Just what is a “progressive” Michael, anyone who disagrees with your party line, anyone who uses evidence and reason to develop conclusions? And just where have I advocated bailing out Wall Street? I haven’t. I have advocated using proven economic policies to protect the economy and thus the middle classes who are very dependent on the economy for their wellbeing. As for assuming that the citizenry is so feeble and moronic, I am not the one who has repeatedly in many threads called those people cows, and various other barnyard names. You are the one who has done that very consistently in your many posts. I’ll again ask you, why is it that the “corporatists” that you rail about in your many posts are the same people who are financially sponsoring your political notions?
That is really good news. But the Federal Reserve is very powerful and it will not pass the senate. Many of the Federal Reserve stakeholders are foreign entities and it needs to be open and regularly audited. The senate needs the fed to print the counterfeit money it needs to keep the US government big and powerful. So yeah, Mars will be colonized before it passes the senate. It probably would not have even passed the House if the congressmen even thought that it might pass the senate. Makes for a good show though.
Yes you do. Your 'sound' economic policies can be summed up in a single sentence: Bail out the Banks. All their dirty loans are quietly being shifted onto the middle class as the top 1% continue to rack in the gains. They've done BETTER under Obama compared with under Bush Jr! Can you imagine that Joe?!? I mean, what's it going to take. Modern Progressives want to use the ill gotten gains from Wall Street to shove their social agenda down anyone and everyone's throat. That's the modern Progressive. Just watch MSNBC. While it's hard to hear their commentary through their muffled butt cheeks when it does come out it's 50% social demagoguery and 50% fantasy land where 'increased aggregate demand' somehow magically brings work back to America. Mark my words: Not a single major banker will do time in prison and the American worker will take a 30%+ hair cut on their pay as our entire society is socially engineered into an efficient Cattle ranch of cheap unskilled Cattle. Moronic yes, feeble no. Ever see a stamped of cattle? Dumb they may be - you don't want to get in their way when they're pissed or scared. The politicians have been leading them by the nose for so long I don't think they CAN cry wolf one more time. But, you never know. I don't think anyone's ever lost money betting on American stupidity. Yeeeeaaahhhhh RIIIIGHT. While Libertarians come in many stripes and colors, if we take Ron Paul as the man of the moment - HOW much money is he getting from corporations? Let me see here: Oh, yeah, NONE. Now, our narcissistic Progressive POTUS Obama, how many 100s of millions is he raking in off the Banking Corporations Joe? Corzine alone forked over 6 fat figures outright. And look what he got for it - $1.6 billion dollar gamble and millions in bonuses as the 100 + year old institutions he ruined burned to the ground over his greed. Dance with the Devil Joe... QE3 here we come.
again with this tired lying about progressives. progressives don't want to bail out the banks. we have been over this not that you listened, mainly because than you wouldn't be able to post such bullshit, progressives are pro labor that is the exact opposite of being pro bail out and pro corporate power. are you even capable of being truthful? all you do is redefine words to have new slurs for the people whose ideas you don't like
actually according to the website open secrets obama is 100% funded by individual campaign donations while your anti corporation here has accepted millions of dollars in donations from corporations. go figure your wrong again.
Read Open Secrets again: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/bundlers.php Look on the list and those "individual campaign donations" once bundled includes Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, health insurance companies among others. Its on the list you can read it for yourself. And here you can find top contributors such as Harvard, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, JPMorgan Chase also listed as top contributers by Open Secrets http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638 And then there are these reports
I would be in favor of this bill subject to the following: At the time for voting on the bill, members who do not hold a PhD in Economics and 20 years of experience, should be required to leave the chamber. The roll should be taken. If a quorum is not present, then recall the absent members. A new measure is then voted on. It has an up/down, without debate, as follows (a) suspend the rules and let the qualified people decide the issue, or (b) declare the bill dead for lack of a quorum. If they want to eliminate Big Government, then they can start among their own ranks. Stop allowing incompetent and unqualified members to decide excruciatingly technical matters of policy and law. Secondly, before any audit is done of the Fed, there needs to be an audit of all the wild claims of bad policy, including: - "printing worthless money" - being in cahoots with tycoons at home and abroad - shady deals of any kind The claimants need to come forward with their evidence, to be tried for abusing the public trust, and/or deliberately lying on an official document. It's not the Fed that's on trial, it's willful ignorance. (Of course it's just a show trial.)
