# Interesting plea for moderation in US politics



## JohnG (Sep 23, 2014)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/23/opini ... pan-region

David Brooks -- makes many good points


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 23, 2014)

Glad to see the Times finally recognizes how Capitalism brought up 6-700,000,000 million people from poverty in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Only in the reality free zones of Western Europe and the USA do folks still think shared misery is somehow a way forward.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 23, 2014)

Hm. I disagree with most things he says, John.

First, New York looks good to him because everyone who lives there today is very rich.

Global poverty...yes, lots of people have been lifted out of poverty. And 2 billion people are hungry. He seems pretty cavalier about that.

Unseemly rich. Who cares about seeming. The important issue is unsustainable equality! How can the country function with four Walmart heirs bathing in billions while their full-time workers are on food stamps?

The influence of elites in politics. Open primaries are a baby minnow; the big fish - giant white shark - is taking all the money out of our elections.

And it's not true that it's always been this way. We solved the problem after the last gilded age pretty well.

But I admit that I'm not a David Brooks fan. A couple of years ago he wrote about something totally unrelated to punditry, and I was impressed. It's when he talks about politics that I find him to be an intelligent idiot.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 23, 2014)

By the way, I'd have to buy a shotgun if my daughter wanted to marry a Republican. 

Fortunately she would never do that, because we brought her up to be thoughtful!


----------



## JohnG (Sep 23, 2014)

Well, I think it's a good piece. It's not aimed at liberals, as I'm sure you could discern, Nick. It's aimed at the conservatives in the country and the talk radio diatribes.

To listen to those you would think every major city in the US was in flames and that we were all standing in breadlines in the scorching sun / snow.

You don't have to look far to see people talking in apocalyptic terms -- literally -- about the state of the USA.

So I think he's talking to / about them.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 23, 2014)

OMG talk radio is designed to scare the elderly vote if I were to guess.
I never heard it before until I starting checking out Nashville and then heard Jeff Beck, Mark Levine....I thought these clowns got fired from Cable news and retired to a Great Society neighborhood where they could try and save the Liberal slaves.

I must admit I listened to an hour of it before tuning out due to the excessive advertising and just insane discussions making small problems seem as though it concerned all of Americans.
Like Air America I suppose, which is why they got fired then became comedian Senators.

Rural America is heavily armed, for Pete's sake I played at a Baptist Gospel picnic with this supremely talented vocalist who should be signed, and the attendance prizes were guns.
Then again there's literally no crime here, but once people get in the rat race of urban life, they should re consider the old West like Wyatt Earp and the boys had. Even they knew guns in the city limits was bad news.

2 Billion people 'eh...That's something for the UN to consider, but I still think they are basically a status quo organization.
Maybe in another 100 years.

Wish we had a better track record on the war on poverty, then the 22 trillion we spent teaching people how to fail might have been useful for people who are actually starving.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 23, 2014)

John, I take it at face value and assume I - a subscriber to the NY Times - am the intended audience.

From that point of view...well, I already said what I think. If it's intended for the shout radio audience - who don't read the NY Times (if they're even literate!) - then that's a much lower bar.


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 23, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Sep 23 said:


> Hm. I disagree with most things he says, John.
> 
> First, New York looks good to him because everyone who lives there today is very rich.
> 
> ...



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/3 ... 40355.html


Looks like half the people in new york are not only not rich but are living at the poverty level...


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 23, 2014)

It's the same in all Nanny States. 
You really don't want to win the "war" on poverty as it is a major source of revenue for the redistributors.
Most of the great society neighborhoods have people being used to collect said revenues yet never receiving them.

But don't take my word on it.
FOIA requests were finally granted in 2013 for the "budget" which by law the Liberal Senate was suppose to pass but avoided for 5 years, so in the request I read that had names redacted, posted the concerns from the GAO that 1.2 Trillion was spent on x-amount of welfare programs, separate from the various extra ones we see in NY, CA and Ill. But taking the number of Americans receiving benefits divided by the amount spent shows each welfare recipient cost the American taxpayers 990k each.

Imagine what the economy would look like if they received said amount.

We could have given 2 billion starving people each a lump sum and made the Planet sing in 3 part harmony. And that's after the 48k for every American on welfare.

If you wonder why politicians fight so hard for wealth redistribution, as usual it's always about the money, for them and their friends though, not the slaves they create for voting purposes.

I sound harsh, but despise these tactics, especially when I see anyone saying drug tests to receive benefits, or work requirements, and they are called racists, even though 38% of recipients are white, 37% black, 20% Latino and the rest of doubtful origins.
By law I had to drug test for every job so I could provide for my family.
We have politicians change the law so drug testing welfare recipients is illegal. That's great for the Drug Cartels.

Wealth Redistribution sounds nice and warm/concerning, but is the biggest fraud in history.
22 Trillion dollars spent and all we have seen is more poverty, and the rise of the Mexican Drug Cartels, who thankfully guard our border for the redistribution they receive.

But I thought the article was nice for a change. Too bad the reality is always the opposite of what our leaders tell us.

Al Queda is on the run, defeated, and ISIS is a Junior Varsity team.
If you like your doctor you can keep him.
We will put 2500 dollars back into Americans pockets from the ACA....

I could go on, but I do not live in the reality free zones created by the politicians and the media.

But on the other hand, I think life is great and have always been a slave for the wealthy. Without them I would have no job.
So I like evil CEOs and Fat Cats, they pay far better than the Plantation owners in DC.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 23, 2014)

Chim,

You realize that it's the blue states that get more cash from the feds than they put in and the red state that fund them, don't you?

My wife saw the same disconnect when she was working in Grays River, WA, Pop 263.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grays_River,_Washington

The private economy is dairy cows, fishing and the occasional artist. The public economy is services (EMT, etc), a youth detention facility, and social security. There's no way that their tax base can pave and maintain their roads. Cut the public funds and the place would starve. Still, many (certainly not all) would complain about those rich people in Portland spending their tax money. Wake up! The money flows the other way around!


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 24, 2014)

Community Reinvestment has been successful in many urban and rural areas, this is what redistribution is meant to be.
Welfare programs are a separate matter entirely.
If this was business as usual why only years later were FOIA requests granted, and still no accountability, only the amounts that disappeared.

More like the residue from a bad design.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 24, 2014)

"Community Reinvestment" sounds like a "politically correct" term to me. What we have is urban to rural ongoing subsidies. 

The bottom line is that many rural communities are unsustainable without cash from taxpayers in cities. Remove tax-based cash for roads, schools, police, fire, EMT, and social security - as well as government funded jobs in prisons, forestry, and military - and these places would crumble.

Check out government spending per capita...
http://www.supportingevidence.com/images/GovtSpendPerCapitaByCounty.png (http://www.supportingevidence.com/image ... County.png)


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 24, 2014)

chimuelo @ Tue Sep 23 said:


> ...
> 
> But on the other hand, I think life is great and have always been a slave for the wealthy. Without them I would have no job.
> So I like evil CEOs and Fat Cats, they pay far better than the Plantation owners in DC.



Amen to this. I too am doing well enough "working for the man" and am very comfortable doing it. They occasionally share a healthy bonus when the going is good. Not as much as the CEO but in this great free society I could be that guy too if I put my mind to it. If other people have issues with large corporations I suggest they go form their own and then distribute the profits in a way they deem better. Open up a donut shop and pay the employees $15 an hour while providing them with health care or become the CEO of Apple and only take in 150K a year redistributing the other 100's of millions as you see fit. The current system isn't perfect but at least you know you can try for the brass ring.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 24, 2014)

JonFairhurst @ 23rd September 2014 said:


> You realize that it's the blue states that get more cash from the feds than they put in and the red state that fund them, don't you?



Actually, and ironically (given all the "let's cut taxes" rhetoric), you are generally backwards on this, Jon, based on the information I can find.

The states that are the largest net contributors to the federal government include mostly blue states: California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Massachussetts. Georgia and Texas are also net contributors.

The largest net recipients include mostly red states, including most of the South. A couple of swing states are also net recipients, like Florida and Pennsylvania.

There are exceptions, to be sure.

