Discussion:
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions to Rich People
(too old to reply)
P***@counter.pun
2009-06-02 13:16:22 UTC
Permalink
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions
to Rich People

By Pam Martens. Posted June 2, 2009.

There's a cycle going on here: if you don't put money in consumers'
hands, you get repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment.

For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts
and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation
ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a
rigged Wall Street.

As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in
this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth
in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.

Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being
produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing
unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to
more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking
purchasing power.

The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated
wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new
industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.

Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged
wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten
loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple
country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore
bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to
compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands
of other consumers from being able to make.

Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production
cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.

In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from
Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the
$42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from
having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of
a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to
plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the
hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now
gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.

It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall
Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting
that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had
kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and
left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to
compensate for all that missing wealth.

And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many
billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and
yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are
being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will
lead to new industries and future job growth.

And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that
evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters
brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout
trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for
innovation.

What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little
time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own
Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance
the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces
who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and
abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the
looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President
might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new
regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if
true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.

The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly
useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that
obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done
with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these
Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S.
Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its
Wall Street primary dealers.

According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total
assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four
institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells
Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246,
control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets
according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.

Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive
concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary.
Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and
brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide
Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage
firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took
over Wachovia.

The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate
it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable,
dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable
and more dysfunctional.

President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country
back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from
commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to
where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put
new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with
real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions
that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and
channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.

President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to
conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in
history, hangs in the balance.
The Mad Ape
2009-06-02 13:29:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by P***@counter.pun
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions
to Rich People
By Pam Martens. Posted June 2, 2009.
There's a cycle going on here: if you don't put money in consumers'
hands, you get repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment.
For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts
and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation
ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a
rigged Wall Street.
As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in
this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth
in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.
Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being
produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing
unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to
more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking
purchasing power.
The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated
wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new
industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.
Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged
wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten
loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple
country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore
bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to
compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands
of other consumers from being able to make.
Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production
cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.
In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from
Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the
$42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from
having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of
a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to
plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the
hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now
gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.
It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall
Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting
that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had
kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and
left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to
compensate for all that missing wealth.
And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many
billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and
yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are
being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will
lead to new industries and future job growth.
And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that
evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters
brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout
trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for
innovation.
What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little
time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own
Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance
the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces
who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and
abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the
looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President
might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new
regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if
true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.
The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly
useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that
obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done
with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these
Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S.
Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its
Wall Street primary dealers.
According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total
assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four
institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells
Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246,
control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets
according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.
Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive
concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary.
Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and
brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide
Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage
firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took
over Wachovia.
The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate
it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable,
dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable
and more dysfunctional.
President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country
back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from
commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to
where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put
new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with
real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions
that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and
channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.
President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to
conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in
history, hangs in the balance.
Hi. The Mad Ape here with your awakening call. Obama ain't gonna do
shit. The very people that you want him to protect us from are the same
people who put him in power...and you thought it was your vote that put
him their. I do not blame you for your ignorance...yet.

You need to watch this documentary:
You will quickly learn that
every single one of Obama's advisor's are from wall street...every one.

Failure to watch this video and continuing to believe in the Obama
Puppet will be your undoing. So forget the mainstream propganda spewing
sock puppet and get educated. You way of life...your very
existence...depends on it.

