Third Party & Independents Archives

Maybe We Need a WWIII To Hasten Economic Recovery

A WW turned the economy around in the 40’s. But, who would we go to war with?

Well heck, the last WW worked out well for Japan and Germany. Maybe we could do them again. And, for fair and balanced, maybe Russia and Pakistan could take on China and India, maybe get their S&P ratings up a notch as well.

That kind of talk makes just as much sense as talking of our economic problems as if caused by the Tea Party or a political party. Or, pegging our problems to spending or taxation.

As to a reason, perhaps if you started sleeping with a baby elephant in your bed for 30 years and then one night a cockroach slipped under the kivers you would complain about the cockroach.

It’s clear our problems are directly related to globalisation. But, it seems people complain about all the causal affects of globalisation. We’ve had 30 years of planning and implementation of globalisation. All the planning, modification of laws, reworking regulations, etc, would fill volumes to record.

We’ve been having one ‘crisis’ after another of late, all seemingly designed to transfer wealth from the richest countries to the developing countries. Recruiters are recommending workers take jobs paying less. Congress (Glass Steagall and later Phil Gramm) set us on a path to the housing ‘crisis’ and unregulated financial schemes that sucked home equity. Banks set on trillions while loans are tight, 401K’s/IRA’s are beat down. Access to any financial gain from small investment programs other than perhaps gold, has been shut down.

Could spout tautology forever - - dying from a million tiny cuts. I recall Bush pushing for folks to invest part of their social security funds in the stock market. Under Bush, in 2004, a social security ‘totalization’ agreement was signed with Mexico. We have a ‘totalization’ agreement with 21 countries. This agreement would allow illegal Mexicans to qualify for SS benefits after 6 quarters (18 months) of US employment. Takes US citizens 40 quarters (120 months) to qualify. As of 2010, Obama hasn’t signed the agreement. Like the NAU it was secreted from the public for several years and then floundered when surfaced.

We don’t know the half of what has gone on before. Swatting a cockroach can be your crisis for the night but you might try and keep an eye on the ever growing elephant as well.

How will we know when globalisation is fully implemented? When you are willing to take a $5-7/hr job and be glad about it.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by Roy Ellis at August 9, 2011 12:02 AM
Comment #327325

Good luck in getting any meaningful discussion of the elephant in the room. No simple “sound bite” solutions.

Posted by: Rich at August 9, 2011 6:40 AM
Comment #327330

Proposing a world war as an economic solution makes as much sense as blaming the Tea Party/Republican party for our economic problems? It’s disappointing to see so many automatically accepting the ‘blame all politicians equally’ line of thought.

Preventing a solution may not be the cause of a problem but it certainly is worthy of blame.

Posted by: Schwamp at August 9, 2011 9:21 AM
Comment #327335

How do you blame a rep for representing the views of his constituents?
Would you expect a progressive to vote for dismantling social security?

Posted by: kctim at August 9, 2011 11:32 AM
Comment #327336

yes I would expect progressives (at-least some) to ‘reform’ entitlements to help right the economy. And yes I do blame the ‘no revenue no way’ crowd for their complete lack of pragmatism.

Posted by: Schwamp at August 9, 2011 11:45 AM
Comment #327342

Actually, Roy sited the primary cause of our problems as globalization. There are few politicians of either party that did not support globalization. What gets to me is the lying pieces of crap we call politicians, constantly downplaying the negative effects of globalization, constantly reminding us of all those great high paying, high tech jobs that are replacing the jobs that were lost.

Should we blame both parties equally? Of course we should.

Blame the Republicans, almost every one of their politicians, for promoting and facilitating the current globalization policies.

Blame the liberals and the conservatives of the Democratic party for endorsing and helping to facilitate the globalization policies without regard for the many of their constituents.

Blame the progressives of the Democratic party for not being able to convince the liberals to provide the safeguards that liberals promised.

It is not globalization, but the brand of globalization that is being promoted by a small band of oligarchs through the use of money to buy our politicians.

Isn’t the real problem the fact the We The People have surrendered our political and economic power to the same brand of wealth that our Forefathers fought a Revolution to free themselves from?

Divide and conquer provides the oligarch with allies it otherwise would not have. Debt gives them power over individuals and governments alike.