The data table claims to be constituted as follows:

"The figure includes all individual and corporate income taxes, estate taxes, gift taxes, and excise taxes. This table does not include federal tax revenue data from U.S. Armed Forces personnel stationed overseas, U.S. territories, Puerto Rico, and U.S. citizens and legal residents living abroad. Spending includes all federal outlays consisting of retirement, disability, and other direct payments; grants; procurement; and salaries and wages. Spending does not include interest on the debt and other spending not allocated by the individual states."


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 24, 2014)

I hear you Brotha' Man dpasdernick..

I attended an "Economics" seminar in Las Vegas earlier this year as I was a contractor by night (Non Union) and by day a Union Tradesmen. 
We had several "experts" and it was a great debate.

It amazed me when a small business owner from the audience got the mic and asked the "wealth redistributor" why doesn't he go and create the utopian he claims works so well, and leave small business owners alone.
Then if he could prove his "theories" have a real debate on how we could move forward.

The audience cheered, my Union bros booed, and he could not answer. 
Only that his skills were needed to teach others at the University how they could achieve such utopian dreams.

We have wealthy redistributors who use other peoples money however they see fit, and the usual result is the purchasing of a Sector of voters.
Bush bought the elderly by making us cover Big Pharmas prices rather than go to Canada where the competition smoked the US Companies.
Welfare is definitely off of the hook and ruining lives, no sugar coating or stats from 2008 can change that fact.
Who knows what we will see when FOIA requests from 2012-2013 start being released by guess who....Kathleen Sibelius, as she was promoted for her failure as DC often does when laws are broken and tax payers robbed.
Almost 1 Billion dollars for the web site that still is unsecured.
Amazon spent 10-15 million and I had a UPS guy show up hours after I received a 1U Chassis with Asian power supply instead of the advertised US Power spec.

The waste, lies and fraud sickens me. And this pertains to both of these crime families.
Unintended consequences my ass.
These guys know EXACTLY what they're doing.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

> Looks like half the people in new york are not only not rich but are living at the poverty level...



You're right, of course, but that makes my point: David Brooks is seeing the rich side and blocking out the poverty. NYC - and now the adjoining areas that have become gentrified, like Brooklyn - are really, really expensive.

And what you and Chim are saying about working for the man is true, but it ignores the second greatest issue of our time: unsustainable inequality (the first is climate change).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

Follow the links.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/0 ... egion=Body


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 24, 2014)

JohnG @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> JonFairhurst @ 23rd September 2014 said:
> 
> 
> > You realize that it's the blue states that get more cash from the feds than they put in and the red state that fund them, don't you?
> ...



Correct! I crossed my blue and red wires. Glad I wasn't defusing a bomb! [BOOM!]


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 24, 2014)

I find the use of the word "redistributors" odd, Chim.

The whole goal of a business owner is to redistribute wealth. They take it from customers, give some to suppliers, some to employees, some to lenders, leasers, taxes, and keep the rest. It's that last part that they work to maximize. 

And if the business is responsible, this is great!

GDP is the measurement of wealth redistribution.

Government redistributes as well, often for roads and infrastructure, which helps the business owner to be successful. Nice!

In fact, one of the problems we have today is too little redistribution. GDP growth has been sluggish. Hiring has been limited. Large corporations are hoarding cash. We have deadlocked government that hasn't been able to make up the difference by hiring people to build and maintain our infrastructure.

Redistribution is good. It makes for a vibrant economy.

Hooray for the responsible redistributors - both in the private and public sectors!


----------



## rgames (Sep 24, 2014)

Brooks is right on all accounts but especially so on the fact that the biggest problem our government faces is lack of leadership. There is none anywhere in any party. Actually I give a slight edge to the conservatives in that regard but it is *very* slight.

Over the past 20 years or so I've seen a shift in people's thoughts regarding what makes someone fit for a leadership position. Unfortunately it has been a shift away from leadership ability and towards demagoguery. More and more voters care less and less about a candidate's leadership and only whether he continually parrots the party line.

Obama is a perfect example: here's a man with no leadership credentials and we elect him to a top leadership position. I like the guy and agree with a lot of what he stands for, but I have not been surprised to see his continued lack of leadership ability.

If your political rhetoric consists of "They won't follow me" then, obviously, you're not a leader!

Leadership is not about repeating yourself to those who already agree with you. Leadership is about changing the minds of those who disagree with you. If you can't do that, then by definition you are not a leader. The fact that we continue to elect people with no leadership ability perpetuates the stagnation we've seen in recent history: nobody can change anyone else's mind and we wind up with gridlock.

We need to be more pragmatic in our voting. If I have the choice between someone who agrees 100% with my beliefs but has no chance of leading anyone else to those beliefs and someone who agrees with 50% of my beliefs but has the leadership ability to get others to follow him on that 50%, I'll take the latter person because, in the end, he or she will have been more effective in the job.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

Jon, I agree with you, but that's actually not the economic term! "Redistribution" happens after the profits are made. After the distribution. Taxes, in other words, although today we talk about upward redistribution.

***

Richard, I agree that Obama should have been communicating his - and my - vision all along instead of making Republican arguments and trying to compromise with people who won't compromise.

But it's nigh impossible to lead when you're dealing with Republicans today.


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 24, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> > Looks like half the people in new york are not only not rich but are living at the poverty level...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nick,

How do you achieve equality? I'm betting that all of our standards of living will go way down in order to elevate every person on the planet to the same level. And then we'd all be f*cked. Take a rich white guy on the right that a lot of people hate, Mitt Romney. He's worth 250 million. Redistribute all of his money. Everyone in America gets what... 75 cents? And you still haven't given anything to Mexico let alone south america, china, india etc. Maybe Gates and Buffet could get everybody a few extra bucks in their pockets by liquidating everything they have. 

I know sometimes life is unfair and that sometimes people don't get the life they dreamed of. I was supposed to be David Bowie part two but that didn't work out so well. Equality will never happen. People aren't wired that way. Especially when the sh&t hits the fan. And besides, as they say, if everybody was Mozart nobody would be Mozart. I do what I can with charities and trying to be a good, law abiding person. Was I lucky to be born in a western country versus China? Yup. I count my blessings. As far as unsustainable inequality goes man has been around for a long time and things have always been unequal. Things will ebb and flow, empires rise and fall, it's just the way it is. The closest thing to utopia is the Shredder Head patch in Omnisphere. Trust me... 

PS This video resonated with me regarding world poverty. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

> How do you achieve equality? I'm betting that all of our standards of living will go way down in order to elevate every person on the planet to the same level



No.

First of all, the goal isn't equality, it's to get back to the balance where there's a middle class with the spending power to sustain our economy. That's to everyone's benefit, including rich people, because they'll have customers.

Second...well, that implies that our standard of living would go up, not down.

How to get there. Well, labor is losing value in favor of capital. So we need to do everything we can to expand capital ownership.

What if employee stock ownership were a stipulation in every government contract, as a start? The FHA did a great job of expanding home ownership, so what if they did the same for capital ownership?

The other part of the picture is, yes, redistribution. Higher marginal taxes.

"Capital in the 21s Century" by Thomas Piketty became a bestseller, which is really weird for a book like that. Why? Because he nails the problem.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 24, 2014)

Well said Nick.

But the Government needs to step down from their endless control mechanisms that have failed us and destroyed the Unions membership ranks.
In Nevada we have right to work laws that allow competition, in that way everyone gets a piece of the action.

Trade Unions would be dead if it wasn't for Nevada's boom from 86-20012.
Big Union states have seen membership drop from them buying politicians and creating these massive Union states where there's no competition.

Our education system has failed for decades from no competition, every time they get a little run for their money Liberal Billionaires shut down the charter schools and take away vouchers that are a way for disciplined minority children to escape the Plantations.

I say unleash the private sector again and give these Liberals and Conservative a run for their money too with a 3rd party of Middle Class folks, instead of trial lawyers and billionaires.

I'd rather the billionaires take a risk with their capital like we see in Vegas.
No taxes, a vibrant mix of Union and Non Union coexisitance, slow but steady wage increases.
Our Minimum wage comes form the demand of the citizens, they get more than New York pays, 2 dollars more to be exact.