TMA

The Mad Ape
kujebak
2009-06-03 22:04:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Mad Ape
Post by P***@counter.pun
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions
to Rich People
By Pam Martens.  Posted June 2, 2009.
There's a cycle going on here: if you don't put money in consumers'
hands, you get repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment.
For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts
and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation
ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a
rigged Wall Street.
As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in
this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth
in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.
Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being
produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing
unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to
more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking
purchasing power.
The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated
wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new
industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.
Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged
wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten
loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple
country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore
bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to
compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands
of other consumers from being able to make.
Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production
cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.
In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from
Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the
$42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from
having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of
a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to
plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the
hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now
gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.
It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall
Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting
that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had
kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and
left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to
compensate for all that missing wealth.
And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many
billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and
yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are
being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will
lead to new industries and future job growth.
And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that
evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters
brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout
trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for
innovation.
What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little
time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own
Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance
the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces
who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and
abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the
looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President
might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new
regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if
true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.
The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly
useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that
obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done
with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these
Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S.
Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its
Wall Street primary dealers.
According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total
assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four
institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells
Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246,
control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets
according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.
Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive
concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary.
Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and
brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide
Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage
firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took
over Wachovia.
The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate
it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable,
dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable
and more dysfunctional.
President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country
back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from
commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to
where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put
new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with
real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions
that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and
channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.
President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to
conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in
history, hangs in the balance.
Hi. The Mad Ape here with your awakening call. Obama ain't gonna do
shit. The very people that you want him to protect us from are the same
people who put him in power...and you thought it was your vote that put
him their. I do not blame you for your ignorance...yet.
You need to watch this
will quickly learn that
every single one of Obama's advisor's are from wall street...every one.
Failure to watch this video and continuing to believe in the Obama
Puppet will be your undoing. So forget the mainstream propganda spewing
sock puppet and get educated. You way of life...your very
existence...depends on it.
TMA
The Mad Ape- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Certainly none of this is music in the poverty pimps' ears.
The need mongering socialists are convinced they achieved
something last November. It may be safer in the long run
letting them spend all their political capital first on other
"urgent" issues (health care, cap&trade, public sector funding)
than taking it away from them all at once. :-)
mimus
2009-06-03 23:26:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Post by P***@counter.pun
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions
to Rich People
By Pam Martens.  Posted June 2, 2009.
There's a cycle going on here: if you don't put money in consumers'
hands, you get repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment.
For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts
and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation
ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a
rigged Wall Street.
As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in
this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth
in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.
Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being
produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing
unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to
more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking
purchasing power.
The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated
wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new
industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.
Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged
wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten
loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple
country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore
bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to
compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands
of other consumers from being able to make.
Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production
cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.
In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from
Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the
$42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from
having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of
a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to
plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the
hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now
gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.
It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall
Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting
that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had
kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and
left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to
compensate for all that missing wealth.
And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many
billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and
yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are
being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will
lead to new industries and future job growth.
And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that
evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters
brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout
trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for
innovation.
What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little
time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own
Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance
the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces
who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and
abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the
looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President
might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new
regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if
true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.
The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly
useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that
obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done
with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these
Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S.
Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its
Wall Street primary dealers.
According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total
assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four
institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells
Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246,
control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets
according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.
Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive
concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary.
Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and
brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide
Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage
firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took
over Wachovia.
The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate
it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable,
dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable
and more dysfunctional.
President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country
back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from
commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to
where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put
new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with
real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions
that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and
channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.
President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to
conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in
history, hangs in the balance.
Hi. The Mad Ape here with your awakening call. Obama ain't gonna do
shit. The very people that you want him to protect us from are the same
people who put him in power...and you thought it was your vote that put
him their. I do not blame you for your ignorance...yet.
You need to watch this http://youtu.be/eAaQNACwaLwYou will quickly learn that
every single one of Obama's advisor's are from wall street...every one.
Failure to watch this video and continuing to believe in the Obama
Puppet will be your undoing. So forget the mainstream propganda spewing
sock puppet and get educated. You way of life...your very
existence...depends on it.
Certainly none of this is music in the poverty pimps' ears.
The need mongering socialists are convinced they achieved
something last November.
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
--
Conservatism = plutocracy + theocracy + hypocrisy
Liberalism = plutocracy + psychosociocracy + hypocrisy


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 03:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out, you
ignorant fop.
mimus
2009-06-04 04:18:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out, you
ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing", the holding open of the
floodgates to illegal immigration, "the Bush tax cuts", the de facto
repeal of Glass-Steagle and the opening of the commodities markets to
unlimited speculation were all in the public interest?
--
Sing:

Ship jobs overseas,
Import illegals by thousand-score,
Shift taxes from the rich,
And watch consumer-confidence soar.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 04:18:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out, you
ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.

Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.

Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your clay
toes warm.
mimus
2009-06-04 14:06:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out,
you ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.
Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.
Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your clay
toes warm.
O'Reilly and Limbaugh fan, I take it?
--
Nothing so illuminates the end as the means.

And the means is frequently the real end.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 17:00:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out,
you ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.
Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.
Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your clay
toes warm.
O'Reilly and Limbaugh fan, I take it?
Bagged and tagged, you libitards fold up like card tables.
mimus
2009-06-04 17:46:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out,
you ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.
Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.
Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your clay
toes warm.
O'Reilly and Limbaugh fan, I take it?
Bagged and tagged, you libitards fold up like card tables.
Readers all around the world see who considers a name-calling tantrum
debate.
--
Nothing so illuminates the end as the means.

And the means is frequently the real end.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 18:02:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out,
you ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.
Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.
Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your clay
toes warm.
O'Reilly and Limbaugh fan, I take it?
Bagged and tagged, you libitards fold up like card tables.
Readers all around the world see who considers a name-calling tantrum
debate.
You had to invoke Bill and Rush, true.
mimus
2009-06-04 18:19:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth
out, you ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.
Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.
Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your
clay toes warm.
O'Reilly and Limbaugh fan, I take it?
Bagged and tagged, you libitards fold up like card tables.
Readers all around the world see who considers a name-calling tantrum
debate.
You had to invoke Bill and Rush, true.
Then let us return to the question:

I take it you believe that "out-sourcing", the holding open of the
floodgates to illegal immigration, "the Bush tax cuts", the de facto
repeal of Glass-Steagle and the opening of the commodities markets to
unlimited speculation were all in the public interest?
--
Socialism for everyone, not just the wealthiest!


