THEY signed into law and the actions that THEY took without the consent of Congress...all of them...we have one individual now that we could remove from office before it is too late, but the overwhelming majority of Congress is locked up in Bribery (another listed high crimes and misdemeanor in the Constitution)
Geez, you don't sound like an elitist at all when you call people without college degrees pathetic. Typical elitist, intellectual bullshit. Glenn Beck didn't pay thousands of dollars for a degree he ultimately wouldn't need, so now he's an idiot? Argue on the issues, calling people 'Glenn Beck clones' is a cop out for somebody without anything smart to say.
You're very confused, you seem to think that pundits are the champions of ideas.They are not. They are simply clowns that, like for people such as yourself, they put on a show for
The real battle is behind the curtains, the smoke screen and the politicans. The battle of ideas, like the rational expectations revolution of the 80s, the neoclassical synthesis up to that, this era will probably be called the neo-keynesian era
And that is ultimately what changes policy due to rational irrationality
what ever history will call this era/epoch, conservatism is dead/irrelevant ideology, or at least it should be. Religion is the underlying cause of this clash of ideologies. The reactionary gang that hijacked the GOP is really about three things ..... their god, their guns, and saving embryos .... in the name of a deity. This crap about the national debt is nothing but a ruse where a progressive and promising administration can be attacked and weakened.
In the end, you'll have your guns, you god, and perhaps your embryos ...... but America will fall further behind the civilized world and continue to stoop to increasing levels of stupidity as she continue to be drawn into acts of hegemonic imperialism. Neglect the homeland, kill muslims. Stupid, stupid, americans.
I don't really see any difference religion and other social movements as the workers movement, nazism, communism or others. Much of what you say is a reflection of just how much of a social rather than intellectual movement modern liberalism is.
I don't care for the GOP or the democrats, they are just represent different interest groups. I do however care for the battle of ideas.
The "crap" about national debt is important, but yeah for the GOP it is merely political capital.
it's easy to be dismissive and equate the long dead nazi and communist ideologies with contemporary social movements, but they are nonetheless dead, failed, and dead.
I don't know exactly what the answers are, but one thing is for sure, and that is that the reactionary press is bringing this country down. and social movements are born out of intellect, but when they are dead, intellect SHOULD prevail, and leave it for dead. Sarah Palin and the hopeless tea bagging morons??
Social movements might be born out of intellect, but that is certainly not how they carry momentum or how they progress. They turn into this monster that brands any opposition as heretics, loons in your movements case "bible humpers" or greedy capitalists.
Sarah Palin is a tool, she's not a serious candidate. I've gone from totally hating her to kinda liking her though, not as a politican (they are mostly all scum, except for a few select that are principled like Ron Paul or Kusishscsh)
the failed political movements of the 20th century got legs because a small group of dissidents captured the oppressed and made false promises of hope ......... and that is what is happening how in American ..... no ideas, no novelty, but false promises, that's for sure.
that's the solution?? Really? Why is the NRA huddling around the likes of a Sarah Palin as a keynote speaker?? How could I possible take anything the NRA or the teaparty seriously when their spokesperson is a moron with no hope, no ideas, never had a single novel thought, and has no future except to muddy the waters even further??
Sarah Palin is not part of the tea party movement, the tea party movement has been around for ages, decades and centuries and has always been about libertarian principles. There's a political struggle by the GOP to try to convert the followers under their flag, hopefuly it fails and a third party is finally born.
I have a pretty good idea of the answers, let the market unfold the recession, put a cap on spending, decrease federal expenditure and cut the regulations. Remove the problems!
the Market??? ..... see, that's what I mean about repeating past failures. The unregulated market, caused the problems and the so-called livertarians want to unleash more Ken Lays, Charles Keatings, and Bernie Madoffs.
No way, I've seen it close up and have seen its victims, including myself.
No it didn't, such a statement doesn't even make sense, regulations almost doubled during Bush.
Unleash more? These people were found out by responsible investors, the regulations in place merely act as a false idea of security. The best example is Enron which a short trader looks trough the books over and borrowed stocks with every dime he had before he released the story of how crooked they were, the market had dumped the stock before the regulators even realized what was happening.
uh huh ...... from where I'm sitting, and from what I've read about Enron and others, the market responded to information that preceded the scandal because it was just that ...... information that was "leaked" ..... there are no mysteries here. Enron, Worldcom, it's an almost endless freaking list over the last 25 years ...... culminating in the Madoff debacle and several others that are still evolving as their executives scramble for cover.
It's not a mystery, that's how short trading works. You investigate a company, if they are irresponsible you borrow lots of stocks and release the story. People have an economic incentive to do their homework because they makem oney of it.
Regulators contrary are incompetent by the incentive strucutre they work under.
There are of course some legitimate concerns about acounting, and insider trading, but that would just be deals made with Dow and Nasdaq to be made publically traded companies.
and ya know, the Bush boom, however short lived, was largely based on construction and real estate markets which were unsustainable. You just can't keep pooring concrete and blacktop all over everything to sustain unskilled labor and expect to have a future. Why is Buffet dumping his energy stocks?? Is it because the "do business as usual" GOP gang back in power for the mid-term??
Yes, that is what I said, when you set the interest rate too low capital is allocated into the higher stages of production.
Of course you can't do that, but the more interesting question is why it happens, which "people are just inherently stupid and we should regulate them" is not only a unfulfilling explenation but one that contradicts itself as the regulators are people as well (usually those in the bottom of the class).
Buffet is betting against the US economy. Look at his portfolio.
Tell him what? That his government has looted his savings trough inflation and financial terrorism? What do you think I'm doing, I'm trying to educate people as to the real causes of the crisis to defute all these ridiculous ludicruos myths about "greed" and "lack of regulation". We're always greedy, greed is not the problem, The problem is when the banks know they are going to be bailed out by the tax payer so they don't have to be caution. The problem is when regulations distorts the market.
You may be trying to educate the masses, you may actually think that you understand the myths. So, why don't I believe you? and why don't I trust you? Where in your arguments have I found flaws leading to mistrust?
What would have resulted in letting market forces prevail and letting the banks fail??
Hypothetically, what would have happened without the bailout?? And, I'm not sure either way mind you. BUT what would Wall Street look like today without the bailout?
The most probable explenation is that you have a preference for your position rather than a belief. Just like someone who believe in god you WANT the government solution to be true.
Don't believe me, do your homework, believe the facts
Without the bailouts things would have gotten worse first, but then after a while the economy would restructure and by a years or so it would be over, and WS would look better. Now it is prolonged, like in the thirties.
Well since I profited from the imbalances, because I saw them coming, I and other like should be heard. We understand how when you lower interest rate you change the capital structure and it puts the economy on an unsustainable trajectory. The boom is the problem, not the bust, the recessions is the solution, not the disease.
Regulations, moral hazard, low interest rates and political will to increase "house ownership" is the problem, the market can regulate itself. With greed comes caution.
I understand that recession can be healthy, BUT its an opportunity for new markets, new technologies but not the same old lazzez faire, look the other way crap that makes executives wealthy by selling off divisions or whole companies to foreign interests while the market for decent jobs evaporates. I give you Lou Gerstner, $813 million, and IBM, who will eventually evolve into the Walmart of technology.
It's an opportunity for government to expand ridiculous and stupid programs and loot the tax payers, then blame it on the market, that is for sure. FDR and Hoover made a model out of it that Obama is following. It doesn't work though.