Sorry, I keep forgetting I left Vegas with a great Pension and reputation to become a Classic Rock God/Farmer, ......sorry bout that chiefs.

Give me Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul, no need for a single GOP or DNC buffoon until they grow a penis. Their women have more courage....


----------



## JohnG (Sep 24, 2014)

chim, I love ya, but I think it's a lot more chaotic than you suggest. Every one of those guys is trying to tear the head off every other one. It's totally disorganised.

RAISE MINIMUM WAGE NOW!!

Then people can buy stuff.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

Definitely raise minimum wage.

Apart from it being good economics (for exactly that reason), it's simply the right thing to do.


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 24, 2014)

JohnG @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> chim, I love ya, but I think it's a lot more chaotic than you suggest. Every one of those guys is trying to tear the head off every other one. It's totally disorganised.
> 
> RAISE MINIMUM WAGE NOW!!
> 
> Then people can buy stuff.



There's a Panera bread (sandwich shop/bakery) near my house. Typically there are 2-3 people manning registers taking your order. Guess what? Now there is one person and 4 kiosks. Slide you card into the Kisok, "Hi Darren Welcome back! Would you like to have a Bacon Turkey Bravo again or would you like to try something new.?" Pay at the kiosk, and go take a seat while the food is prepared. (I, personally, will not use this service) This is exactly how companies are going to circumvent a government forced minimum wage increase and it hasn't even happened yet. There'll be 5 people making $15 an hour instead of 10 making $8.00. Not to mention the Big Mac goes from $4 to $6.50.

As Chim stated above. Nobody is willing to prove this wrong. Go open up a small bookstore or restaurant or whatever. Pay double the minimum wage. Let me know how it goes.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

First, I want to repeat: the minimum wage is a standard. It's simply not right for people to work full-time and not be able to live.

So even if you were right, dpasdernick - and actually you're not - it has to do with the kind of world you want to live in. And I don't want to live in the world of Dickens.

Okay.

Big companies are going to automate either way. In some cases people will lose their jobs with a higher minimum wage. But that number is very small compared to the number of people who will be helped, and to the impact on the economy. It would help something like 98% of the target for the policy even if the CBO report that came out recently is completely right - and it's taking the worst case for job loss.

This is one of the most studied and analyzed policies in all of economics. I'd be happy to give you links if you don't want to take my word for it.

Remember, every public policy has winners and losers. This would have way, way more winners. It's counterintuitive, but you can't rely on intuition when you're talking about macroeconomics.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

And there are plenty of other economists who say it would have NO net effect on employment.

http://www.cepr.net/documents/publicati ... 013-02.pdf


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 24, 2014)

Wage increases will come from a single payer system, not some one size fits all mandate from 2 Crime Families in DC.
Why is it that Califonia and New York have the shittiest minimum wages.
They have all of the wealthiest Liberals there, the highest crime rates, highest unemployment, highest welfare rates, more dope on the streets, more cops....

Why on Earth would anyone trust these wealthy public servants with even more power is beyond me.
The first 2 years they had unlimited money, unlimited power to change everything from taxes to wages to healh care, and yet we heard nothing other than their wicked partnership with the very doctors and insurance companies they demonized weeks earlier during class warfare speeches just to get elected...?

Mow suddenly there's opposition and now they tell us how they can cure our ailments and bring rivers of honey to the tax payers they took for granted.

Anyone know why out of work SEIU and AFL-CIO workers are protesting this...?
Where are the poor struggling students that can't afford to miss a day of work as their loan sharks in DC demand satisfaction on "educational loans."

Simple answer. We were told single payer for the wage increases, sorry, we lied to you, it's for your own good.
So now we see how the states and federal minimum wage requirements raise the wages according to the Davis-Bacon act.
This is great news for Union workers, but they want to organize the fast food industry, taking 50% of the workers wages so they don't get a raise, but rather a pension flipping burgers instead of being a scientist or engineer.

Says a lot for our Union Education system 'eh..?
Since we no longer have shop classes where students can learn a trade like I use to get, and was thankful for, we can have students learn to wear head plastic and gloves and make our burgers better.

I think you guys read too much and don't have real world experience.

I wish I could invite to a Union meeting where members are furious about the bull shit exemption from the ACA we got instead of a wage increase.

But there's the biggest meanest guy at the door, usually an x con called the sergeant at arms. he cards members, and no card no entry.
You could learn a lot there since the media never covers the real story as usual.

Sure, give everyone more money. The truth is that fast food workers don't want to stay there, and the full time workers are management and get a decent salary already.
Automation will creep in and then what are students who are the main number of employees suppose to do...borrow more money from the loan sharks in DC to get a degree in gender awareness or some other useless nonsense.

So, there's my beef again. If these fake wages are allowed, I get a raise in my pension, but then again do I really want a bored career Union burger flipper, or a motivated student who will look back and laugh at how he once worked at mickey Dees.

FWIW my union took a 4 dollar an hour wage decrease during this great society administration just to have full time work.

Other than Unions I haven't even seen a full time worker in this pathetic era for years.
WHo wants them when the President changes the law every few months to keep wealthy Liberals from getting fired by us...?

Wait until the employer mandate, then ask why there's a line at Mickey Dees now.
Personally if you eat there, you should be miserable for supporting such crappy food in the 1st place.


----------



## bbunker (Sep 24, 2014)

Gotta call BS on you on one thing, Chim.

"Why is it that California and New York have the shittiest minimum wages."

No. Only two states, Washington and Oregon, and the District of Columbia have higher minimum wages than California. If you're making that claim as a cost-of-living comparison, you really need some data to go along with something like that.


----------



## rgames (Sep 24, 2014)

The wealth gap is a significant problem but it won't be solved with minimum wage legislation. Minimum wage is for kids in high school, not adults and certainly not adults with families.

The problem is endemic to American society: we've moved away from a society that considers the individual's responsibility to the greater good and into one that thinks only of the benefit to the individual. Whether the power players are in government or private industry doesn't matter - they're still in it for themselves. So government and/or legislation is not the answer because the end result will be the same: government-sponsored fulfillment of self-interest. You can't legislate that problem away, not through minimum wage laws or any other type of law. Recent history has proved that is a fact.

We need a national re-birth of conscience, like we had in the first half of the twentieth century (which, by the way, is when we had a reasonable wealth gap and the country accomplished the most). Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford and other ultra-wealthy people took pride in attaching their names to entities that benefitted the greater good. More recently, though, we have the Walton and Jobs era that has no interest in such greater-good activities and, instead, cares only about maximizing individual wealth. There are still a few old-schoolers like Bill Gates but they're too few to have an impact on society in general: who's the media darling - Jobs or Gates? Who has given half of his personal wealth to tackle world health issues? See the problem there?

Until we develop a national conscience that decries the Steve Jobs "capitalism at any cost" mantra, we're not going to solve the problem, not through government intervention and not through private intervention because both have the same goal: self interest.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

Nah.

Nobody says raising the minimum wage will completely solve the "significant" problem of inequality - as I said, one of the two biggest problems of our time! - but it's still a good step forward.

About a quarter of minimum wage people are teenagers. The rest are not.

http://beforeitsnews.com/economy/2012/0 ... 13847.html

It's also not even remotely true that we did the best during the first half of the 20th century. We did far better in the three decades after WWII.

Hoping for a rebirth of conscience (like the robber barons had?) wouldn't be a plan even if those times were as good as you say. Public policy that will reduce the inequality is.

Yes, government really does have a positive role to play in society.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

Notice that I'm ignoring the Apple-bash trolling. We've seen that show before here.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 24, 2014)

> Wage increases will come from a single payer system



Not counting minimum wage, I say they'll come from a better economy when the unemployment rate is back to normal. That will force employers to raise their wages to attract workers.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 24, 2014)

People have been trotting out the "minimum wage kills jobs" argument since 1962 or thereabouts. 

Somewhat surprisingly, it has not been proven by events, even though I fully appreciate the logical argument.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 25, 2014)

bbunker my brotha',
Cali and NY should lead in this area by raising their minimum wage to adjust to the cost of living and high tax rates, that was my point.