IMO, we have brought this on ourselves by surrendering political power to money and just as, if not more important, our refusal to consider any alternative to our mass consumption ways that demand a lion’s share of the worlds resources. Something the rest of the world is becoming less willing to accept.

Posted by: jlw at August 9, 2011 12:59 PM
Comment #327346

I said dismantle, not reform, because that would be the equivelent of asking the Tea Party rep to do the exact opposite of what he/she were elected to do.

Posted by: kctim at August 9, 2011 1:44 PM
Comment #327356

Eloquent jlw.

Saw today where a federal court decided against allowing political contributions by foreign nationals. Of course this ruling will be appealed to the SC. We should expect a few muddied rulings for a couple of years and at some point the courts will have figured out how to work it in without much public angstm IMO.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 9, 2011 4:27 PM
Comment #327359

Have you heard of the “dead cat bounce”? After something hits bottom, it bounces, at least a little.

WWII cost millions of lives and destroyed lots of stuff. Indeed because of wise American policies after the war, the world economy recovered. But it was a heck of a price to pay.

It was NOT the massive government spending that did the trick. It was the destruction of everybody else’s stuff, the physical liquidation of capital and the elimination of millions of workers that made for the bounce.

After the Black Death in the late Middle Ages, the economy picked up. For the survivors of something like this, times can be good. But it is a lot like hitting yourself with a hammer because it feels good when you stop.

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2011 4:58 PM
Comment #327369

C&J, America did not suffer the devastation that much of the rest of the world received. It was government spending that helped build the massive economic infrastructure which helped enable America’s ability to make the wise decisions that helped the world recover.

The post war government also helped capitalism turn America into a hedonist society. TV was exceptionally helpful as well.

Roy, back during the Roberts/Alito hearings, the Democrats where hounding them on abortion. I called them scam hearings because neither of those fellas were nominated because of their views on abortion. They were nominated for their free market, pro business rulings.

I think the only members of the public that the conservatives on the Court give a damn about are the money interests and those who are enabling and cheering them on.

Posted by: jlw at August 9, 2011 7:02 PM
Comment #327371

jlw and C&J, excellent posts.
jlw, I agree with your post. I have no problem with downgraded expectations. I dislike the “need to consume” and the “service based economy”. An entirely different mindset is needed. I liken it’s end result equivalant to a society like the Nox, in the SG1 episode of the same name. The Nox were a simple living society with vastly superior technological advantages. They shielded themselves and their technology from others by living a very simple existence.

C&J, the “dead cat bounce” was a very good analogy. The rest of the world was in ruin and we just happenned to have a fully functional economy. They called it the best! They were wrong, it was the only. Since the second world war our country has benefited off of that fully functional economy. We kept electing people who would distribute this peace dividend to us. Never thinking that the eneritia was generated by a dead cat hitting the ground.

I take exception to the impact zone being WWII. It’s called WWII for a reason. It was the second one. The Great War also decimated the world and we were shielded by our oceans on either side. We prevailed in another World War with a fully functional economy. Doesn’t it sound familiar?

But was WWI when the cat hit the ground? No, I don’t think so. It was just a few short years before. The cat hit the ground in 1913.

In 1913 the Federal Reserve Act was enacted.
In 1913 the 16th Amendment was ratified.
In 1913 the 17th Amendment was ratified.

In 1913 a very live cat hit the ground. The resulting wars were a transfer of enertia. The resulting social programs were a transfer of enertia. Now the enertia has been spent and an arc is forming.

Here are a few sayings I would like to present at this point.
1. A cat has 9 lives
2. A cat always lands on it’s feet.
3. Identify the problem. Examine the 16th and 17th amendments and consider their role in our current affairs. This country was a very different country before these amendments were made. Our world looked towards our country throughout it’s early years as a beacon of hope. But in 1913, Woodrow Wilson segregated the white and black people, and treated them differently. Another reason to look at the politics of the day and relate it to the politics of today.

Identify the problem. It’s looking more and more like the federal government’s aquisition of power in 1913.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 9, 2011 7:24 PM
Comment #327373

Do you reckon we could afford another Marshall Plan after WWIII, since we have been on a perpetual Marshall Plan since the end of WWII?