Now you're just yelling "heretics".
Equity and stocks are sold of to other countries when you have a huge trade deficit, that's no mystery...
Outsourcing create jobs!
You're presenting the same old mercantalist myths that have been debunked for 300 years.
my grandfather fed his family on FDR's "model." OLD immutable ideas always fail in the end. The myth is promulgated today's former MBA students who can't see beyond what is read from economics textbooks. Yesterdays ideas, tomorrow's failures.
No, farmers fed your grandfather and FDR made sure it wasn't easy. He burned crops and killed cattle to get the price higher, that not a joke. His policies prolonged the great depression. Read about the depression of 1920
The idea of bread for the poor isn't old, it was the corner stone of the feudal realm. To care for the stupid peasent as they couldn't do so themselves.
Well I'm an engineer. Economics is too easy to waste a masters on, but I do work in finance.
We should extrapolate too much from the AGW, not even IPCC goes so far as to suggest that is in our near our generations future.
But of course the envoirment is a concern. We need to be level-headed however, and relate the cost of doing things for the envoirment to the benefit. Cutting emissions by on twenith as now proposed and passed will cost about 2 trillion dollars, which could feed every starving person on the planet for 200 years. The better way is to invest a lot in R&D on a broad scale
What would my 403b look like today, and mind you it it around 68% of the pre-crash value ..... but what would it look like today without the bail out?
It would probably be lower today, but you would have much better future prospects.
The peope on the top know what they are doing, look at the goldman sachs scandal, they are transfering wealth to rich bankers, bailing them out at the expense of you while the structural problems in the economy are just compiled instead of restructured. These companies need to die.
They will shift the current crisis inot a currency crisis, there's already movement out of the USD as a reserve currency
So both the Bush administration AND Obama administration and most of congress were wrong to bail out the big banks and wall street? in your opinion? And I'm asking you this because you see yourself as an authority?
Yes definetly, it's called the "fallacy of compostion" the idea that some sectors of the economy are more "important" than others. The idea that an economy will go under if rich 29 year olds can't run around in their ferraris is utterly ridiculous. Let these spoiled incompetent idiots fail like everyone else.
Why do you think they did it? Don't you think it might have something to do with banking being the biggest lobby in Washington?
Greed is not a problem, greed is good. You don't see everyone migrating to Las Vegas and put everything on red 36. People and especially investors make responsible and calculated bets.
Even a child understand that greed doesn't work that way.
People can create their own safety nets trough savings and trough charitable organizations. Government programs for such things are inefficient and they don't do the job they set out to do, they only make it worse.
@Visfen People, can't see the forest through the trees there Gordon Gecko. "People," listen to counsel from the likes of Bernie Madoff and others, and why shouldn't they? The market has expanded all these years and Bernie and his family have palatial estates all over the planet manifesting his success, and expertise??
Increasing regulations?? So you're saying the government has become more lax on market regulation during a GOP congress AND presidency AND during the 1990s?? THis is antithetical to everything that I've listened to and learned for the last 25 years.
The few instance of deregulated is basically the Q-regulation on levels of leverage and the Glass-Stegal act. That's 2 deregulations (and stupid mind you with the continuency of FDIC and the bailing that create moral hazard), while the regulation in total have increased just under Bush from 122 000 to 266 000. To call it deregulation is to call an immensly obese person too thin.
The GOP are hardly the party of free market, they just have a different set of interest group than the democrats.
well OK then ....... you've sold me. How could I have been so mislead and outright wrong for so many years ......
Tell me something ..... if it weren't for the Clean Water Act would industries like GE still be discharging chemicals like PCBs into our nation's waterways??? or should the government not have stepped in and regulated it??
The problem with external cost of envoirmental pollution is one that has to be incroporated in the pricing mechanism, either trough property rights or trough such restrictions as CWA. I prefer the first because it allows for greater competition (basically you clean up your own shit or pay huge fines).
I'm not saying that there is no place for regulations, but regulation risk and enducing speculation is what let to the problem, it wont solve it.
yeah, well, we have those regulations in place now, and they do work most of the time but thanks mostly to watchdog groups whose members educated the public 40 or so years ago.
But the question is ....... without government regulating, and in this case environmental policy really does emanate from the public sector ..... would industry (wall street mega-corporations) STILL be releasing toxins as they do in China or India?
And investigate journalism, just like I brought up with short traders - they make their money unraveling corruption.
Yeah, I don't agree with the idea of superfund, I think exxon mobile should pay for exxon valdez (as an example) not the taxpayer. It's a form of corporate welfare.
I'm more for an approach that incorporates the cost of toxic waste in production. That makes sure companies own the waste and the consequences it creates
In China they aren't rich enough to care about the envoirment
When I worked in NYC in the 1980s and 90s, I was aware of the bonuses and heard the numbers boasted back then ....... but muti-million dollar bonuses earned whether company earned or lost money goes against my middle class morality like the salary of a professional baseball player. Lose your clients money, virtually all of it, and get a bonus.
Yeah, one of the problems with the ridiculous bonuses is that there is massive protections against corporate take overs. That is the markets way of removing inefficent administration, now it's almost impossible.
However, there are legitimate bonuses, most of the brokers work on comission and while the company as a whole can be doing terrible, some people might very well be doing a good job.
I however would never place my money in these firms. Huge overhead and morons in charge.
When I was a salesman at IBM, I earned bonuses by making or exceeding my quota. Sometimes there were incentives during the year. But as part of the sales team back then I saw the numbers at wall street firms like goldman, and they were to be mistrusted
Definetly, and the same goes for the rating agencies.
One of the problems with the ever increasing range of laws and regulation of the sector is that it create a huge bottle head for people who want to compete with these people. It makes sure that they can do pretty much what they want in this industry and get away with it.
Competition is a far better form of regulation than any technocrat could possibly come up with.
If you could chose between a good and a bad company, what would you chose?
You see, you're saying that markets should be completely free of any kind of regulation ...... and I'm saying that GREED prevails. GE didn't foresee cleaning up PCBs 40 years after they were released into the Housitonic or Hudson. Sure it would have been cheaper to not release them in the first place but the are literally thousands of examples where UNFORTUNATELY if government didn't intervene, industry would have gone its merry way without any care about anything
No I'm not saying they should be free from regulations, if we have a government there is a place for judicial regulations in terms of fraud, deception and theft. But other than regulation can come from the bottom up and not the top down. Because greed prevails self-regulation is put in place, people don't want to lose their money. And in this way the regulation become lose and instead of a one rule for all situation scenario you get a balance.
Yes, surely it is cheaper to not do so in the first place but we have to make calculated decissions. It's like in health care, you don't know how the patient is going to do under surgery, so you look at the risk and the benefit and decide with the patient what is best.
We can't test everything there is for it's effect, that would take millions of years, some risk is good. But make the polluter pay for that. GE is ridiculously wealthy, as is Exxon, they can afford it.
@perfectbark, Here are some more dropouts: Ted Turner, founder of CNN (Brown University, expelled), Steve Jobs, co-founder and C.E.O. of Apple (Reed College), Ralph Lauren, fashion magnate (City College of New York), Larry Ellison, co-founder of Oracle (University of Chicago and University of Illinois), David Geffen, co-founder of DreamWorks (University of Texas at Austin), Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook (Harvard University), Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft (Harvard University)
Any black person who speaks against majority black people is called "brilliant". Usually by a white person who's views he parrots. Nothing new. Yawnnn....
the refreshing thing about Dr. Sowell is that he actually leaves race out of it, at least in terms of what he presumes about people. also, if you're going to attack someone on the use of the word "brilliant" I would begin by not misspelling the word whose. but maybe that's just me.