What we are seeing from this lawlessness caused by the implementation of the ACA has made us a part time work force.
Many part time workers are getting food stamps so they surely don't want a minimum wage increase that nullifies their EBT benefits.

This is why you see SEIU and AFL-CIO guys from the massive out of work lists across the nations Union Halls protesting this.
I still get calls to march on City Hall even after I told them I moved. They never tell you what you are protesting, the organizers simply offer you strike pay and a Bar-B-Q at the Hall after you do as they tell you.
This is also why you might notice the yellow and purple colors (SEIU FLag) and red shirts being worn by all of these middle aged folks who never worked at Mickey Dees or for a minimum wage out in force.

Notice how these Unions and politicians have the worst timing to state their cases.
Again, I harken back to 2009-2011 when they had the purse and the power, no opposition to block any legislation and they did nothing......That's all we need to know.


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 25, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> First, I want to repeat: the minimum wage is a standard. It's simply not right for people to work full-time and not be able to live.
> 
> So even if you were right, dpasdernick - and actually you're not - it has to do with the kind of world you want to live in. And I don't want to live in the world of Dickens.
> 
> ...



Nick,

Please tell me what "the kind of world you (meaning me) want to live in" is? I'm very curious.


----------



## gbar (Sep 25, 2014)

American politics has always been a blood sport generally. There are rare occasions when the factions come together instead of arguing over which end of the egg you are supposed to crack first, but... even when that happens, the results are as likely to be terrible as they are good.

And there's always been a large Loud, Angry Loon Contingent. The party affiliation that the loudest and looniest coalesce around tends to change over time, but there seems to be no danger of pragmatic, well informed rationality making Loud Angry Loons irrelevant any time soon.

Look at it this way, at least Aaron Burr isn't shooting Alexander Hamilton.  

When the politicians start shooting each other, that won't even set a new precedent.


----------



## Goran (Sep 25, 2014)

JohnG @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> People have been trotting out the "minimum wage kills jobs" argument since 1962 or thereabouts.



To hell with "jobs" you cannot decently live on. If a political/economic system can only provide you with jobs if these are misreable and underpaid, then I say it's high time to get rid of it.


----------



## gsilbers (Sep 25, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Sep 23 said:


> Hm. I disagree with most things he says, John.
> 
> First, New York looks good to him because everyone who lives there today is very rich.
> 
> ...




the whole idea that rich shouldnt have too much goes into communism territory and that just doesnt work. proven and proven again and again. 

but at the same time they are hoarding a lot of money which does not promote the idea of capitalism were it follows the republican ideology of they are the job creators. 
the 1% has way too much more than what they know what to do with it and there is enough data to show they keep getting more money and not spending it.

taxing is a good solution were there is a special tax bracket for individuals and also for corporations. but at the same time they can get tax deductions if they invest that money. so that way they are not taxed like in France were they promote unfair socialism and punish the rich but at the same time they HAVE to invest in creating jobs.
this way the government forces individuals with obscene amount of money to invent in creating jobs. and of course throw in there more deduction if its a US job (or whatever country they are from) 

This in my opinion would a bi-partisan solution. Democrats get the rich taxed and the republicans get the notion that the rich are still the job creators. 

the issue is lobbying. the rich have powerfull lobbying groups which want to lower taxes for the rich and corporations. if they could work together so they get the rich to invest rather than taxed then that would be a good solution.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 25, 2014)

Unions have contractual agreements that require 40 hours per week.
We have purchased politicians for this task, I guess they need more money to make that happen for the peasants.

Again I harken back to 2009-2011 when any law could have been called to the floor and passed by wealthy redistribuotrs in power and they were even handed a single payer plan by the Unions who waited years for this opportunity, and we saw how they preffered partnering up with their brothers in Big Banking, Big Pharma, Big Insurance.

Any Gun control laws.............nope, again it doesn't benefit them so why keep your promises.
Best to wait until there is opposition then try to pretend you want to pass a law then campaign on how the bad guys blocked you, when you could have changed America over a 2 year period.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 25, 2014)

Why do Washington and Oregon have higher minimum wages than all other states? Sadly, I think that race has something to do with it. While we're not without a stained history or current tensions, we're largely white. When people think of poor people here, we don't automatically associate that with minorities. The working poor is "us" rather than "them". 

So when we talk of raising the minimum wage, we're raising "our" minimum wage. 

Of course, business owners who employ low-wage workers and conservative idealogs don't support it, but enough of the general population does to get legislation passed. And the local economy doesn't seem to suffer from it. If anything, having fewer people in economic desperation seems to help the economy with more spending and it certainly helps the quality of life.

Not that we are without the homeless, the unemployable, and the non-working poor. Nothing in the private economy will solve or ease those situations. But those are completely different issues from the minimum wages of the working poor.


----------



## bbunker (Sep 25, 2014)

Gsilbers,

Just got to say, suggesting that "the whole idea that rich shouldnt (sic) have too much goes into communism territory" may be one of the most grossly inaccurate political statements I've ever seen.

"The rich shouldn't have too much" isn't the foundations of communism. It's the foundations of democracy. Because as soon as the rich are too rich, then you cannot have democracy, since no oligarchy can sustain one. There's a vast difference between "The rich shouldn't have too much" and "There should be no rich."

And JonFairhurst, you're cheating a bit in your argument, because Washington and Oregon have higher minimum wages than all other STATES, yes. But the District of Columbia has a higher minimum wage than ANY state. Which does complicate your point a bit.


----------



## rgames (Sep 25, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed Sep 24 said:


> Notice that I'm ignoring the Apple-bash trolling.


Precisely the problem. Apple are among the biggest culprits propagaing the problems you claim to want to fix and yet you (and many others) ignore that fact. The only conclusion we can draw is that you and others are not thinking logically or don't actually care about the problem.

We live in an era where branding trumps logic - Apple is a brand, Democrats are a brand, Republicans are a brand - you pick your brand and leave logic behind.

We will not leave that era until we fix that problem. Your response is a good example of that fact.

If you actually cared about wealth distribution you'd spend less time talking about minimum wage and government intervention and more time talking about Wal-Mart, Apple, Facebook and their ilk.

You're attacking the problem from an angle that will never fix it. Until we make that shift, the problem will remain. Think about it: the wealth gap problem has only increased in the last 30 years. Over that time we've had every type of government and economy: Republican, Democrat, surplus, huge debt, etc. None of it has made a difference - the wealth gap continues to widen. And yet you and others continue to promote more of the same. Well, you're getting more of the same.

Society does best when the rational choice and emotional choice are in agreement. It's time to bring reason back into the decision-making process.

rgames


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2014)

> Nick,
> 
> Please tell me what "the kind of world you (meaning me) want to live in" is? I'm very curious.



Dickensian. It's all in my post - I'd just be repeating myself.


***
Richard, you're mistaken about the angle that will never fix the problem. The wealth gap increased because of corrupt public policy, not because people buy Apple products.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 25, 2014)

bbunker @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> ...But the District of Columbia has a higher minimum wage than ANY state. Which does complicate your point a bit.



DC is a unique case - African Americans aren't a minority there. In the 2010 census, the group comprised 50.7% of the population. So again, the voting public feels that this is "our" minimum wage, rather than something that benefits "them". So, yes, it complicates my point, but also supports it. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Washington,_D.C (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographi ... ngton,_D.C).


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 25, 2014)

rgames @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> ...Think about it: the wealth gap problem has only increased in the last 30 years. Over that time we've had every type of government and economy: Republican, Democrat, surplus, huge debt, etc. None of it has made a difference - the wealth gap continues to widen.



Just because one party or the other has leadership positions doesn't mean that "we've had every type of government and economy". Far from it. 

The top marginal tax rate in 1980 was 70%. It was as high as 90%+ before 1964. In 1981 it fell to 50% and was down to 28% by 1988. It hasn't been over 39% since. That correlates with the growth in income at the top - which accumulates. When the top income grows, the top wealth snowballs.