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 19:12:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth
out, you ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.
Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.
Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your
clay toes warm.
O'Reilly and Limbaugh fan, I take it?
Bagged and tagged, you libitards fold up like card tables.
Readers all around the world see who considers a name-calling tantrum
debate.
You had to invoke Bill and Rush, true.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing", the holding open of the
floodgates to illegal immigration, "the Bush tax cuts", the de facto
repeal of Glass-Steagle and the opening of the commodities markets to
unlimited speculation were all in the public interest?
I take it you refuse to admit that Clinton was responsible for NAFTA,
that out-sourcing is part of the globlist agenda, and that credit
derivatives were authored in the 1980s and their creators given a Nobel
prize.

Here's a clue sonny, blaming everything on Bush and forgetting
Greenspan's Libertopian puzzlement at unbridled greed is what marks you
as a partisan hack.
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 04:18:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Go back to your poli-sci professor and have him wash your mouth out, you
ignorant fop.
I take it you believe that "out-sourcing",
You take fuck-all nothing, you tantrumming little sloganeer.

Fucking bend double and blow yourself, child.

Oh and here - have some plutocrat hot water bottles to keep your clay
toes warm.

kujebak
2009-06-04 19:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by kujebak
Post by P***@counter.pun
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions
to Rich People
By Pam Martens.  Posted June 2, 2009.
There's a cycle going on here: if you don't put money in consumers'
hands, you get repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment.
For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts
and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation
ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a
rigged Wall Street.
As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in
this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth
in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.
Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being
produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing
unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to
more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking
purchasing power.
The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated
wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new
industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.
Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged
wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten
loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple
country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore
bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to
compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands
of other consumers from being able to make.
Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production
cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.
In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from
Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the
$42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from
having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of
a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to
plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the
hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now
gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.
It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall
Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting
that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had
kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and
left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to
compensate for all that missing wealth.
And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many
billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and
yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are
being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will
lead to new industries and future job growth.
And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that
evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters
brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout
trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for
innovation.
What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little
time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own
Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance
the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces
who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and
abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the
looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President
might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new
regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if
true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.
The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly
useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that
obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done
with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these
Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S.
Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its
Wall Street primary dealers.
According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total
assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four
institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells
Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246,
control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets
according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.
Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive
concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary.
Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and
brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide
Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage
firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took
over Wachovia.
The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate
it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable,
dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable
and more dysfunctional.
President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country
back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from
commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to
where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put
new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with
real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions
that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and
channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.
President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to
conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in
history, hangs in the balance.
Hi. The Mad Ape here with your awakening call. Obama ain't gonna do
shit. The very people that you want him to protect us from are the same
people who put him in power...and you thought it was your vote that put
him their. I do not blame you for your ignorance...yet.
You need to watch this
quickly learn that
every single one of Obama's advisor's are from wall street...every one.
Failure to watch this video and continuing to believe in the Obama
Puppet will be your undoing. So forget the mainstream propganda spewing
sock puppet and get educated. You way of life...your very
existence...depends on it.
Certainly none of this is music in the poverty pimps' ears.
The need mongering socialists are convinced they achieved
something last November.
If you can call outright and contemptuous plutocracy "socialism" . . . .
Counterintuitively socialism is an effective way of
strengthening plutocratic rule. This has been made
quite evident by the money flow in the last presidential
election. The banksters detest uncertainty inherent
in free market competition, which is why they inven-
ted these evil capital preservation schemes, which
are now going to suck any hope of financial prosperity
from our children's lives. In order to challenge the old
money establishment we must first disredit the pre-
cepts of collectivism, and the usefull idiocy of the
neo-Marxist left.
Post by mimus
--
Conservatism = plutocracy + theocracy + hypocrisy
Liberalism = plutocracy + psychosociocracy + hypocrisy
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.06...
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
mimus
2009-06-03 23:22:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by P***@counter.pun
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions
to Rich People
By Pam Martens. Posted June 2, 2009.
There's a cycle going on here: if you don't put money in consumers'
hands, you get repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment.
For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts
and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation
ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a
rigged Wall Street.
As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in
this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth
in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.
Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being
produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing
unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to
more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking
purchasing power.
The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated
wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new
industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.
Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged
wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten
loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple
country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore
bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to
compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands
of other consumers from being able to make.
Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production
cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.
In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from
Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the
$42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from
having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of
a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to
plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the
hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now
gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.
It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall
Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting
that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had
kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and
left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to
compensate for all that missing wealth.
And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many
billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and
yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are
being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will
lead to new industries and future job growth.
And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that
evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters
brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout
trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for
innovation.
What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little
time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own
Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance
the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces
who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and
abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the
looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President
might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new
regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if
true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.
The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly
useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that
obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done
with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these
Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S.
Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its
Wall Street primary dealers.
According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total
assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four
institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells
Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246,
control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets
according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.
Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive
concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary.
Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and
brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide
Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage
firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took
over Wachovia.
The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate
it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable,
dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable
and more dysfunctional.
President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country
back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from
commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to
where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put
new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with
real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions
that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and
channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.
President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to
conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in
history, hangs in the balance.
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?