Sowell uses facts, logic, reason and rationality -- that is what we agree with. As opposed to character assassination, emotionalism / irrationality, ignorance, self-aggrandizing ideological bullshit, such as what's in your comment. And since when did Sowell speak maliciously about blacks? People like you call blacks of today victims and want to coddle them literally and via the govt. as if they're helpless retards, when, obvious to anyone living in reality, they are not. U=unsupportable Crap.
weren't allowed to compete with you (or your daughters)so not only were black people victimized by you, your own females were and are to this day. You need to stay in your comic books, you know fantasy land and stay out of adult conversation.
WTF, this shit is old, son. Victimized by me? When did I victimize a black person, you libtard? And prove that "my own 'females' " (WTF is that shit, am I white or something?) are victimized to this day... white women have more privilege today than anyone, but you wouldn't understand that because everything you believe is based on simplistic pre-conceived notions, rather than reality.
spiderman, donald Duck, or whatever you call yourself. You talk like you have some type of authority on black people when your IQ "reason" appears to be that of the racists I have witnessed most of my life. Ted Bundy? Maybe you have simliar feelings about women as he had. Study some history boy and listen to your elders, and not just the ones who get "trotted out" when they need someone to make you feel good.".
NICE NON-RESPONSE, DUMBASS. You can't tell me when I victimized a black person (because 1. I never have, and 2. you don't know me) -- but in your initial comment that's what you said I did. "Ted Bundy? Maybe you have simliar feelings about women as he had." I don't, my profile is (obviously) a joke, SO NOW WHAT? Another tangent for the unoriginal 'tard? "Study some history... " BLAH BLAH BLAH. Fabricate more nonsense to base your bullshit stories about me, on, please. NEXT!
@regresseur.Don't take it personal poot butt. That was a generalized statement meant for those who fit the bill. No, now that the laws are in place, you can no longer (generalized statement for those who are slow, hint,hint) victimize "openly", although redlineing, mortgage lending practices, police shooting, sentencing laws and practices, (white boy gets probation, black kid gets 15 years) Look at the true story movie "American Violet". You may be stupid, but can't be that stupid. (well maybe).
@regresseur BTW. Tell your mama, aunt, or sister they have more privilege than anyone and see how long it takes them to kick you out of their basement and live on your own.
I just read lazy,weak,packaged,standard, typical, parroted comment about African Americans. You poor boob.Before most europeans were brought here, I should say "dumped" here Europe was people poor, land poor, and resources poor. They had the look of Oliver Twist. The US govt. GAVE them land. When blacks couldn't get a GI Bill even though they served, white got theirs, were allowed to buy homes,send kids to college. that's how this 1s
I don't have the time or patience to educate you if in fact it is even possible.
.... You will have to grow and mature on your own.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, like you've done. Ha! I say you're 19 and faking age so that you can have an anecdotal response to the facts. You have not supported your arguments with anything other than "I lived through it." Like that trumps history. Go back to school kid.
itssoEC 1 year ago
I have been over this time and again with your type. Heres a short response. The demoracts of yesterday are not the ones who lynched and desegregated .The republicans of today are SURELY not the party of Lincoln (that's another story in itself, read "Forced in to greatness", Dr. Lerone Bennett)during the days of segregation, most blacks were republicans, MLK,Jackie Robinson to name a few prominent names. democrats Reagan,Strom,Jesse helms,Bull connor,lester maddox,george wallace.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, The Dems are still segregating. They sure aren't unifying. Any policy that elevates one person over another, purely on the basis of color, is RACIST. The Conservative Movement seeks to make the Republican Party back into the party of Lincoln, MLK, Fredrick Douglas, etc. It's been Dem-Light for awhile.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC How are the democrats segregating? I see more diversity in there party that in the republicans. Maybe you should look a little closer at your "con" servative party, although ray charles could see it , show it to stevie wonder, and have jose feliciano see it as well that it is YOUR party with the all white audiences and members. maybe thats what you guys men by "taking back your country"It's gooten too dark? too much flavor? Well that's the worls we live in son. Join the 21st century!
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, so much of their policy is race based. That's what I mean. Obama's election was supposed to usher in a new era of post-racism, yet he has time after time pitted different ethnic groups AGAINST each other. The Dems may have fooled most of the black population into voting for them, but they have prospered under Conservative policies. As for the "you guys" statement, my family is mixed. You sir are a bigot.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC What do you mean "race based"? When did a bill target an ethnic group? Up until 1964 all government polices were raced based for WHITE MALES. I guess that was okay then.How about the Homestead Act? Was that charity?
Get your mind right son. I'm here to help you.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, the Republican Party has had black leaders since it's founding in the late 1800s. the Democratic Party: (1) fought to keep blacks in slavery; (2) started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize Republicans--black and white; (3) passed the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws; (4) fought every piece of civil rights legislation from the 1860's to the 1960's; and (5) attacked Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights protesters with skin-burning fire hoses and vicious dogs.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC Once again son, you fail to grasp the fact that the democraqtic party of the old is NOT the one of today. I already explained how they morphed into the Republican party because of Presidents Harry S. Truman and Lyndon Baines Johnson. They didn't care much for Eleanor Roosevelt either.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, and YOU fail to grasp the fact that 1) you kept most of the racists. and 2) the dem policies have decimated the family unit and minorities have been hit hardest. They create dependency and lower standards.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, You kept Bull Connor, Lestor Maddox, and George Wallace, as well as a LONG list of racists.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC You kept Bull Connor, Lestor Maddox, and George Wallace, as well as a LONG list of racists
......................
Who???
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, here's a good list to start: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jimmy Byrnes, Hugo Black, Al Gore, Sr., Senator Robert Byrd, Senator Ernest Hollings, Jesse Jackson, Dan Rather, Cragg Hines, Al Sharpton, Representative Dick Gephardt, Andrew Cuomo, Lee P. Brown, Mary Frances Berry, Billy McKinney, Sam Ervin, Orval Faubus, Donna Brazile, VP Biden, Hillary and Bill Clinton, J. William Fulbright.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC ...that damn reagan
mumbleora 1 year ago
That damn Reagan. Reagan He opposed a national holiday for the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He tried to get rid of the federal ban on tax exemptions for private schools that practiced racial discrimination. And in 1988, he vetoed a bill to expand the reach of federal civil rights legislation.Congress overrode the veto.
Reagan also vetoed the imposition of sanctions on the apartheid regime in South Africa. Congress overrode that veto, too.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, you say Reagan opposed making Martin Luther King Day a national holiday, but The Truth: AP reported back then, “Reagan originally had expressed concern over the cost of honoring King with a national holiday, and said he would have preferred a day of recognition.”
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, the (singular) private school that he originally opposed the ban on tax exemptions for, he later changed his mind about as more information became available.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, Ronald Reagan opposed voting rights act of 1965
The Truth:
Reagan opposed any federal legislation that interceded with states rights and found it to be unfair to the south and should either be implemented on all states or on none of them...his motivation was not racial in fact Reagan later extended it another 25 years in 1982
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC I don't have the time nor the patience to educate you. I will take the time and offer you this. States rights was the mantra of the dixiecrats and segregationist. It was the the underlying theme for the the civil war in every sense.
