The ..2012.... Political thread
-
rich n:
SurSteven:
Andy_Shofar:
Britons fear Libya becoming another Iraq -poll Tue Mar 29, 2011 * Seven of 10 Britons fear Iraq-style conflict * Almost half disapprove of the intervention LONDON, March 29 (Reuters) - Seven out of 10 Britons think coalition forces enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya could get sucked into another Iraq-style conflict, a poll showed on Tuesday. complete article: http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72S08220110329?sp=true
Republicans were in office when we got involved in Iraq. Are you saying that Republicans make more war than Liberals and Democrats do?
Here's a question for you - which party is responsible for the only use of nuclear weapons (i.e atom bomb) against an enemy in all of history?
Of all possible political parties in life...there is probably a reason why the democratic party was in office when we discovered the atom bomb
-
I'm thinking this One World Order is way over rated. Seems the only part of that deal we got, is using are people as human shields and paying for others Democracy. The way I see it. If you want Democracy than you fight for it. We fought for ours. Time others step up and fight for theres.
-
So Trump has official joined the crazy train. What is with these Rep candidates. You keep hoping one will surfaces with something important to say but no they just get more nuttier. I guess the more outrageous you get the more money the outrageous give. I just do not see what Trumps bring to the table. If he stuck to rebuilding the economy there was a glimmer of hope. No No No he has to talk crazy talk.
-
SurSteven:
Andy_Shofar:
Britons fear Libya becoming another Iraq -poll Tue Mar 29, 2011 * Seven of 10 Britons fear Iraq-style conflict * Almost half disapprove of the intervention LONDON, March 29 (Reuters) - Seven out of 10 Britons think coalition forces enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya could get sucked into another Iraq-style conflict, a poll showed on Tuesday. complete article: http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72S08220110329?sp=true
Republicans were in office when we got involved in Iraq. Are you saying that Republicans make more war than Liberals and Democrats do?
Please read or re-read the headline above, the Brits are saying what they are saying - they fear another Iraq within the current actions taken ...
-
SurSteven:
rich n:
SurSteven:
Andy_Shofar:
Britons fear Libya becoming another Iraq -poll Tue Mar 29, 2011 * Seven of 10 Britons fear Iraq-style conflict * Almost half disapprove of the intervention LONDON, March 29 (Reuters) - Seven out of 10 Britons think coalition forces enforcing a no-fly zone in Libya could get sucked into another Iraq-style conflict, a poll showed on Tuesday. complete article: http://af.reuters.com/article/libyaNews/idAFLDE72S08220110329?sp=true
Republicans were in office when we got involved in Iraq. Are you saying that Republicans make more war than Liberals and Democrats do?
Here's a question for you - which party is responsible for the only use of nuclear weapons (i.e atom bomb) against an enemy in all of history?
Of all possible political parties in life...there is probably a reason why the democratic party was in office when we discovered the atom bomb
Ending a six year world wide war and saving many from further destruction.
-
stop funding war and it stops. If you haven't see the academy award winning movie "Inside Job" it out on netflix. A must see movie.
-
appletart2:
stop funding war and it stops. If you haven't see the academy award winning movie "Inside Job" it out on netflix. A must see movie.
I agree.
-
Corporate Tax Holiday Could Put $1.2 Trillion in Shareholders' Pockets Lawmakers in Washington are mulling a one-time corporate tax holiday on foreign earnings that could provide a bonanza to many U.S. multinational corporations.... [Snip]
Given that 85% of the Outstanding Stocks is in the hands of the Richest 10%, this means that over a Trillion will go into the hands of just a very few people. The "other" 90% of The People would get to squabble over 180 Billion. You tell me who benefits the most? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/01/steven-chu-explains-the-v_n_843684.html
Steven Chu On The 'Very Hard' Decision To Cut Energy Assistance For Poor Households [Snip] ...Energy Secretary Steven Chu acknowledged that the administration had made ?very, very hard decisions? in proposing to decrease funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program by $2.5 billion in its 2012 budget... [Snip]
Yeah, lets throw thousands, if not millions, of Americans out in the cold - it will trim 2.5 Billion off the budget - but lets not touch the 4 Billion We give to Big Oil every year as incentive to look for new Oil. I'd like to drop this åsshole off in his skivvies about a hundred miles Northeast of Fairbanks - see how he likes him some cold! Mother fuçker has probably never been cold or hungry in his entire life.