By increasing the top tax rates, we could cut the deficit and add public sector jobs. Labor would become more scarce, so the price of labor would rise. Problem solved.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 25, 2014)

I'm interested in the notion that everyone who lives in New York is rich- one of those dumb wrong generalizations, but the poster already copped to that  

I'm also interested in the notion that great industrialists need to be emulated in all their machinations, that their ambition and accomplishments excuse their inhumanities. Carnegie was a notorious union buster who hired Pinkertons to intimidate, beat and kill people, and he was hardly alone. Building great wealth often involves great sacrifice- on the part of others. Regardless of the corruption of them over time and the currently popular anti-union view, unions were started to address issues of poor people who paid for the wealth of ambitious men with their life 's blood. The young women who jumped to their deaths from the windows of the burning Triangle Shirtwaist factory paid for the lack of interest in safety among factory owners. Children worked as indentured slaves in factories. The labor movement in America changed all of that somewhat. To deny the good done is short-sighted and ideological. As Nick suggested, hard labor shouldn't be a path to not having enough gruel.

Communism? Socialism? Capitalism? How about Balanced-ism? How about promoting things like education (including performance bonuses for teachers, a complete re-thinking of the tenure system and better pay for proven teachers) job training, infrastructure spending and jobs programs to improve the country's ability to do business, how about removing loopholes but cutting the corporate tax rate to make us more competitive, how about mid-termed tax breaks for small business, how about single payer health care instead of the current hodge-podge, how about campaign finance reform,how about cutting obscene defense spending, (but not on the backs of soldiers like my son, please) how about taxing rich people more in ways they'll never feel even slightly (like on their huge capital Gains)- obviously I could go on, but those are a few liberal AND conservative ideas that would help us move ahead.

America is a frozen lake. We're not moving forward, we're not getting obvious things done. Obstinate Republicans and an inefficient President who doesn't know how to do business have us stuck in the ice, and a "news" media profiting from and promoting hysteria has us fighting an ideological war with each other instead of working towards a common good. If anything, that should be a goal in itself- advance the country, move it forward, compromise to the extent that things advance, try to achieve.....balance.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2014)

You do understand what I was saying, Larry, right? It wasn't a dumb wrong generalization, it was a dumb way of saying that nobody can afford to live in Manhattan anymore.

But yeah, I agree with you of course.

Well, except that - as I may have posted a few thousand times - I think those of us who use reason are knocking our heads against the wall.

I don't see two warring ideologies, I see a war against one: conservatism, promoted by people who aren't the least bit interested in what's good, they're interested in the security of simple answers to complicated problems. It doesn't matter how many times you prove to them they're wrong.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 25, 2014)

It's gerrymandering. Too many safe seats where only challenge is from one's own party.

The beginning and end of it all.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 25, 2014)

I too want a new balance, in 2016 wealthy Liberals will keep the Executive branch and Conservatives will bring a balance to the new Clinton White House.

Here's some balance for you.




upload an image


----------



## JohnG (Sep 25, 2014)

That just ain't raht!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 25, 2014)

I don't like gerrymandering, for some odd reason, but I say it again and again: the first step to solving all the problems of the world is to get the money out of our elections.


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 25, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> I don't like gerrymandering, for some odd reason, but I say it again and again: the first step to solving all the problems of the world is to get the money out of our elections.



I 100% agree with the statement above.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 25, 2014)

I did understand Nick, but New York City isn't just Manhattan, any more than "LA" is Beverly Hills.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 25, 2014)

chimuelo @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> I too want a new balance, in 2016 wealthy Liberals will keep the Executive branch and Conservatives will bring a balance to the new Clinton White House.
> 
> Here's some balance for you.
> 
> ...



Ha! Love it.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 25, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> You do understand what I was saying, Larry, right? It wasn't a dumb wrong generalization, it was a dumb way of saying that nobody can afford to live in Manhattan anymore.
> 
> But yeah, I agree with you of course.
> 
> ...



I feel like my answer to this is more complex than I have energy for, having just returned from my son's medal ceremony for having served in Afghanistan!! Ha! 

I also feel it's important that I respond accurately, and I will tomorrow.


----------



## bbunker (Sep 25, 2014)

'I went to Kabul, and all I got was this lousy ARCOM.'

Just kidding, Larry. From me, thank your son for his service!


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 26, 2014)

bbunker @ Fri Sep 26 said:


> 'I went to Kabul, and all I got was this lousy ARCOM.'
> 
> Just kidding, Larry. From me, thank your son for his service!



Ha! I will BB, thanks.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 26, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> I don't like gerrymandering, for some odd reason, but I say it again and again: the first step to solving all the problems of the world is to get the money out of our elections.



Couldn't have said it better. 
Citizens United was born from the corrupt practice of Unions charging tax payers more money in the guise of a raise for our fire fighters, police and teachers, but that "organizing" money goes directly for purchasing legislation, which also compliments the 1000 per year per member for dues which tax payers also pay for.

Get rid of the Liberal Union cash, take out the Citizens United nonsense.

The model used which started all of this crap was tax free status for religious organizations. Then came the Sharptons and Jacksons, etc.

That is what created the Bible Belt, not people of faith.
Then give Corporations like the President's advisor from GE who pays no taxes a choice. Pay the IRS or fund research for alternative energy.

And please have wealthy Liberals with Beach front mansions, Yachts and Lear Jets stop being the face of the Green Energy movement.
Nothing infuriates those who work for a living more than wealthy Liberals telling us how bad the situation is as they climb off of their Yachts telling us we need to pay more....will they ever learn..?
Just having a NeoCon say that there's a problem got 3 times the attention of these wealthy elites marching in the streets with their armed bodyguards so they could tolerate a few moments with the uneducated peasants.


----------



## gbar (Sep 26, 2014)

JonFairhurst @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> rgames @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > ...Think about it: the wealth gap problem has only increased in the last 30 years. Over that time we've had every type of government and economy: Republican, Democrat, surplus, huge debt, etc. None of it has made a difference - the wealth gap continues to widen.
> ...



These graphs, though, are a bit misleading in that much of the top 1% gains went to the top .01%, and much of that was the direct result of policy changes like reduced capital gains (this has rolled back a bit) and private equity loopholes that folks lobbied hard to get placed in the tax code.

Here are (just) some of them:

1. Carried interest: allows fund managers to get a salary taxed at capital gains rate.
2. Management fee waivers: instead of a fee, managers can get a % of profit allowing them to be taxed at 20% capital gains rate.
3. Limited Partner Loophole: allows labor income to escape Medicare tax.
4. S corp (same as LP)
5. Public Offerings: not only is income to founders taxed at the lower capital gains rate, many of these deals are structured so that the newly public companies pay them back for paying that tax over 15 years 
6. Angel Investor Loophole: allows VCs to exclude 100% of capital gains up to 10 million dollars.


And that's just some of the more popular ways people have managed to pay a lower tax rate than say... a salaried professional making 140K a year.

The redistribution of income from the middle-class to the top .01% is partly the direct result of tax policy. and with more wealth comes more political power, more benefits (lower taxes)... up and until you reach a breaking point with populist angst. We're not there yet, apparently. But when we get there (assuming there is no policy correction), it will be safe to say that the folks who benefited the most collectively (if not individually) did it to themselves.

Jeff Bezos has argued this is unsustainable. Of course, he made it to the top .01% via Amazon.com, and Amazon needs middle-class customers with large disposable incomes, so among the .01% you could think of folks like Jeff Bezos as the canaries in the coal mine


----------



## dpasdernick (Sep 26, 2014)

chimuelo @ Fri Sep 26 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't like gerrymandering, for some odd reason, but I say it again and again: the first step to solving all the problems of the world is to get the money out of our elections.
> ...



To your last point Chim,

Leonardo Dicaprio was just anointed Messenger of Peace by the UN and is asking the world to protect the planet. Very noble. I wonder what the carbon footprint of his 6 LA homes is? Or the chartered plane that took him there. I get it that these people give millions but they don't give it all. A million sounds so generous to us average bears but it doesn't mean that Leo will be bumping into any of us at Subway ordering the combo. They all go back to Malibu and say "I am a good person" as Jeeves brings them a mineral water. I just try to live without it all invading my brain too much... It's easier that way.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 26, 2014)

I think Hollywood will start converting to Islam any day now as it's another way to show how peaceful and caring they all are.
DiCapprio is already getting that "I kidnapped Elizabeth Smart" look going, next will be the Bergdahl Rose garden look as the tail get's longer.