States rights is being tlaked about now with these new "con" servatives. Seceding from the union is again being talked about by southern govenors.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora don't copy and paste to this site ideas that you don't understand or don't know about.Stick to your video games.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I'm 43 & an executive you simpleton. So, far you have no facts.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC executive?? So that automatically puts you in a special category that makes you correct on what you say? i have met many people with book sense but no common sense. I have met many people who have never entered a high school classroom let alone a collegecampus that had more brains than than many who have degrees.At 43 you still need schooling young man. I saw first hand many of the things you only read about.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I have had more than a logical response to all your bs. You have not shown more than a regurgatory level of understanding. You are only showing your extraodinary level of ignorance.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora , I don't havetime to point out all your bs. You continue to bear false witness. You have a lack of facts, principles, or logic. I can't even come to the conclusion that you are older than 19 based on the lack of substance.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, as for apartheid, Reagan preferred a policy of "constructive engagement." which held that quiet diplomacy, contact with oppositionist bodies, application of fair employment practices under the Sullivan Principles by American companies operating in South Africa, assistance programs to train Africans, and public statements endorsing reform would do more to undermine apartheid than would confrontational measures, including sanctions and disinvestment.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@shadowgeyser I completely agree with you what i am talking about is what happens in a fraudulent situation. in the specific example i raised i was talking about deception which i think we can all agree would exist regardless of the socio economic systems that are put in place. what you say about regulatory agencies is true, you can have industry standards that people are aware of and that would help them make an informed decision but in an anarcistic society you wouldnt have criminal courts.
aussieconservative 1 year ago
@shadowgeyser I agree but libertarianism generally espouses small government. the courts police army etc. to protect the sovereign rights of each individual. true capitalism still needs to be protected from basic fraud. e.g. I open the box to find a spanner instead of a bumper bar. (sorry that was a dig at my friend.)
aussieconservative 1 year ago
America has a few brilliant minds - but oh so many morons.
Obama being the spearhead of moronic ideology and Sowell a heartrending reminder of what a well-educated mind is in comparison.
deathtrapdeath 1 year ago 2
Thomas Sowell would be a great President.
LieutenantFever 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Sowell is extremely stupid
neonaction 1 year ago
and we the people made the wrong decision. all in the name of apologizing for enslaving blacks 150yrs ago. now looks like we have to contend with a nuclear jihadi iran
hammerheadrock 1 year ago
What a RACIST!!!
Oh, wait.
XKG80 1 year ago 2
@XKG80 lol good one
TheProgressistViewer 1 year ago
@XKG80 lol, indeed, i too was called a racist as i voted
hammerheadrock 1 year ago
ok, has a point, but this wasn't that amazing.
mrzipdisk 1 year ago
@mrzipdisk, you should watch the entire interview.
itssoEC 1 year ago
1.)I've been homeless before,and in the that time I walked three miles a day to & from work.
I've also never in my entire life asked my government for welfare,food stamps,or even student loans.
Indeed,I've lived the life of a true anarchist before,totally outside the system.
So to answer your question I didn't need to see a movie to know of my own strength.
I've also never asked a bank for a loan to start up a business(would that count as welfare,with entrepreneur's enslaved to banks?)...
thirdshift47 1 year ago
2.)I only support equal representation in government,& estate & capital gains taxes for the top 1% of the population & welfare erosion,er,reform for the poor working class is anything but,& all the data on wealth disparity in this county confirms this.
All that being said,though,notwithstanding the fact that I voted for the Green Party this past election,I won't vote anymore;i'm an anarchist & my attitude is--"I can do bad all by myself";I don't need the government & capitalsim for that.
thirdshift47 1 year ago
What you would do? You would do better, as would everyone if the flaws and the failure were flushed out. That doesn't look like it is going to happen. Now we're all subsidizing companies that destroy money.
I'd follow the advice of Jim Rogers to go into inflation hedges and essential goods. Like agriculture. The spot price for silver is fairly low, oil is going up and gold should be taking of soon too as well.What we can be sure of with these policies, just like in the 70s, is massive inflation
Visfen 2 years ago
Demographic roulette. Glad we pulled that trigger...
Flankitto04 2 years ago
Thomas Sowell for president.
mg5679 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Who listens to Thomas Sowell these days or any other day for that matter. I'm surprised (not really ) he's still around. I had hoped he had disappeared with Nixon, but I see he is only trotted out on special occasions to give aid and comfort to a certain type of people.
mumbleora 2 years ago
@mumbleora, like the Dems trotted out Obama? Obama has never been in charge of anything prior and certainly has never been accountable. Truth is Sowell has been here the whole time. The mainstream media ignore anyone that doesn't fit their agenda.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC He's in charge now and I'm lovin' it!Sowell HAS been here all the time and as I said, you don't hear from him unless it's to attack a black person, that's when he's trotted out and after he's barked or i should say "yelped" he's put back in the basement until next time. If they respected his "brillance"why haven't dixiecrats, I mean repub. offered him a cabinet post, or asked for his advice? Because though he may be intelligent, his worth to them is his attacks. Thank you very much.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I think you have the parties mixed. The Republicans have far more appointments of color, mostly because they want the best person (i.e. Condie). The Dixiecrats, like Carter, stayed in the Dem Party. I believe that with the Conservative wave that is taking back the Republican Party you'll see more of people like TS.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC Nope. I'm clear on the dixiecrats and how Strom thurmond, jesse helms etc, etc, switched from democrat to republican, reagan to republican etc,etc, after Truman (democrat) desegregated the armed forces finally when LBJ signed the civil rights and voting rights act, they ALL jumped ship and became republicans. Read a book son. I lived through it.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I'm in my 40's and though I didn't live through it, I was also not exposed to the level of propaganda that you evidently gave into. Truman did issue the executive order to desegregate the millitary, but it wasn't inforced until Ike took action to effectively end segregation in the military and then pushed passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. FDR & Truman rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC First of all. F*** Reagan!Let's establish that first.When he went to Philadelphia Mississippi the where 2 whites and one black civil rights workers, Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman, and James Chaney were shot to death and buried in an earthen dam, and declared he was for states rights the very fuel used to feed discrimination, he solidified in my mind and others where he stood.
I also lived through his years as Gov of Calif. I don't have the time to educate you on many of
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora,Johnson and Kennedy voted against 1957 CRA. From inception the Reps were the anti-slavery party. They amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom, citizenship &the vote, passed civil rights laws in the 1800’s that were overturned by Dems when they took over Congress in 1892. Dems also enacted the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. It took Reps nearly 6 decades to finally achieve passage of civil rights legislation in the 1950’s and 1960s.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC Your other comments but I will say this. You say I'm exposed to propaganda that I lived through or lived closer to the time of the event as opposed to you who came late and probably have the view of Republican majority leaders Palin, Limbaugh, and Beck.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, If these 3 have my views, then good for them.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, Don't you dare invoke the name of Reagan in that manner. The so-called “Dixiecrats” in the 1948 national election, formed 3rd party – the State’s Rights Dem Party – most remained Dems for all local and state elections. Strom Thurmond can rot. He jumped ship due to conservative move of his constituents. I'll give you him & Helms is probably one of the main reasons this view of Reps is fostered. He was a strange mix of views. Definitely flawed, but correct on many issues.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, The Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. The Democratic Party has never apologized for their horrific atrocities and racist practices. The Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Dems, and their primary goal was to intimidate and terrorize African American voters, Reps who moved South to protect African Americans and any other whites who supported them.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, For the 40+ years that Dems have been running black communities, they have turned those areas into wastelands. Buildings are dilapidated, teen pregnancy is at an all time high, school drop out rate is 50% and 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock. In his book “Dreams from My Father”, President Barack Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as “plantation politics”. So, don't be so dismissive and condescending.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC That damn Reagan. Reagan He opposed a national holiday for the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He tried to get rid of the federal ban on tax exemptions for private schools that practiced racial discrimination. And in 1988, he vetoed a bill to expand the reach of federal civil rights legislation.Congress overrode the veto.