Oh please prove even one of these claims using credible evidence. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Now that statement is a very clear lie. It is yet again another example of you playing fast and loose with reality. Oh where is your proof or are you just making stuff up again? You are making stuff up again. I see you are back to having people shove stuff down your throat again. You still have not defined what a “progressive” is. Apparently it is anyone who disagrees with you. The so called progressives are a diverse group of folks. Unlike their conservative counterparts, they do think for themselves and as a result have many different views and opinions. By the way just what is the “progressive” social agenda? You may not like the facts reported by MSNBC but that does not make their reporting demagoguery or fantasy. Again if you have any proof of wrong doing by MSNBC now is the time to show it. Unlike Fox and other right wing media, MSNBC takes great effort to make sure they are being truthful and honest in their broadcasts. They don’t just make stuff up on the fly as do people like Hannity, Beck, Levin, and Limbaugh to advance their political agendas. And yes the unpleasant fact for you is that if there is no demand for goods and services, there can be no jobs for those goods and services. You don’t have to be a genius to figure that one out. There are no mystical magical “job creators” that magically produce jobs if we rub their bellies just right and repeat magical chants (e.g. tax reductions and no regulation). There is no magic restoration process or wand that occurs and makes everything better only after sufficient sacrifice has occurred and the world has fallen into economic ruin. Ah, back to calling folks who disagree with you, who think for themselves, various barnyard animals. As I have said before, you cannot prove even one of your outrageous claims. If you have proof that any of these folks have violated the law, now is the time to show it. But we both know you have no such proof. Because time and time again you have failed to produce those proofs. Unfortunately for you, in this country everyone is entitled to the due process of law. It is part of our Constitution. Oh boy, more name calling and zero evidence. So in your view Ron Paulism is Libertarianism/conservatism? The facts are that the Koch brothers and all of the various entities that they fund are big financial supporters of the Libertarian/conservative movement. “The children of the late Fred C. Koch who founded the second-largest privately held company in the United States, Koch Industries, are businessmen who control the Koch Family Foundations and contribute a large amount of money to conservative, libertarian, and free-market individuals and organizations.[1] The Koch brothers have given more than $196 million to dozens of free-market and advocacy organizations.[1] Tax records indicate that, in 2008, the three main Koch family foundations contributed to 34 political and policy organizations, three of which they founded, and several of which they direct.[1][2]” - Wikipedia In an article in the August 30, 2010 issue of the New Yorker, Jane Mayer wrote,[1] “The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests.... And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a “kingpin of climate science denial.” The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_the_Koch_family Here is another billionaire funding his own Libertarian islands. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...artificial-libertarian-islands-140840896.html Libertarianism/conservatism would allow these “corporatists” to steal oil as they have done in the past and pollute the environment, as they have done in the past without being bothered by the government. Don’t look now Michael and I am sure you won’t, but you have been dancing with the Devil for a very long time now. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer
Fed stakeholders Rothschild Bank of London Warburg Bank of Hamburg Rothschild Bank of Berlin Lehman Brothers of New York Lazard Brothers of Paris Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy Goldman, Sachs of New York Warburg Bank of Amsterdam Chase Manhattan Bank of New York I was asked to prove only one claim. I admit that my previous post contained some educated conjecture, but these ARE the groups that run the fed.
They may be real entities, but where is your proof that they run the Fed as you have alleged? Additionally, you are asked to prove just one of your allegations about the Fed. You have failed. You were not asked to name foreign entities. I can name foreign entities too. But that does not prove your allegations about the Federal Reserve. Green beans, tomatoes, oranges, grapes, chips, fish, beef, corn, mushrooms are real too. But that does not mean they run the Fed. Nor does it mean that there are Martians down on the street corner. Unfortunately, your post is so very typical of the reasoning or lack thereof by people with your point of view.
Really?!? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And having an intelligent conversation with Americans who fails to accept reality is pointless.