Saudi Green Energy movies are bombing at Box Office, so the Qatari's along with Al Gorezeerah Media will pay them to convert for the sake of peace or some other silly nonsense, then the world can sing in 3 part harmony again.

What have we got to lose at this point..


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2014)

"Do what I say, not what I do." - Someone's Dad

"Who f-ing cares about Dicaprio's or Al Gore's carbon footprints. What they're saying is the most important thing anyone can say." - Nick Batzdorf, Sage to Himself


----------



## AC986 (Sep 26, 2014)

Apparently, having now been appointed to the UN, David Beckhams wife says she will be marvellous because she is a mother and has children.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 26, 2014)

I'd rather have a mother and child lecture me than the men without cocks that force us to live under laws they exempt themselves from.
If she has hair. I'd really listen.
I grow weary of the women with mens haircuts too.
Janet Napolitano looked like Frank Luntz. 
Just the sight of her on the Head of Homeland Security posters would encourage our enemies to invade the entire continent.




screenshot tool


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2014)

More in response to David Brooks' editorial.

"Liberals talk about circumstances; conservatives talk about character"

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/26/opini ... ciety.html


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2014)

"Liberals talk about circumstances; conservatives talk about character"

Look at Richard's posts and you'll see how true that is!

"We need a national re-birth of conscience" - that kind of stuff.

No. We need better policy!


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 26, 2014)

Krugman makes perfect sense.

He explains how well America was doing before Liberals took us into War and started the Great Society.

I need to read more of his stuff.

Hell I thought he just taught Corzine and other wealthy Liberals how to steal investors money and get away with it.

Thanks for the link... :mrgreen: 

The good old days when 2 parents didn't have to work to fund mothers with 5 kids from different fathers that paid no child support.

This means I can retrain my wife.
She was so busy working she never learned how to cook very well.
The poor broad can't even boil water.

That's OK though, she makes more than me as the unemployment rate amongst fine trim is 0%.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 26, 2014)

Krugman is a national treasure. I read his blog every day, and have learned a hell of a lot from it over the past few years.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 26, 2014)

chimuelo @ Fri Sep 26 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't like gerrymandering, for some odd reason, but I say it again and again: the first step to solving all the problems of the world is to get the money out of our elections.
> ...



Oh I dunno-I think many of us get a little antsy when the Koch Brothers buy the state of North Carolina and every election in it, too. Well, those not on the Heritage Foundation's Board, or the Americans for Prosperity board, or the Cato Institute's board, or KOCHPAC's board........last I checked, Koch bros weren't wealthy lib'rals. Dunno about their yacht status.


----------



## gbar (Sep 27, 2014)

NYC Composer @ Fri Sep 26 said:


> Oh I dunno-I think many of us get a little antsy when the Koch Brothers buy the state of North Carolina and every election in it, too. Well, those not on the Heritage Foundation's Board, or the Americans for Prosperity board, or the Cato Institute's board, or KOCHPAC's board........last I checked, Koch bros weren't wealthy lib'rals. Dunno about their yacht status.



David Koch: 246 ft super yacht named "Leander".

Bill Koch: several yachts. One he races in the America's cup is called " America". Bill was on the outs with brothers Charles and David for years and even turned them over to the feds for illegally extracting oil from public leases they weren't paying fees on once. They have reconciled.

Charles Koch: yacht status TBD. He may be too busy running the myriad of PACs, "think tanks", and thinking up new ways to fund "education efforts" and scholarships to study non-rigorous, antiquated economic ideas by folks like Hayek and Mises. It's sort of like "creationist" "education efforts" to encourage people to study things disproving evolution; sort of a "you get what you pay for" approach to creating a particular narrative.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2014)

Exactly right NYC.
You and I will be agreeing more and more as the election unfolds revealing the corruptive process that is so nasty I don't like the idea of children even watching this barbarism.
These 2 Crime families have allowed private and public money to purchase seats and legislation for decades now.
I want a 3rd party from the middle class for the middle class and anyone who actually can prove their hands are stain free from the Unions and super pacs gets my vote, but this corruption is so deeply rooted only millions marching on DC will get their attention.

You might be surprised to know that I turn over my cart of groceries to show the labels are face down making the checkers job easier, I even stack our plates at a restaurant so all the napkins and silverware are on top, then wipe down the area we used. It's not normal I know. But I was brought up this way where 1 persons work makes another persons work easier. My Union tradesmen job was designed so we would pour the decks and the walls, then strip them leaving a clean work place for the Carpenters and Iron Workers to work more efficiently. That's the kind of Union I have seen for decades build infrastructure making everyone else's life easier.

These other Unions we see for IRS workers and VA "administrators" is despicable and has no purpose being a part of Government. PERIOD. 
And even though my money for organizing and membership dues goes to people I do not vote for or would ever support, I never got upset. Only after being in a All locals Union Hall gathering at a stadium where I met with firefighters and police, teachers did I realize that many of them felt like me and told me stories of how much of their pay raises and membership dues goes to the same ass holes who never do nothing but use that money to destroy the opposition. For the hundreds of millions we have given to these wealthy redistributors, we find out they just make us complicit by exempting us from laws exactly like they do, and I do not enjoy being a part of their team but have no choice.
And people want to wonder why Citizens United was born, and why the Koch brothers bought Wisconsin and other districts with their billions...?

Every giant tower I have built over the last 30 years came from evil billionaires, every bridge I built (3) came from Government infrastructure.
How can these evil billionaires manage to keep us working and can afford to pay our 50-60 bucks an hour wages, when the very bastards we have to give our money to can't build a god damned hospital...?
Koch brothers, Justin Timberlake, Adelson, Wynn, Andrew Aggassi have all built hospitals and schools here in LAs Vegas and lined my pockets...
Why would I ever want to take these people down when they have created all of the jobs and wealth I have seen over the last 30 years....?


----------



## bbunker (Sep 27, 2014)

But Chim, my friend, these rich and powerful didn't create the jobs, and they didn't create the wealth. They are just in the best position to skim the profit. They are best positioned to collect the value added to capital by labor. But they don't create the wealth of a nation. But you know that...you don't call multinationals 'wealth redistributors' because of any value that they add to the economy.

Small business is where the jobs and the wealth actually come from. And equally importantly, they also pay their taxes, since most small business owners can't afford a tax haven in the Caymans.

So, I'm sure some pennies of those construction projects came from multinationals. But the buckets of dollars came from small businesses, who hire 65% of the new jobs, use that labor to add value to goods and services, and then pay their taxes on the profit they make from it.


----------



## snowleopard (Sep 27, 2014)

First, regarding Red/Blue subsidizing, here is what I could find. 

Slate article from 2012 showing a graph that shows it's mostly the blue states (or areas) paying to help the red areas. http://tinyurl.com/slatebluered

This article here from Salon is from just last week showing pretty much the same, with some hard numbers. http://tinyurl.com/salonbluered

If someone has contrary numbers showing that it's the red states supporting the blue states, I'm all ears. 

As to the rest of the argument, I agree with what Nick focused on: Money. It's all about money. I've been saying this for months, years. The country has become a plutocracy, with virtually every political office and position up for if not direct sale, heavy financial influence. 

As to who creates jobs, I think this banned TED talk by billionaire Nick Hanauer says a lot:


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2014)

Yes bbunker. I agree that small businesses is the driving economic force in America not the billioniares, but they seem to be the only ones who can afford Union wages.

This brings me to another point, why then, are the wealthy redistributors burdening small businesses with uncertainty, and breaking the very laws made to give business a heads up on the regulations and taxes they are going to have to prepare for...?

Do these politicians know what you and me know? I think so and they don't care, as they exempted themselves from the burdens they have imposed upon us. 800 Billion dollars were handed them with ZERO opposition to stop any legislation and yet they pursued the largest anti business regulations and laws ever seen before.