Reagan also vetoed the imposition of sanctions on the apartheid regime in South Africa. Congress overrode that veto, too.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I just tore down your whole argument and now you're going off on a strawman argument on Reagan. How weak.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoECYou're the one who said "don't you daretalk about reagan" I guess I wouldn't want him discussed either. Reagan is a standard bearer for you guys and is the reason for this whole mess called new conservatism and he makes you guys go nuts resulting in tears,chokin up, red eyes, and advanced cases of flatulence.
I have been over th
mumbleora 1 year ago
@itssoEC The swith occured when LBJ sided with minorities to turn these upside down laws right side up. Read a book son. Read a great general history "from slavery to freedom", John Hope Franklin's classic for starters.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, yeah, LBJ made them wards of the state aka slaves. His entitlement programs created dependency. THAT's your big moment????
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC Do you think that welfare was only for blacks? That it was created for less than 12% of the population? I know welfare gets painted with a black face but believe me MANY non blacks and whitwes benefit from it just like the civil rights laws freed white women from the dependency of white men making white men having to compete more fairly with his sister mother and daughters.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, No, welfare was an Equal Opportunity F'n. It freed no one. It created dependency. Period! Don't paint any face on it.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC That's exactly where your type looses tough WITH reality. Many people have used welfare to keep them afloat to recover and get on their feet. Would you have them starve in the land of plenty just to please you?What did your parent (s) do when they lost their job and couldnt get money to keep your family alive?Just like in any sector you have people who abuse systems but the majority don't. Some people exceed the speed limits, do you change the law to fit them?
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, there are better ways to help and better organizations to do it. The government has no place as a charity.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, Answer to the charges I've just made against the WHOLE DEMOCRAT PARTY. PARTY OF F'N SLAVERY!!!!!
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC What else ya got?
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, On apartheid, he hated it, but preferred a policy of "constructive engagement." which held that quiet diplomacy, contact with oppositionist bodies, application of fair employment practices under the Sullivan Principles by American companies operating in South Africa, assistance programs to train Africans, and public statements endorsing reform would do more to undermine apartheid than would confrontational measures, including sanctions and disinvestment.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, just because you don't see his methods of combating racism, doesn't mean he wasn't. Read a book pops.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, MLK, Jr. was a Republican to the day he died. Reagan reversed his position on Bob Jones U after he took a better look at the situation. Admitting you were wrong is difficult, but he did just that.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC MLK and Robinson discribed themselves as "Rockefeller Republicans"
Reagan inferred to Dr. King as a communist, just like Hoover, just like "con"servatives call President Obama a communist. Reagan got the votes he needed and said what he had to to stay elected. Hypocrite that he was.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, it was JFK that inferred he was a communist and had him under surveillance. President Obama is a Marxist that is settling for a more European style Socialism. He surrounds himself w/ more of the same as well as fans of Mao.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC I'm no big fan of JFK but I would rather have him than Reagan. At least he was on the road to change once he saw how vicious kings detractors were.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, the Associated Press reported back then, “Reagan originally had expressed concern over the cost of honoring King with a national holiday, and said he would have preferred a day of recognition.” Also, when asked at a press conference if he agreed with then-Senator Jesse Helms’s (R., N.C.) claims that sealed FBI files implicated some of King’s associates as Communists, Reagan said: “We’ll know in about 35 years, won’t we?” Reagan telephoned Mrs. King to apologize for that comment.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC Reagan signed the King legislation only after being passed by Congress with a veto-proof majority.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@itssoEC If you don't respect black authors, try the well read book by white historian Howard Zinn
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I respect any author that knows the facts. Why would I NOT respect black authors. Are YOU racist?
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC His books have been out there prominately for years. For you not to be familiar with it AND these factsby him and other black historians would lead me to believe you must not have respected them enought o pick it up and read it. I am not a racist, but a 300 year victim of racist. Yes I said VICTIM, but many good people mainly black and many white have fought to make me and other whites free. Read a book son.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, I'm a present day victim of racism, you racist. For you to assume anything about what I have read or not read is foolish. I didn't assume that you have not read from the opposing view. However, I believe your view of the facts are skewed.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora you might have tapped 2 or 3, but if you were at the plate you've been struck out. If you were a pitcher, I'd had gotten a walk.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, like you're a sports guy. Sports people are real. You're more like some kinda Dungeons & Dragons nerd. You need to enter reality.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC Or do you apply the standing law? So do you take away the program that help the manybecause of the few whoabuse it? I don't know what a nerd is, that must be a valley girl term.I don't play Dungeons & Dragons. That's kind of satanic I understand. Finally I just believe in the concept of Ma'at.
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, Interesting question. It MAY be to late to just wipe away some programs, but we can do things to phase out such programs. W2 in WI set the example and was eventually cloned by the US Congress. What did we do BEFORE these programs? Charitable organizations, religious or otherwise, and family. Since the govt programs had such a negative influence on families, it will take awhile to get back to that.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@mumbleora, as for D&D, I was illustrating my point that you're out of touch. As for Ma'at, the counterfeit of the True God and Judge, she is satanic. False gods can make true statements, but will ultimately take you off the correct path. Satan himself quotes scripture, but skews it to fit his needs.
itssoEC 1 year ago
@itssoEC The concept of Maat. (truth, justice, righteousness,and reciprocity) is not satanic. The concepts are central to all eastern religions, concepts strived for but not always reached. Also the ancient Kamites believed in only one true god, and these "angels" only powers of god. Anyway I'm getting off track, I'm just correcting your misinformation, but read the classic "Ancient Egypt, the Light of the World" by the great Gerald Massey to get your mind right. before calling thing satanic son
mumbleora 1 year ago
@mumbleora, like I said, "False gods can make true statements." Yes, good concepts. True statements to suck you into worship of a FALSE god. Ma'at will end in the lake of fire.
itssoEC 1 year ago
I love TS and just finished his book "Applied Economics" (5*+++). However, I still dont get his stance on the "Iranian situation". Much like McCain's perpetual war/ocuppation philosophy.
chokin2 2 years ago
Who listens to Thomas Sowell these days or any other day for that matter. I'm surprised (not really ) he's still around. I had hoped he had disappeared with Nixon.
mumbleora 2 years ago
Obama the first ~Half Caste~ White president
rottwieler20 2 years ago
The word is thrown around too much, but Thomas Sowell is one of the few who deserve to be called brilliant.
