overgrowem
Well-Known Member
Went right over my head. As far as I could tell U were posting straight from Oral Roberts U.
Neoliberal Economics is DEAD
- Thread starter ttystikk
- Start date
Red1966
Well-Known Member
So you confirm my statement, then question my education? You really think you're superior don't you? You haven't impressed me much so far.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
"Just curious, where did U go to school?"
overgrowem
Well-Known Member
Your comprehension prob. has erupted again.What part of "the Revolution lead to the Articles of Confederation" do U not understand? Asking where U went to school is not questioning UR ed.,but the level of ed that state offers..It is possible to become well educated in Ala or Miss. after all..
overgrowem
Well-Known Member
I went to schools in Cali, South Carolina,Maryland, Alabama, and all over Fl.
Last edited:
Red1966
Well-Known Member
"Asking where U went to school is not questioning UR ed". It isn't?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Yeah, spread the blame around.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Ok, so let's hear your highly educated opinion?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
then why do i see so many posts from you back in 2007 talking about how much you trust bush and worship rawn pawl?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-salaries-dont-rise/2015/03/11/38c08cea-c81d-11e4-b2a1-bed1aaea2816_story.html
Profits from an improving economy going to greenmailers and stockholders, not raises.
Even the 90th percentile earners are getting screwed. I wonder how long it will take them to figure out that they've been screwed by their own republican party, in favor of the .01%?
Give the ultra rich all the money, and what do they do with it? TAKE MORE, of course! WTF did they expect?
Profits from an improving economy going to greenmailers and stockholders, not raises.
Even the 90th percentile earners are getting screwed. I wonder how long it will take them to figure out that they've been screwed by their own republican party, in favor of the .01%?
Give the ultra rich all the money, and what do they do with it? TAKE MORE, of course! WTF did they expect?
heckler73
Well-Known Member
I actually just read something else earlier re: the top 10% now owning 80% of stocks
It's just goofy sometimes.All I see when I read those stories is Mr. Jensen giving Mr. Beal the big speech.
Sadly, Mr Jensen is correct. While the economics might be ringing a death knell, the system set-up in its wake still continues, and will continue to do so.
One vast and ecumenical holding company,
For whom all men will work to serve a common profit,
In which all men will hold a share of stock
all necessities, provided
all anxieties, tranquilized
all boredom, amused...
What is the alternative message in the face of that?
overgrowem
Well-Known Member
Your assumption is?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
I'm waiting for your opinion, I made no assumptions. You're the one who talked about your education?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
First, you quoted a fictional story that has no basis in reality.I actually just read something else earlier re: the top 10% now owning 80% of stocks
All I see when I read those stories is Mr. Jensen giving Mr. Beal the big speech.
Sadly, Mr Jensen is correct. While the economics might be ringing a death knell, the system set-up in its wake still continues, and will continue to do so.
One vast and ecumenical holding company,
For whom all men will work to serve a common profit,
In which all men will hold a share of stock
all necessities, provided
all anxieties, tranquilized
all boredom, amused...
What is the alternative message in the face of that?
Second, they definitely AREN'T providing for any of the above.
Third, if we are to call ourselves a democracy, our laws, rules and practices need to support that ideal. Currently, they do anything but.
The US is a democratic republic.
You sound as if you subscribe to the "zero sum gain" philosophy, is that true?
Btw, some pages back you linked a story where the author was describing terms. Did you believe his definition/description of government backed pension plans was correct?
The pension discussion is a whole different topic, so I'm not trying to hijack your thread. But the guy was either being deceptive or he really doesn't understand how they work. At least not the CalPers plan in Cali.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Please be more specific so I can refer to the story you mention.
My proposal is simple; a Constitutional amendment that allows only registered voters to make campaign contributions, and that the limit to those contributions be so small as to be universally accessible.
Earlier, I tossed out $100 as a working number. In order to better codify this so no one can play shenanigans, I further propose that the maximum allowable contribution be no more than one half of one percent of the average individual income, as calculated by the Government Accountability Office or some other PUBLIC officially recognized department.
Thus, if the average income in America is $50,000, NO ONE who isn't a registered voter could contribute dime one, and NO ONE could contribute more than $250 to all campaigns in total in any given election cycle- or one calendar year. Anything more would be a felony charge of election tampering, and if a foreign entity is involved (to include corporations with any foreign held shares) possibly treason. Yes, it could still be tax deductible, from one's PERSONAL taxes, because corporations, non profits, PACs or labor unions cannot be registered voters.
Again, draconian, but it would certainly return the power of the vote to the people and remove the incentives for our elected officials to act primarily in the interests of their richest- and therefore generally largest- donors.
This doesn't even eliminate the ability of those duly registered voters who happen to be shareholders to act in the interest of their holdings, by contributing up to their $250 limit, speaking out and voting for the candidates of their choice.
What it outlaws is the incredible concentration of money - and therefore power - in the hands of a tiny rich minority.
David Johnston article :
"There are no taxpayer contributions to public worker pension plans. All the money in these plans — except for investment earnings — is compensation that workers have earned".
One term describes the election process of and the other the governance.
It defiantly isn't a democracy. Shouldn't be hard to look up.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Compensation that workers have earned is still on the taxpayers dime though. If I gave you 100 bucks and you invested 10 of it, that 10 still came from me originally. The logic is fuzzy. The interest you earn from your investment is all you, the investment itself isn't.
Why would investments on behalf of the worker into a pension plan come from a different source that pays his salary? If you are a government worker, how else does the government raise the money to pay you?