FWIW, my 30 years of great wages helped create small businesses where I was. The evil CEOs and Billionaires started the projects, we then spent the money on homes, clothes, cars, private school (thank God).
I watched small businesses pop up to accommodate the 80,000 Tradesmen spending like drunken sailors, so I know how business works and who creates wealth, it's not the Billioniares, but they sure help while redistributors are out purchasing voters. It's the middle class guys like us, although some might say I am being arrogant, it's what I have seen since I was 19 and only on rare occasions did I work for the Government, and then I was also glad they did something.
But that was during the evil "GOP" Congress and Clinton. These anti global warming conservatives built several clean coal burning plants, a new naval airs station in Fallon, NV. Yucca mountain where there's never going to be Nuclear waste, it's a massive Strategic Oil reserve regardless of what the media and your truth tellers in DC say.

So without a strong middle class it seems nobody buys anything except food and gas.

Where's the shovel ready jobs, where's the full time jobs being destroyed by Liberals and their worthless ACA act that has turned America into a part time labor force..?

I can tell you who's doing real good. DC is. There's a housing boom, there's help wanted ads everywhere, there's 48,000 lobbyists in a town Obama promised would not have lobbyists, so that's who's winning the war on poverty my brotha'.

One example of shovel ready jobs that only cost 240 million. The Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge that spans across the Colorado River to bypass the Hoover Dam.

Guess who owned the property there...? A private citizen. But guess who brought the property there, a wealthy redistributor.
He paid millions since he is wealthy, but then turned around and sold it back to the tax payers for millions more.
During the job an Iron Worker died. We took up a collection of 100 per man and there's no getting out of that, it is voluntary, but if you refuse you could get ass beat.
The Union kicked in the usual benefit of 5000 USD and then the trust covered 10k more to the beneficiary.
Not a dime from the Senator or the Japanese company that made millions though.

Then the job before that 3 guys died, the same collections were taken, more people involved so the beneficiaries got more than usual, plus the Unions kick ins, and Lo and Behold the evil CEO/Casino owner kicked in 25k per worker so their widows could go back to Mexico w/o being turned into beggars.

These are the wealthy redistributors I admire, not the self serving wealthy redistributors in DC who have more money than the small casino owner, and not a penny from him or the Japanese owners.

So my respect for anyone who was born into wealth or made it is based on how they redistribute their own money, not how they redistribute our money as they cling to their tax payer cash and dare to call others greedy or non caring.

These morons in DC don't get it and never will. If you think these clowns can actually cover all Americans with health deals they made with Big Insurance companies that's a dangerous misconception.
These guys are stealing your money. Just look at the 960 million dollar website and tell me these guys didn't redistribute that money to their bros who donated to their campaigns.....

I have no need for these self serving bums. Sadly I am stuck with them.
But in November we face the GOP takeover again.
How can such a wealthy great nation only offer 2 crime families as a choice of leadership is beyond me.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 27, 2014)

chimuelo @ Sat Sep 27 said:


> Yes bbunker. I agree that small businesses is the driving economic force in America not the billioniares, but they seem to be the only ones who can afford Union wages.
> 
> This brings me to another point, why then, are the wealthy redistributors burdening small businesses with uncertainty, and breaking the very laws made to give business a heads up on the regulations and taxes they are going to have to prepare for...?
> 
> ...



Chim- you're a smart guy. I'd like to address the points you make here, some of which I strongly agree with, other not- but I never feel I get the same courtesy back from you. It always seems you're much more interested in a monologue than a dialogue, a launching pad from which to express your p.o.v., and that's fine-it just doesn't encourage discourse. Carry on!


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2014)

You're absolutely right.
I always notice these things after I vent.

I am ready for your POV and promise I'll be courteous.

But if you try and persuade me to trust wealthy Liberals my eyes will start twitching like the French Detective that was tormented by Inspector Clouseau

I actually have a weekend off and am watching MSNBC.....???
But only because of the Global Citizens Concert.
Whoever is mixing sound for Carrie Underwood has the best ears I've heard for an FOH in years.
I'm not into smooth rock/country twang but love the fiddle, steel and solo work they do for a meager 8 bars after verses upon verses of yee haw foot stompin' anti yoga music.


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 27, 2014)

chimuelo @ Sat Sep 27 said:


> You're absolutely right.
> I always notice these things after I vent.
> 
> I am ready for your POV and promise I'll be courteous.
> ...



Cool  

No worries, I don't trust anybody not to act in their own most expedient interests. Anything that happens along those lines is then a delightful surprise. I'll address your earlier post later (if that makes any sense!)

Do me a favor- look over my latest screed up above (the one about a balanced approach) and tell me which thoughts made sense to you as initiatives and which didn't.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 27, 2014)

NYC Composer @ Thu Sep 25 said:


> How about promoting things like education (including performance bonuses for teachers, a complete re-thinking of the tenure system and better pay for proven teachers) job training, infrastructure spending and jobs programs to improve the country's ability to do business, how about removing loopholes but cutting the corporate tax rate to make us more competitive, how about mid-termed tax breaks for small business, how about single payer health care instead of the current hodge-podge, how about campaign finance reform,how about cutting obscene defense spending, (but not on the backs of soldiers like my son, please) how about taxing rich people more in ways they'll never feel even slightly (like on their huge capital Gains)- obviously I could go on, but those are a few liberal AND conservative ideas that would help us move ahead.



Before I engage on the issues above, the service requirements you mentioned a while back about doing 2 years is something I have always thought necessary even if there's someone who uses religious beliefs as a reason to not get involved, then they can do community service. I know a quadriplegic kid I grew up with who was ignored until high school where he ran into me and my crew. We invited him to hang out with us but had to carry his weight by the usual ringing the teachers bell then pretending you didn't do it, stuff like that. But he WANTED to be part of a crew so the idea that people should be dismissed as if they're not good enough have never sat well with me. He couldn't load a rifle very well, he couldn't even walk very well but they should be shown a list of duties and allowed to pick one so they too can have skin in the game.

As for teachers, hell yes. Teachers should be re evaluated yearly. And like any union job I ever worked on when you don't cut the mustard, you sit at the hall where unemployment might inspire you to get back in the game. If that doesn't work your fired. Why should a bad teacher be allowed to infect our kids, just because they are Union..? That's typical Federal Union bull shit.

Job training is fine, but remember when kids got kicked out of school? BAck then they got a few chances and if that didn't work there was technical school where you know it's the last road, and the parents have to pay according to their income. If they are on welfare then make deductions. Not our fault someone chose to breed and then didn't care for parenting much.
Remember shop class...? why do we think kids don't want to go to work right out of high school? College is a joke these days and another Federal cash cow for the redistributors who often fight over getting the loans processed at a friends bank like the redistributor from N.Dakota did just for a yes vote on the ACA. Now he's the Chinese Ambassador. At least we didn't insult them by sending a Kennedy or other wealthy donor there, save those for the pacified nations.
Infrastructure spending...of course. That's what built this nation. So taking taxes in the name of roads and bridges and then using that money to buy poor peoples votes instead is bull shit and we need people accountable for such misappropriations of tax dollars.
Re do corporate loopholes. Let them choose between paying the IRS or funding inner city schools or alternative energy.
But to tax them out of the country is another Liberal failure. 
China watches us and gladly accepts all corporations to tax free zones. 
This is why having an activist as Attorney General is just poor decision making, and the Presidents war on wealth is sheer ideology with disastrous conclusions.
Especially after demonizing Big Insurance companies that they now get 3% of the action on. They were hated until they paid into the wealth redistribution scams. We should have single payer, not corporate rip offs like that, and don't even get me started on the 990 million dollar website....OMG>..red eyes glaring.

Finance reform for sure. Defense spending, not so much as wasteful defense spending. many of our defense projects have helped find cures and medications even bio fuels so it's not a good idea to cut that, but rather have oversight where people are actually held accountable.

Super wealthy billionaires need to become partners with government not enemies.
In politics I understand these cowardly b astards and their pathetic tactics just to win. But corporations that are extremely profitable need a business baron like a Romney somewhere in there or else they feel as though they are an enemy.