Will6719 2 years ago 12
Agree 100%
Ayn Rand
Yaron Brook
Peter Schiff
Ron Paul
Milton Freidmon
etc...
too many great minds in America, and we get Pelosi/Obama/Bush/Cheney and these clowns propped up to represent 'We the People'...pathetic.
helltrackrider 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
and don't forget to add sarah palin. Glenn Beck, rush limbaugh, sean hannity, ted haggard and john hagee to your list. At least 3 of which are college drop outs .... talk about pathetic.
perfectbark 2 years ago
being a college dropout doesnt make things 'pathetic'...
having socialist beliefs in a country of which is supposed to stand for INDIVIDUAL Rights is pathetic...this is why i listed those i listed...not because of their education level or lack there of.
Anyone who believes that another individual has a inherent Right to MY labor/property is a treasonous individual to this Country and should be viewed and treated as such should they impose that belief upon me by force...i.e. LAW.
helltrackrider 2 years ago 4
uh huh ....... I like the way the word treason is conveniently bantered about as if you actually understand what it means in relation common law rights in western democracies. you're utterly illiterate, and who would want to take that from you?
perfectbark 2 years ago
Treason - disloyalty to ones nation...
Obama/Bush/FDR/Lincoln/etc...all fall into this category with the legislation that THEY signed into law and the actions that THEY took without the consent of Congress...all of them...we have one individual now that we could remove from office before it is too late, but the overwhelming majority of Congress is locked up in Bribery (another listed high crimes and misdemeanor in the Constitution)
helltrackrider 2 years ago 3
Geez, you don't sound like an elitist at all when you call people without college degrees pathetic. Typical elitist, intellectual bullshit. Glenn Beck didn't pay thousands of dollars for a degree he ultimately wouldn't need, so now he's an idiot? Argue on the issues, calling people 'Glenn Beck clones' is a cop out for somebody without anything smart to say.
blizzaire08 2 years ago 5
You're very confused, you seem to think that pundits are the champions of ideas.They are not. They are simply clowns that, like for people such as yourself, they put on a show for
The real battle is behind the curtains, the smoke screen and the politicans. The battle of ideas, like the rational expectations revolution of the 80s, the neoclassical synthesis up to that, this era will probably be called the neo-keynesian era
And that is ultimately what changes policy due to rational irrationality
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
what ever history will call this era/epoch, conservatism is dead/irrelevant ideology, or at least it should be. Religion is the underlying cause of this clash of ideologies. The reactionary gang that hijacked the GOP is really about three things ..... their god, their guns, and saving embryos .... in the name of a deity. This crap about the national debt is nothing but a ruse where a progressive and promising administration can be attacked and weakened.
perfectbark 2 years ago
@perfectbark
In the end, you'll have your guns, you god, and perhaps your embryos ...... but America will fall further behind the civilized world and continue to stoop to increasing levels of stupidity as she continue to be drawn into acts of hegemonic imperialism. Neglect the homeland, kill muslims. Stupid, stupid, americans.
perfectbark 2 years ago
I don't really see any difference religion and other social movements as the workers movement, nazism, communism or others. Much of what you say is a reflection of just how much of a social rather than intellectual movement modern liberalism is.
I don't care for the GOP or the democrats, they are just represent different interest groups. I do however care for the battle of ideas.
The "crap" about national debt is important, but yeah for the GOP it is merely political capital.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
it's easy to be dismissive and equate the long dead nazi and communist ideologies with contemporary social movements, but they are nonetheless dead, failed, and dead.
I don't know exactly what the answers are, but one thing is for sure, and that is that the reactionary press is bringing this country down. and social movements are born out of intellect, but when they are dead, intellect SHOULD prevail, and leave it for dead. Sarah Palin and the hopeless tea bagging morons??
perfectbark 2 years ago
Social movements might be born out of intellect, but that is certainly not how they carry momentum or how they progress. They turn into this monster that brands any opposition as heretics, loons in your movements case "bible humpers" or greedy capitalists.
Sarah Palin is a tool, she's not a serious candidate. I've gone from totally hating her to kinda liking her though, not as a politican (they are mostly all scum, except for a few select that are principled like Ron Paul or Kusishscsh)
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
the failed political movements of the 20th century got legs because a small group of dissidents captured the oppressed and made false promises of hope ......... and that is what is happening how in American ..... no ideas, no novelty, but false promises, that's for sure.
perfectbark 2 years ago
@perfectbark
that's the solution?? Really? Why is the NRA huddling around the likes of a Sarah Palin as a keynote speaker?? How could I possible take anything the NRA or the teaparty seriously when their spokesperson is a moron with no hope, no ideas, never had a single novel thought, and has no future except to muddy the waters even further??
perfectbark 2 years ago
Sarah Palin is not part of the tea party movement, the tea party movement has been around for ages, decades and centuries and has always been about libertarian principles. There's a political struggle by the GOP to try to convert the followers under their flag, hopefuly it fails and a third party is finally born.
I have a pretty good idea of the answers, let the market unfold the recession, put a cap on spending, decrease federal expenditure and cut the regulations. Remove the problems!
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
the Market??? ..... see, that's what I mean about repeating past failures. The unregulated market, caused the problems and the so-called livertarians want to unleash more Ken Lays, Charles Keatings, and Bernie Madoffs.
No way, I've seen it close up and have seen its victims, including myself.
Didn't we learn from this??
perfectbark 2 years ago
No it didn't, such a statement doesn't even make sense, regulations almost doubled during Bush.
Unleash more? These people were found out by responsible investors, the regulations in place merely act as a false idea of security. The best example is Enron which a short trader looks trough the books over and borrowed stocks with every dime he had before he released the story of how crooked they were, the market had dumped the stock before the regulators even realized what was happening.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
uh huh ...... from where I'm sitting, and from what I've read about Enron and others, the market responded to information that preceded the scandal because it was just that ...... information that was "leaked" ..... there are no mysteries here. Enron, Worldcom, it's an almost endless freaking list over the last 25 years ...... culminating in the Madoff debacle and several others that are still evolving as their executives scramble for cover.
perfectbark 2 years ago
It's not a mystery, that's how short trading works. You investigate a company, if they are irresponsible you borrow lots of stocks and release the story. People have an economic incentive to do their homework because they makem oney of it.
Regulators contrary are incompetent by the incentive strucutre they work under.
There are of course some legitimate concerns about acounting, and insider trading, but that would just be deals made with Dow and Nasdaq to be made publically traded companies.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
tell that to the guy turning 65 and was planning to retire as has 401k and pension evaporates.
perfectbark 2 years ago
and ya know, the Bush boom, however short lived, was largely based on construction and real estate markets which were unsustainable. You just can't keep pooring concrete and blacktop all over everything to sustain unskilled labor and expect to have a future. Why is Buffet dumping his energy stocks?? Is it because the "do business as usual" GOP gang back in power for the mid-term??
perfectbark 2 years ago
Yes, that is what I said, when you set the interest rate too low capital is allocated into the higher stages of production.
Of course you can't do that, but the more interesting question is why it happens, which "people are just inherently stupid and we should regulate them" is not only a unfulfilling explenation but one that contradicts itself as the regulators are people as well (usually those in the bottom of the class).
Buffet is betting against the US economy. Look at his portfolio.