-
Altanon:
Corporate Tax Holiday Could Put $1.2 Trillion in Shareholders' Pockets Lawmakers in Washington are mulling a one-time corporate tax holiday on foreign earnings that could provide a bonanza to many U.S. multinational corporations.... [Snip]
Given that 85% of the Outstanding Stocks is in the hands of the Richest 10%, this means that over a Trillion will go into the hands of just a very few people. The "other" 90% of The People would get to squabble over 180 Billion. You tell me who benefits the mos http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/01/steven-chu-explains-the-v_n_843684.html
Steven Chu On The 'Very Hard' Decision To Cut Energy Assistance For Poor Households [Snip] ...Energy Secretary Steven Chu acknowledged that the administration had made ?very, very hard decisions? in proposing to decrease funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program by $2.5 billion in its 2012 budget... [Snip]
Yeah, lets throw thousands, if not millions, of Americans out in the cold - it will trim 2.5 Billion off the budget - but lets not touch the 4 Billion We give to Big Oil every year as incentive to look for new Oil. I'd like to drop this åsshole off in his skivvies about a hundred miles Northeast of Fairbanks - see how he likes him some cold! Mother fuçker has probably never been cold or hungry in his entire life.
I believe that a very large amount of the US stock market, as well as international markets, is owned by US pension funds. I don't have current stats but i think it's around 1/3 to 1/2 of the US historically. So it's impossible that 85% of equities are owned by the richest 10% of individuals, if that's what you're suggesting.
-
EADG:
...I believe that a very large amount of the US stock market, as well as international markets, is owned by US pension funds. I don't have current stats but i think it's around 1/3 to 1/2 of the US historically. So it's impossible that 85% of equities are owned by the richest 10% of individuals. You seem to get very worked up about things that you don't understand very well. Just a suggestion - maybe you should inform yourself about how the world actually works and then get involved in changing it to your liking, rather than engaging in name calling at those who are actually doing things.
You're right; I don't know as much as I'd like, so I listen to folks who know more. Like Professor Edward Wolff at New York University. In an interview in the Multinational Monitor, (link below,) he made the following pertinent statements:
"...The richest 10 percent of families own about 85 percent of all outstanding stocks. They own about 85 percent of all financial securities, 90 percent of all business assets. These financial assets and business equity are even more concentrated than total wealth..."
"...The most common measure used, and the most understandable is: what share of total wealth is owned by the richest households, typically the top 1 percent. In the United States, in the last survey year, 1998, the richest 1 percent of households owned 38 percent of all wealth. ... There is also another measure called the Gini coefficient. It measures the concentration of wealth at different percentile levels, and does an overall computation. It is an index that goes from zero to one, one being the most unequal. Wealth inequality in the United States has a Gini coefficient of .82, which is pretty close to the maximum level of inequality you can have..."
"...We have had a fairly sharp increase in wealth inequality dating back to 1975 or 1976. Prior to that, there was a protracted period when wealth inequality fell in this country, going back almost to 1929. So you have this fairly continuous downward trend from 1929, which of course was the peak of the stock market before it crashed, until just about the mid-1970s. Since then, things have really turned around, and the level of wealth inequality today is almost double what it was in the mid-1970s. Income inequality has also risen. Most people date this rise to the early 1970s, but it hasn?t gone up nearly as dramatically as wealth inequality..."
"...The top 5 percent own more than half of all wealth. In 1998, they owned 59 percent of all wealth. Or to put it another way, the top 5 percent had more wealth than the remaining 95 percent of the population, collectively. The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it owned 83 percent of all wealth. This is a very concentrated distribution..."
"...We are much more unequal than any other advanced industrial country. Perhaps our closest rival in terms of inequality is Great Britain. But where the top percent in this country own 38 percent of all wealth, in Great Britain it is more like 22 or 23 percent. What is remarkable is that this was not always the case. Up until the early 1970s, the U.S. actually had lower wealth inequality than Great Britain, and even than a country like Sweden. But things have really turned around over the last 25 or 30 years. In fact, a lot of countries have experienced lessening wealth inequality over time. The U.S. is atypical in that inequality has risen so sharply over the last 25 or 30 years..."
There's a lot more here: http://www.multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html Moreover, I do not take what any one person says as fact. There are loads of similar articles all over the Internet. It's nothing new, either; I can remember an article in US News and World Report from the early 1990's entitled, "Is the American Worker Getting Shafted?" Needless to say, the answer was - YES!
-
From Joseph Stiglitz: http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?currentPage=all
The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation?s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent.
-
mustangsally10:
From Joseph Stiglitz: http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?currentPage=all
The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation?s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent.