Why would we want to chase these people overseas, it's insane to think you can create jobs by chasing out the most successful corporations and people.
Wouldn't you want Apple over here instead of the UK.
These morons in DC know nothing about business or these companies would have never fled.

Cheers


----------



## NYC Composer (Sep 27, 2014)

chimuelo @ Sat Sep 27 said:


> NYC Composer @ Thu Sep 25 said:
> 
> 
> > How about promoting things like education (including performance bonuses for teachers, a complete re-thinking of the tenure system and better pay for proven teachers) job training, infrastructure spending and jobs programs to improve the country's ability to do business, how about removing loopholes but cutting the corporate tax rate to make us more competitive, how about mid-termed tax breaks for small business, how about single payer health care instead of the current hodge-podge, how about campaign finance reform,how about cutting obscene defense spending, (but not on the backs of soldiers like my son, please) how about taxing rich people more in ways they'll never feel even slightly (like on their huge capital Gains)- obviously I could go on, but those are a few liberal AND conservative ideas that would help us move ahead.
> ...



You are a beauty! You make me laugh and you make me think, and these are qualities I don't often find, but you editorialize in all responses.! Okay,even so, we're getting somewhere, so:

1. We agree on my concept of national service and how it might promote the idea of civic responsibility. I'm glad, but not really part of this discussion.

2. We agree that the teacher's union has evolved in a way that protects teachers but doesn't hold teachers accountable for the education of students. 

3. You support jobs training in theory but give no credence to the idea that it might actually keep people out of crime or off the streets or out of prisons. I find that anti-logical. Economics are the key to everything.

4.Regarding lowering the corporate tax to make us more competitive but closing loopholes: I have no idea what you meant by what you said.

5.By "finance reform for sure" did you mean campaign financing, which is what I was talking about? I think it should be the top priority in America-the removal of ALL financing by special interests in the electoral process. To me, this is a total no-brainer.

6. Re single payer insurance-obviously we agree.

7. You didn't speak to my idea of giving small businesses mid-term (as opposed to long term or short term) tax breaks. This gives them a chance to establish themselves , but doesn't support them forever.

8. Going after defense spending waste IS cutting defense budgets. Samesame. It should be done yet it should be illegal to do it on the backs of soldiers. The VA bit is shameful. My son's BREAKFAST was cut. He has to pay out of pocket for certain uniforms and boots. Shameful.

9. The fact that you support infrastructure spending is great, but you want to talk about previous or even recent waste-so what? I'm proposing an agenda moving FORWARD. If you added up all the inefficiency of infrastructure spending in the past, it would support the world-again, so what? Is it an initiative we should take up to move FORWARD? Partnering with private industry is fine with me.

10. Obama's "war on wealth"???? My friend, I invest in the stock market-please trust me-Obama's "war on wealth" has made the rich happier than they've ever been while they trash him in ideological terms.

I got more, but I'm out of gas-thanks for engaging!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 27, 2014)

> Why would we want to chase these people overseas, it's insane to think you can create jobs by chasing out the most successful corporations and people



We're not chasing people overseas, we're keeping the dollar high and that creates a trade deficit.


----------



## AC986 (Sep 28, 2014)

chimuelo @ Sat Sep 27 said:


> But if you try and persuade me to trust wealthy Liberals my eyes will start twitching like the French Detective that was tormented by Inspector Clouseau



Chief Inspector Dreyfus.

Carry on.

o[])


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 28, 2014)

Nobody's perfect but what a team we have here. Like a band, someone has to lead, but then others need to lead to help the leader who isn't always right, the end result a bunch of leaders with better ideas than the leaders who misled.

In short new blood is needed, too bad we have only 2 shitty teams to pick from.
Great POV Nick, I shall check up on that but many COrporations have taken up residence elsewhere, which is why Jack Lew wanted a law making that illegal. I say apologise and bring the boys home.


OTOH a friend told me how great the score for Train Robbers with John Wayne and Ann Margeret was so I dl'd it since I was in the mood to be entertained and have the weekend free. The music was fantastic, incredible actually how well integrated it was, and Ann Margeret with the tight Cowgirls outfit and dress was spectacular.

Had a great week of performing, doesn't happen all the much IMHO, but when I feel it does I take a break for days and won't touch the keys.
I want the last string of flawless nights to burn in good.

Good night chaps, we can fix the world again soon I hope.
:wink: o[])


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 28, 2014)

Oh - did you mean we were chasing people with our military? If so, sorry. I was talking about chasing our jobs overseas by having a high dollar, which makes overseas labor cheaper at the expense of unemployment here.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 29, 2014)

Love the way you explain how tax inversions benefit the economy.
Now I know why the Vice Presidents family hedge fund does so well.
We should have let Jack Lew treasury dept. head, keep tax payer bonuses in the Caribbean Banks too.
Role Models are great for us to follow.

For the bad guys, we should give them free press using selfies in Jail making 1.28 USD per hour and maybe Union-ize them.
Lately I've been watching the real estate market in Vegas and would love to get one of those KB homes that come with Solar Panels made by inmates.
What a service to society they are doing.

Here's my guy, but sadly he's a Union stooge and needs to start throwing stones after his glass house gets a new remodeling.
The Clintons will beat Bernie though since their big Oil backers like Bloomberg and Soros have endless cash to purchase Liberals with.
Biden's "old" company got 39 billion from what I hear from the Pres too.
Guess he's running for office and will want to remove ISIS for friends like Iran and Syria, Saudi Arabia, since they are moving forward with Green and Nuclear Energy.
Sad when you can't hide from those that invest in your campaign.

http://slnm.us/KjMQ2H7


----------



## gbar (Sep 29, 2014)

chimuelo @ Mon Sep 29 said:


> The Clintons will beat Bernie though since their big Oil backers like Bloomberg and Soros have endless cash to purchase Liberals with.
> Biden's "old" company got 39 billion from what I hear from the Pres too.




I think you need to stay away from whatever conspiracy sites you are logging into before something really bad happens to your brain that is irreversible.

As far as I know, for example, Joe Biden spent a short time as a law clerk and then a public defender before entering politics. That's it.

His son, Hunter, is a sitting member of an energy company, and that puts a bee in the bonnet of some conspiracy nuts, but this is kind of weirder.

You have some odd (and errant) information driving some of your monologues.

It's kind of scary, really.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 29, 2014)

> Love the way you explain how tax inversions benefit the economy



Me? I'm saying they hurt the economy.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 29, 2014)

Comes from a website where all comedians quotes about politicans are kept, some are really funny.




how to screen capture

I don't care if it's true or a lie, the fact we have leaders involved in Hedge Funds when Senate Committees are trying to prosecute Banks is a joke.
SIB was never found to be bad guys, not when they fund campaigns and launder money, it's perfectly legal since Antigua is a Bank surrounded by sand. 
Wealthy redistributors spend thousands flying there to play beach ball.... :lol: 

If I had any money I'd want to avoid taxes too, it's just the natural thing to do, especially when you want everyone else to pay more once your offshore accounts have been established.

They'll tell you, it's perfectly legal.


----------



## gbar (Sep 29, 2014)

chimuelo @ Mon Sep 29 said:


> Comes from a website where all comedians quotes about politicans are kept, some are really funny.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Umm, I think that's a dig at Dick Cheney.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Sep 29, 2014)

Yep. Cheney's old company, Halliburton.

Biden rides the train. Or he did until the Secret Service told him he couldn't.


----------



## chimuelo (Sep 29, 2014)

Halburton, yes another purchaser of legislators, and Salvage companies too.

Good for them weeks before the BP Spill they were wise enough to buy the only salvage company close enough to assist.
I bet that chapped many asses in DC knowing they had to pay Haliburton again after seeing them take all of that cash in Iraq, since they were the only company who could fix the fires Saddam Hussein left behind.

Knowing Haliburton they probably had a deal with Hussein to blow them up in exchange for safe passage out of Iraq, and then pulled a Qatari/Suadi ISIS swtich-er-oowski.


----------