Visfen 2 years ago
Tell him what? That his government has looted his savings trough inflation and financial terrorism? What do you think I'm doing, I'm trying to educate people as to the real causes of the crisis to defute all these ridiculous ludicruos myths about "greed" and "lack of regulation". We're always greedy, greed is not the problem, The problem is when the banks know they are going to be bailed out by the tax payer so they don't have to be caution. The problem is when regulations distorts the market.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
You may be trying to educate the masses, you may actually think that you understand the myths. So, why don't I believe you? and why don't I trust you? Where in your arguments have I found flaws leading to mistrust?
What would have resulted in letting market forces prevail and letting the banks fail??
Hypothetically, what would have happened without the bailout?? And, I'm not sure either way mind you. BUT what would Wall Street look like today without the bailout?
perfectbark 2 years ago
The most probable explenation is that you have a preference for your position rather than a belief. Just like someone who believe in god you WANT the government solution to be true.
Don't believe me, do your homework, believe the facts
Without the bailouts things would have gotten worse first, but then after a while the economy would restructure and by a years or so it would be over, and WS would look better. Now it is prolonged, like in the thirties.
Read about the depression of 1920.
Visfen 2 years ago
Well since I profited from the imbalances, because I saw them coming, I and other like should be heard. We understand how when you lower interest rate you change the capital structure and it puts the economy on an unsustainable trajectory. The boom is the problem, not the bust, the recessions is the solution, not the disease.
Regulations, moral hazard, low interest rates and political will to increase "house ownership" is the problem, the market can regulate itself. With greed comes caution.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
I understand that recession can be healthy, BUT its an opportunity for new markets, new technologies but not the same old lazzez faire, look the other way crap that makes executives wealthy by selling off divisions or whole companies to foreign interests while the market for decent jobs evaporates. I give you Lou Gerstner, $813 million, and IBM, who will eventually evolve into the Walmart of technology.
perfectbark 2 years ago
It's an opportunity for government to expand ridiculous and stupid programs and loot the tax payers, then blame it on the market, that is for sure. FDR and Hoover made a model out of it that Obama is following. It doesn't work though.
Now you're just yelling "heretics".
Equity and stocks are sold of to other countries when you have a huge trade deficit, that's no mystery...
Outsourcing create jobs!
You're presenting the same old mercantalist myths that have been debunked for 300 years.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
my grandfather fed his family on FDR's "model." OLD immutable ideas always fail in the end. The myth is promulgated today's former MBA students who can't see beyond what is read from economics textbooks. Yesterdays ideas, tomorrow's failures.
perfectbark 2 years ago
No, farmers fed your grandfather and FDR made sure it wasn't easy. He burned crops and killed cattle to get the price higher, that not a joke. His policies prolonged the great depression. Read about the depression of 1920
The idea of bread for the poor isn't old, it was the corner stone of the feudal realm. To care for the stupid peasent as they couldn't do so themselves.
Well I'm an engineer. Economics is too easy to waste a masters on, but I do work in finance.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
Agriculture, you've heard of the dust bowl? was in the shitter in the 1930s, another cautionary tale.
perfectbark 2 years ago
You think the shortages of food were helped by price fixing and the burning of crops and killing of cattle?
Dust bowls we can control, some things we can, so why go down the road of these same policies again?
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
and the dust bowls are coming back as we continue to drain fossil water from teh ogallala aquifer ....
perfectbark 2 years ago
We should extrapolate too much from the AGW, not even IPCC goes so far as to suggest that is in our near our generations future.
But of course the envoirment is a concern. We need to be level-headed however, and relate the cost of doing things for the envoirment to the benefit. Cutting emissions by on twenith as now proposed and passed will cost about 2 trillion dollars, which could feed every starving person on the planet for 200 years. The better way is to invest a lot in R&D on a broad scale
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
What would my 403b look like today, and mind you it it around 68% of the pre-crash value ..... but what would it look like today without the bail out?
perfectbark 2 years ago
It would probably be lower today, but you would have much better future prospects.
The peope on the top know what they are doing, look at the goldman sachs scandal, they are transfering wealth to rich bankers, bailing them out at the expense of you while the structural problems in the economy are just compiled instead of restructured. These companies need to die.
They will shift the current crisis inot a currency crisis, there's already movement out of the USD as a reserve currency
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
.
So both the Bush administration AND Obama administration and most of congress were wrong to bail out the big banks and wall street? in your opinion? And I'm asking you this because you see yourself as an authority?
perfectbark 2 years ago
Yes definetly, it's called the "fallacy of compostion" the idea that some sectors of the economy are more "important" than others. The idea that an economy will go under if rich 29 year olds can't run around in their ferraris is utterly ridiculous. Let these spoiled incompetent idiots fail like everyone else.
Why do you think they did it? Don't you think it might have something to do with banking being the biggest lobby in Washington?
I'm not the authority, it's an economic fallacy.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
and where will the furlowed 29 year old rear his incompetent head again ..... as a walmart greeter? I don't think so
perfectbark 2 years ago
@Visfen
with greed comes caution via regulation ...... there has to be some safety net since it is a human inclination toward GREED......
perfectbark 2 years ago
Greed is not a problem, greed is good. You don't see everyone migrating to Las Vegas and put everything on red 36. People and especially investors make responsible and calculated bets.
Even a child understand that greed doesn't work that way.
People can create their own safety nets trough savings and trough charitable organizations. Government programs for such things are inefficient and they don't do the job they set out to do, they only make it worse.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen People, can't see the forest through the trees there Gordon Gecko. "People," listen to counsel from the likes of Bernie Madoff and others, and why shouldn't they? The market has expanded all these years and Bernie and his family have palatial estates all over the planet manifesting his success, and expertise??
Why not trust Bernie? Why not trust you?
perfectbark 2 years ago
Getting your economic understanding from a movie doesn't really inspire confidence.
Bernie Madoff excelled during a system of ever increasing regulations, how could you possibly use that as an argument against my position?
He's made a tremendous fortune because people dependended upon an incompetent government to do their homework. They shouldn't.
Don't trust me, don't trust anyone that hasn't earned it , especially not the government - they have the worst track record there is.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
Increasing regulations?? So you're saying the government has become more lax on market regulation during a GOP congress AND presidency AND during the 1990s?? THis is antithetical to everything that I've listened to and learned for the last 25 years.
perfectbark 2 years ago
The few instance of deregulated is basically the Q-regulation on levels of leverage and the Glass-Stegal act. That's 2 deregulations (and stupid mind you with the continuency of FDIC and the bailing that create moral hazard), while the regulation in total have increased just under Bush from 122 000 to 266 000. To call it deregulation is to call an immensly obese person too thin.
The GOP are hardly the party of free market, they just have a different set of interest group than the democrats.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
well OK then ....... you've sold me. How could I have been so mislead and outright wrong for so many years ......
Tell me something ..... if it weren't for the Clean Water Act would industries like GE still be discharging chemicals like PCBs into our nation's waterways??? or should the government not have stepped in and regulated it??
perfectbark 2 years ago
No reason to be snide.
The problem with external cost of envoirmental pollution is one that has to be incroporated in the pricing mechanism, either trough property rights or trough such restrictions as CWA. I prefer the first because it allows for greater competition (basically you clean up your own shit or pay huge fines).
I'm not saying that there is no place for regulations, but regulation risk and enducing speculation is what let to the problem, it wont solve it.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
yeah, well, we have those regulations in place now, and they do work most of the time but thanks mostly to watchdog groups whose members educated the public 40 or so years ago.