Regarding the nyu professor's statement, he must be talking about individuals' ownership of stock, excluding institutions. but institutions own trillions of dollars of stocks. And those institutions -- pension funds being the largest category -- benefit a vast number of Americans including, prominently, union workers. So when people take the attitude of "screw the big corporations", that approach doesn't just affect the rich (however you want to define that group). I think most people agree that wealth is concentrated in the hands of the wealthy. The related question (about which people disagree) is whether that is per se a bad thing. I would be interested to see any information on whether societies with higher concentrations of wealth among the higher strata have better or worse outcomes for those in the lower strata. (referring to industrialized democracies,not third world plutocracies or dictatorships). I don't think the answer would be clear cut either way, but historically the US has offered great opportunity for people to capitalize on their abilities, to the extent they want to.
-
Some folks simply have run into bad luck while others are actually just lazy sh*ts...why foot the bill for them? Seriously, I don't mind helping out where ever/when ever I can. However, if you don't want to work because you'd rather listen to music all day or you want to rant and rave about how it's everyone else's fault, then you deserve to have far less than half the money...do things to help people avoid having to live in inhumane conditions??? sure, that's a given. But make someone who's decided they don't to work an equal??? Not as far as I'm concerned. I'll be happy to contribute towards helping them pay for help as well as a roof over their head and food in their mouth (as much as I can - I'm not wealthy either). But when it comes to delving out the luxery items and living easy, I'm going to buy my yatch first before I buy yours...
-
GE made 14 BILLION last year profits and paid zero taxes and got 360 million back. Oh Yeah! They got a tax credit back. Jeffery Immelt CEO of GE was appointed by by Obama as the head guy for jobs counsel. After he cut all kind of union benefits of GE Workers. Check out this site. At least someone trying to do something. http://www.immeltmustgo.com/action/immelt-must-go?sc=immelt_gg2
-
President Obama has tossed his name in the hat for the 2012 election. (at least he won't be out of practice since he has not stopped campaigning since he was a Senator seeking to be President). (So far ....) His group of professional campaigners - estimate that this office will cost him 3/4 of billion to 1 billion dollars. More likely - he will have to get contributions from the richer contributors (the ones he usually belittles, besmirches, scolds and scorns for having too much money). Many of the smaller contributions are not as likely to kick in as much because: (1) the first election of his -- they were excited to have him there. (2) The unemployment numbers weren't as high (so no cash to contribute). (3) the high cost of Gasoline (put the money in the tank not in contribution). (4) There is no shortage of rich democrats -- recently they had a $30, 000 a plate fundraiser and made approximately 1.5 million. (5) Could this be where the stimulus money went? (6) So far he does not have any competition from the other side that should cause him any worry at this time.
-
There are twice as many people in Government as there is in Manufacturing. Which means the taxpayer has really has a lot of work to do to support this heavy load. 48 out of the 50 States have more people in Government than in Manufacturing in their own States.
-
The_Fool:
...President Obama has tossed his name in the hat for the 2012 election. (at least he won't be out of practice since he has not stopped campaigning since he was a Senator seeking to be President)....
And Paul made it into his first campaign video at 32 seconds.
-
Man With Obama Sign Attacked In San Francisco April 5, 2011 3:00 PM SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) ? A man who set up a table with political literature and a sign supporting President Barack Obama was attacked in San Francisco?s North Panhandle neighborhood on Monday morning, a police captain said Tuesday. complete coverage: http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/04/05/man-with-obama-sign-attacked-in-san-francisco/
-
I think Paul made it into the other sides video. Well glad Paul such a threat. Clearly there was a jab. Let see who can the other side have to do there music humm Bush tried don't worry be happy by Bobby Mcferrin but he denounced him and voted for his opponent. than there was Jackson Browne..whew wrong choice. So Bush ended up with no hit wonder Toby Keith who was just glad anyone asked. Well Obama going to have to pay his own way this time.. I not giving any money this time. He done a pretty lousy job. But he does insight those good old boys so that might be worth throwing a few bucks towards his campaign to drive those tea partiers crazy. A billion dollars....just say no
-
The_Fool:
There are twice as many people in Government as there is in Manufacturing. Which means the taxpayer has really has a lot of work to do to support this heavy load. 48 out of the 50 States have more people in Government than in Manufacturing in their own States.
people in government are suppling a service not manufacturing. Compare apple to apples. It entitlement programs like tax breaks to the rich that putting us into debt. And not enforcing crimes like what the banks pulled We should be taxing the oil companies for the wars in middle east since where there protecting there interest.