Who cares? Capitalism is going to collapse within twenty years. Economic growth and rate of profit are both declining (under 2% annually now) and as the developing world continues to develop, this will only get worse. There's a decline in productive capital in the US. The US will soon be like Greece. Capitalism is unsustainable. The important thing, however, is that when it does fall, we need to spearhead the change in a socialist direction, lest we fall into another Dark Ages.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Emmanuel Saez of the University of California at Berkeley found (and I quote) “In 2010, average real income per family grew by 2.3% … but the gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 11.6%, while bottom 99% incomes grew only by 0.2%. Hence, the top 1% captured 93% of the income gains in the first year of recovery. Such an uneven recovery can help explain the recent public demonstrations against inequality.” There's the Evidence (once again) So suck it Joe. The only thing a Progressive like Obama cares about is fattening up WallStreet and the TOP 1% of America so he can get a few crumbs to pretend to redistribute to the bottom 99%. Most of those crumbs are gobbled up by obese White middle class Federal bureaucrates as they 'redistribute' most of it into their own pockets via bloated paychecks, benefits and job security. As for the Koch bother, one more time in case you missed it: THEY DO NOT SUPPORT RON PAUL. Ron Paul is the ONLY Libertarian running in the POTUS race. Or did you miss that? Did that one slide by you unnoticed? Well, let me reiterate: Ron Paul, unlike Obama and Mittens, does NOT receive Corporate donations. That's why the media labels him as a 'crazy' Libertarian with 'crazy' views on the monetary system and he's 'unelectable' and 'crazy' and maybe he's a 'bigot' and did we mention 'crazy'. Corporations support Mittens. Is Mitten's a Libertarian? NOPE. He's a Neo-CONservative Corporatist. The only thing that differentiates him from Obama who is a Progressive Corporatist is WHO gets the redistributed money. Mittens has no interest in ANYTHING ANY Libertarian would care about. It'd be WONDERFUL if the Koch brothers were indeed Libertarians. THAT would be absolutely fantastic. And, maybe in their hearts of hearts they are? Who knows? But, they obviously know out here in the real world we're run by Corporatism and so that's what they're all about. Just like you. Just like Clinton. Just like Mittens. Just like Obama.
Michael, income inequality is rising as an inevitable result of capitalism, not specific policies by different capitalists.
If President Obama was only interested in fattening up Wall Street, why is he fighting to only allow tax increases next year on the 1%? If President Obama is only interested in satisfying the wants of the 1% and Wall Street, why did he push for and sign into law banking reform which was stiffly resisted by Wall Street? Why is it that while President Obama enjoyed much Wall Street support last election cycle, he no longer enjoys that support? And if President Obama is a pawn of Wall Street why did he push for and sign into law healthcare reform which makes healthcare affordable to all Americans, the 99%? So now you are defining Libertarianism as Ron Paulism. The facts are that the Koch brothers and other billionaires, “corporatists” have and continue to fund the Libertarian cause through a multitude of organizations and spend hundreds of millions on the cause. The facts are the Koch brothers and fellow “corporatists” understand that Ron Paul is a flawed candidate. But that does not mean they don’t support Ron Paul’s Libertarian ideology. There is a difference Michael between a candidate and the political ideology. You don’t seem to be able to understand the difference. Just because Koch and his billionaire “corporatist” bedfellows do not support your candidate that does not mean that they do not support and fund your ideology, because clearly Koch and his fellows do support the Libertarian cause with huge sums of money. By the way, Ron Paul is running for POTUS this year on the Republican ticket just like Romney. Paul is not running on the Libertarian ticket. Gary Johnson is running for POTUS on the Libertarian ticket. http://2012.libertarian-party.org/
Correction: you mean Corporatism. But, there will come a day when reality KOs us in the face and if we're lucky a little sense will be knocked into us and we'll see the collapse of Corporatism and rise of Capitalism and FREE markets will be utilized to bring wealth back to the poor.
Puuulease Joe. The numbers don't lie. The ONLY reason, and I mean ONLY reason, Obama ever suggests taxing the top 1%, is as part of a demagoguery political platform. In the real world his buddies on Wall Street will get richer. Do they support the Ludwig von Mises Institute? Do they support LewRockwell.com? Well, looky here: Sorry Joe, but YOUR so-called facts are incorrect. Which is plain to see. I'll state it one more time: Ron Paul is a Libertarian and he gets no support from the Koch brothers. It's really THAT SIMPLE. There is no such thing as Paulism as Ron Paul has never written a philosophy of his own. Will he? Maybe, but as it stands he hasn't. And so he is a simple, albeit popular, Libertarian following classical Austrian economic theory. The Koch brothers HATE free-market capitalism. Like any Corporatists they want markets regulated in THEIR favor and politicians that will game the system for them. That wouldn't happen in a free-market Capitalistic country. They'd be forced to work and earn a living.
This much I agree with. Paul has his reasons for running as a Republican, but, so what? Democrats used to be almost exactly the opposite of what they are now. White bigots who supported Big War. And Republicans used to be Conservative Liberals who (obviously) opposed War (as was Christian value system). See how things have changed? IOWs it's about changing the PEOPLE themselves, the way they think, that's the only way we're going to change society.