But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest and most corrupt via scams like that greatest of all
distributed Ponzi schemes, the Oil Bubble, which stole three trillion
dollars and destroyed the world and US economies-- the perpetrators of and
profiteers off which have walked away with perfect impunity-- are the
problem.

And any attempts to deal with any of that will be defeated with cries of
"Communism!" . . . .
--
All power and wealth to the wealthiest! anything less is class war!


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 03:16:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.

You moron.
mimus
2009-06-04 04:15:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
--
The road the nation decided to take
produced a perfect Eldorado
to the most sordid and criminal speculators
the world has ever seen,
the type of citizen
who has no regard for the people, the nation, or honor,
and who cares not whom he ruins
or the effect of his acts on national or international life.
Many of them have borne great names;
they have been regarded as leaders
in the financial and social world;
they have influenced and dominated governments.

< Ernie Bevin (1933)


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 04:16:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
mimus
2009-06-04 14:03:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
--
Thou shalt exempt the wealthy, the priests, the zealous
and the patriotic from the following Commandments.

< The Zeroth Commandment


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 17:00:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
mimus
2009-06-04 17:43:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
Nice evasion, but you can't steal intellect or athletic prowess for
yourself.

Now answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth
and ownership is impossible?
--
A money-based system of politics, such as one run on
campaign contributions, and a money-based system of justice,
such as one run on lawyers' fees, both favor the wealthiest,
whether individuals, families or corporations.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 18:02:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
Nice evasion, but you can't steal intellect or athletic prowess for
yourself.
But you can steal fame and power by using intellect and prowess.
Post by mimus
Now answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth
and ownership is impossible?
Do you believe the bell shaped curve is inherently unfair?
mimus
2009-06-04 18:15:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
Nice evasion, but you can't steal intellect or athletic prowess for
yourself.
But you can steal fame and power by using intellect and prowess.
Post by mimus
Now answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth
and ownership is impossible?
Do you believe the bell shaped curve is inherently unfair?
Answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and
ownership is impossible?

Third and final chance.
--
When was the last time you heard an American politician
use the word "plutocracy"?


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 19:09:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
Nice evasion, but you can't steal intellect or athletic prowess for
yourself.
But you can steal fame and power by using intellect and prowess.
Post by mimus
Now answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth
and ownership is impossible?
Do you believe the bell shaped curve is inherently unfair?
Answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and
ownership is impossible?
Looks like you're in denial of the bell shaped curve.
Post by mimus
Third and final chance.
Do skills and talents tend to concentrate on championship teams?
mimus
2009-06-04 20:07:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
Nice evasion, but you can't steal intellect or athletic prowess for
yourself.
But you can steal fame and power by using intellect and prowess.
Post by mimus
Now answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth
and ownership is impossible?
Do you believe the bell shaped curve is inherently unfair?
Answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and
ownership is impossible?
Looks like you're in denial of the bell shaped curve.
Post by mimus
Third and final chance.
Do skills and talents tend to concentrate on championship teams?
Plonk for dishonesty.
--
Find out just what any people will quietly submit to
and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong
which will be imposed upon them.

< Frederick Douglass


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8878

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2006/PSI.gasandoilspec.062606.pdf

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Is Ken Darian
2009-06-04 22:20:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Post by Is Ken Darian
Post by mimus
Who the hell do you think _owns_ the "two" main "parties" in the US,
anyway?
But, yes, overconcentration of wealth and ownership and outright looting
by the wealthiest
Kill the big fish off and watch the small fry die.
You moron.
Is that the robber baron theory of economics?
Are you bent on strangling success to feed mediocrity?
Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and ownership is
impossible?
Do you believe that overconcentration of intellect or athletic prowess
is impossible?
Nice evasion, but you can't steal intellect or athletic prowess for
yourself.
But you can steal fame and power by using intellect and prowess.
Post by mimus
Now answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth
and ownership is impossible?
Do you believe the bell shaped curve is inherently unfair?
Answer the question: Do you believe that overconcentration of wealth and
ownership is impossible?
Looks like you're in denial of the bell shaped curve.
Post by mimus
Third and final chance.
Do skills and talents tend to concentrate on championship teams?
Plonk for dishonesty.
Retreat from reality.

Overconcentration of wealth is possible, look at Mexico.

But that isn't the case here.
Loading...