Posted by: Mike at August 9, 2011 7:52 PM
Comment #327375

Mike, your question reflects the notion we are responsible for the well being of the rest of the world. We aren’t.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 9, 2011 8:01 PM
Comment #327396

Mike, yup, dying from million$ of tiny cuts. Any way to take money out of the taxpayers pockets is acceptable in breaking the back of the middle class.
Meanwhile :

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 10, 2011 11:32 AM
Comment #327405

Roy, blaming the innocent, envious class warfare?

Conservatives know who is to blame for America’s downfall. Liberals, the lazy poor and those who are in the artificial middle class.

The wealthy have done everything they can to help America over the last three decades. They need to be awarded, not criticized.

Mike, Weary, by helping the rest of the world, the middle class is helping American corporations, making the world safe for American capital investments. Surely you are not interested in harming the wealthy just to avoid a few Make the World Safe taxes. Don’t you all know that much of the defence spending is dedicated to the same goals.

Weary, you really do need to enlarge your reading list. Glen Beck is not a historian. He spins history to serve his needs.

Where things different in America before 1913? Some things where, but some things are relatively the same.

Before 1913, workers, especially the lower class workers were forced to work in conditions that most Americans today don’t know about and probably wouldn’t not believe if they did know. They certainly would not, despite conservative wishful think, accept those kinds of working conditions today. Back in those good old days, workers were awarded with a life of abject poverty, even having to take their children with them in the sweat shop factories, and coal mines, just to keep the family alive.

Back in the good old days, there were no primary elections. Politicians of both the major Parties were selected by party political bosses. If those conditions existed today, there would be no tea party candidates beating Rino’s in primary elections.

One thing that hasn’t changed is a government that is controlled by robber barons and their crony capitalism. There was a brief period of time in which the people made inroads against crony capitalism, but most of the legislation was weakened or eliminated by three consecutive Republican Administrations in the 1920’s.

A side note. Many historians give Hoover almost exclusive credit for sending millions of tons of food aid to Russia in the mid 1920’s. Millions of Russians were saved from starvation the Bolshevik regime was saved from being overthrown.

At the turn of the century, the American economy was in about the same shape that it is in today. During most of the Gay 90’s, the economy was mired in recession and depression. As a matter of fact, every decade in the 1800’s was mired by a recession or depression. Sound familiar.

By the turn of the century, a couple of decades of decent was coming to a head. Workers were moving into Revolutionary mode and the Socialists had the answers to all their problems.

The populist movement had divided into two camps, workers influenced by socialism vs. middle and upper middle class citizens who were just as fed up with a corrupt election process, a government that was owned by crony capitalist interest, and appalling working conditions and pay. But they were afraid of the socialist, and wanted nothing to do with socialist remedies.

This group of urban and rural middle and upper middle class citizens call their movement the Progressive Movement.

They wanted reforms. They wanted better working conditions, better pay for workers. They wanted primary elections where all the members of a political party could vote for a slate of candidates rather than being forced to vote for the party bosses choices.

They wanted economic reforms and more forceful regulations on business, a goal that was shared by a vast majority of businessmen. That’s right, most hard working, honest businessmen wanted reforms. They were being driven out of business by the Robber Barons and their crony capitalist government, and the use of unscrupulous and unethical business practices.

Progressives weren’t perfect by any means. The people they counted on for votes where white, xenophobic and as racist as they could be towards black citizens.

They underestimated the abilities of their wealth enemies to use that wealth to propagandize and control events.

They were naive about the peoples abilities to adjust to and use democracy to their advantage.

Yes, things were different back then and conservatives are determined to return America to the good old days, the Gay 90’s.

Posted by: jlw at August 10, 2011 2:25 PM
Comment #327421

Correction, recessions or depressions occurred every other decade in the 1800’s.

Willy, can you think of any reason why 2/3 of the Congress and 3/4 of the states would ratify the 16Th and 17Th amendments?

On Wilson, in 1911, a group of southern conservative Democrats opened a campaign headquarters in New York City for the purpose of electing Wilson president. A majority of his cabinet was composed of Southern Democrats and we all should know by now, the Jim Crow governments that conservative Democrats where running in the South.

Beck is correct in saying that the progressive movement was racist, but he fails to mention that virtually the whole damn country was racist.

Wilson wasn’t interested in social justice or universal suffrage. He felt that uneducated whites should not have the right to vote, and he detested black enfranchisement. He had no choice but to implement some of the progressive reforms because middle class progressives had become a force to be reckoned with in the Democratic Party. Enfranchisement of blacks was not one of those reforms. That had to wait another 60 or 70 years.