But the question is ....... without government regulating, and in this case environmental policy really does emanate from the public sector ..... would industry (wall street mega-corporations) STILL be releasing toxins as they do in China or India?
You've heard of superfund?
perfectbark 2 years ago
And investigate journalism, just like I brought up with short traders - they make their money unraveling corruption.
Yeah, I don't agree with the idea of superfund, I think exxon mobile should pay for exxon valdez (as an example) not the taxpayer. It's a form of corporate welfare.
I'm more for an approach that incorporates the cost of toxic waste in production. That makes sure companies own the waste and the consequences it creates
In China they aren't rich enough to care about the envoirment
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
When I worked in NYC in the 1980s and 90s, I was aware of the bonuses and heard the numbers boasted back then ....... but muti-million dollar bonuses earned whether company earned or lost money goes against my middle class morality like the salary of a professional baseball player. Lose your clients money, virtually all of it, and get a bonus.
perfectbark 2 years ago
Yeah, one of the problems with the ridiculous bonuses is that there is massive protections against corporate take overs. That is the markets way of removing inefficent administration, now it's almost impossible.
However, there are legitimate bonuses, most of the brokers work on comission and while the company as a whole can be doing terrible, some people might very well be doing a good job.
I however would never place my money in these firms. Huge overhead and morons in charge.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
When I was a salesman at IBM, I earned bonuses by making or exceeding my quota. Sometimes there were incentives during the year. But as part of the sales team back then I saw the numbers at wall street firms like goldman, and they were to be mistrusted
perfectbark 2 years ago
Definetly, and the same goes for the rating agencies.
One of the problems with the ever increasing range of laws and regulation of the sector is that it create a huge bottle head for people who want to compete with these people. It makes sure that they can do pretty much what they want in this industry and get away with it.
Competition is a far better form of regulation than any technocrat could possibly come up with.
If you could chose between a good and a bad company, what would you chose?
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
You see, you're saying that markets should be completely free of any kind of regulation ...... and I'm saying that GREED prevails. GE didn't foresee cleaning up PCBs 40 years after they were released into the Housitonic or Hudson. Sure it would have been cheaper to not release them in the first place but the are literally thousands of examples where UNFORTUNATELY if government didn't intervene, industry would have gone its merry way without any care about anything
perfectbark 2 years ago
No I'm not saying they should be free from regulations, if we have a government there is a place for judicial regulations in terms of fraud, deception and theft. But other than regulation can come from the bottom up and not the top down. Because greed prevails self-regulation is put in place, people don't want to lose their money. And in this way the regulation become lose and instead of a one rule for all situation scenario you get a balance.
Visfen 2 years ago
Yes, surely it is cheaper to not do so in the first place but we have to make calculated decissions. It's like in health care, you don't know how the patient is going to do under surgery, so you look at the risk and the benefit and decide with the patient what is best.
We can't test everything there is for it's effect, that would take millions of years, some risk is good. But make the polluter pay for that. GE is ridiculously wealthy, as is Exxon, they can afford it.
Visfen 2 years ago
@Visfen
what would I do?? In my lifetime, how will my portfolio perform? Is it right?
perfectbark 2 years ago
Comment removed
itssoEC 1 year ago
@perfectbark, Here are some more dropouts: Ted Turner, founder of CNN (Brown University, expelled), Steve Jobs, co-founder and C.E.O. of Apple (Reed College), Ralph Lauren, fashion magnate (City College of New York), Larry Ellison, co-founder of Oracle (University of Chicago and University of Illinois), David Geffen, co-founder of DreamWorks (University of Texas at Austin), Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook (Harvard University), Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft (Harvard University)
itssoEC 1 year ago
Any black person who speaks against majority black people is called "brilliant". Usually by a white person who's views he parrots. Nothing new. Yawnnn....
mumbleora 2 years ago
the refreshing thing about Dr. Sowell is that he actually leaves race out of it, at least in terms of what he presumes about people. also, if you're going to attack someone on the use of the word "brilliant" I would begin by not misspelling the word whose. but maybe that's just me.
Will6719 2 years ago 3
I would suggest you learn to capitalize the first word you use in a sentence. It suggests a lazy mind, if you're going to be that petty.
But maybe that's just me.
mumbleora 2 years ago
Sowell uses facts, logic, reason and rationality -- that is what we agree with. As opposed to character assassination, emotionalism / irrationality, ignorance, self-aggrandizing ideological bullshit, such as what's in your comment. And since when did Sowell speak maliciously about blacks? People like you call blacks of today victims and want to coddle them literally and via the govt. as if they're helpless retards, when, obvious to anyone living in reality, they are not. U=unsupportable Crap.
regresseur 2 years ago 7
Yawnnnn.....
mumbleora 2 years ago
You're racist. Yawnnn...........
regresseur 2 years ago
weren't allowed to compete with you (or your daughters)so not only were black people victimized by you, your own females were and are to this day. You need to stay in your comic books, you know fantasy land and stay out of adult conversation.
mumbleora 2 years ago
WTF, this shit is old, son. Victimized by me? When did I victimize a black person, you libtard? And prove that "my own 'females' " (WTF is that shit, am I white or something?) are victimized to this day... white women have more privilege today than anyone, but you wouldn't understand that because everything you believe is based on simplistic pre-conceived notions, rather than reality.
regresseur 2 years ago
@regresseur Listen Ted Bundy,Jerry Steinfield,
spiderman, donald Duck, or whatever you call yourself. You talk like you have some type of authority on black people when your IQ "reason" appears to be that of the racists I have witnessed most of my life. Ted Bundy? Maybe you have simliar feelings about women as he had. Study some history boy and listen to your elders, and not just the ones who get "trotted out" when they need someone to make you feel good.".
mumbleora 2 years ago
NICE NON-RESPONSE, DUMBASS. You can't tell me when I victimized a black person (because 1. I never have, and 2. you don't know me) -- but in your initial comment that's what you said I did. "Ted Bundy? Maybe you have simliar feelings about women as he had." I don't, my profile is (obviously) a joke, SO NOW WHAT? Another tangent for the unoriginal 'tard? "Study some history... " BLAH BLAH BLAH. Fabricate more nonsense to base your bullshit stories about me, on, please. NEXT!
regresseur 2 years ago
@regresseur.Don't take it personal poot butt. That was a generalized statement meant for those who fit the bill. No, now that the laws are in place, you can no longer (generalized statement for those who are slow, hint,hint) victimize "openly", although redlineing, mortgage lending practices, police shooting, sentencing laws and practices, (white boy gets probation, black kid gets 15 years) Look at the true story movie "American Violet". You may be stupid, but can't be that stupid. (well maybe).
mumbleora 2 years ago
@regresseur BTW. Tell your mama, aunt, or sister they have more privilege than anyone and see how long it takes them to kick you out of their basement and live on your own.
mumbleora 2 years ago
I don't live in anyone's basement. Got anything else? BTW, nice non-reply, again.
regresseur 2 years ago
@regresseur Not in the basement?
How about the attic?
mumbleora 2 years ago
I just read lazy,weak,packaged,standard, typical, parroted comment about African Americans. You poor boob.Before most europeans were brought here, I should say "dumped" here Europe was people poor, land poor, and resources poor. They had the look of Oliver Twist. The US govt. GAVE them land. When blacks couldn't get a GI Bill even though they served, white got theirs, were allowed to buy homes,send kids to college. that's how this 1s