Wilson argued that Anglo-Saxon Americans would not tolerate domination by “an ignorant and inferior race.” The argument, the blacks want everything that whites have, they want your land, they want your women and they want to kill you, was the same argument I often heard growing up in the 1950’s. Occasionally a black family would move into town, but they never stayed long. It was a common joke to many of the white people in town that blacks where to stupid to live in a house without burning it down. The end of Wilson’s second term was tainted by race riots in several cities. White mobs attacking black communities and black mobs fighting back.

Racism did not go away with civil rights legislation, it just switched parties and toned down some of the rhetoric. My town that was totally controlled by Democrats began electing Republicans and today it is a Republican dominated village. A strip mall village that graduated 19 students last year, none of them black.

It has been my experience in life that those most racist towards blacks have had very little personal contact with them.

Conservatives are making a comeback, and they are definitely anti progressive, anti enfranchisement of the poor and minorities. Attacks on the poor and minority voters thinly disguised as a campaign against fraudulent voters. Where is the evidence for wide spread voter fraud that has in any way influenced a recent election? Obama?

Mike, 99 million over the last decade? Were where the Republicans and And Fox News on this issue during the Republican reign. What? No outrage from Republican Congressmen and Fox News about all the tax incentives given to corporations that make the offending outlays pale by comparison? I wonder how many Republicans voted for those initiatives when they were a part of The Bush democratize the world campaign.

It is called crony capitalism and if you are interested in finding out how it is empowered, just follow the Republican, Democratic, and tea party candidates down to K Street.

The argument is why should we pay more taxes to get out of this mess when the government is doing those kinds of things. Especially when conservatives know that all our problems have been caused by liberals and the poor rather than crony capitalism leading us down the path to an oligarchy of the wealthy.

I watched Point of View (POV) last night. It was an expose of the U.S. food industry and it’s ownership of the FDA.

The average chicken farmer owns two chicken barns, owes $500,000 in debt and earns $18,000 per year.

A conservative Republican woman trying to get a bill, in her sons name, passed in Congress to restore some power to the FDA after it was turned into a toothless entity by Bush and the Republicans, like many, if not all of our other regulatory agencies.

It took 12 agonizing days for her child to die of hemorrhagic e coli poisoning. 18 days after her son died, the government issued a recall of that particular batch of hamburger.

A state of the art meat processing plant with a control center that directly controls every machine in every one of the companies plants located around the country, Texas, Ohio, etc.

The company has devised a unique anti bacteria regime, they use giant washing machines to wash their meat product in Ammonia before shipping it to customers. A company spokesman bragged that the company had 70% of the market share for their product and where expecting to have 100% of the market share in less than a decade. That is where corpocracy and crony capitalism is leading America, monopolization of entire markets. That is why most businessmen were demanding regulations on business back in the bad old progressive days. That is why our great grandparents went after the two big to fail.

Posted by: jlw at August 10, 2011 6:56 PM
Comment #327426

jlw; who has controlled the FDA for the past 2 1/2 year…Bush???

Posted by: Mike at August 10, 2011 9:01 PM
Comment #327428

Again with Beck! Where did I mention Beck? Do you have a hardon for Beck, jlw?

Correction, recessions or depressions occurred every other decade in the 1800’s.

Attention, recessions or depressions occurred every other decade in the 1900’s.

You’ve been sold a bill of goods, jlw. Backed by the full faith and credit of this poor, sick, disfunctional, government.

The Federal Reserve Act was to monitor the money supply, and to prevent the booms and busts of the 19th century economic model. The history of the Federal Reserve will show it has never prevented the booms and busts it was chartered to prevent. The Federal Reserve has siphoned off the benefits linked to the innovation and efficiency of the American People thruout the 20th century via inflation. Like a parisite, the Federal Reserve continues to bleed the American people’s innovation and efficiency into it’s ever screaching maw.

In 1907 we have a panic, in 1913 we have a coop. We go from self reliant to dependent in one century. I always knew it took three generations to subvert a cause. The first to have the idea, the second to make things uncomfortable, and the third to take advantage.

I have concluded the majority of my audience at WatchBlog has taken advantage of the third generation’s way of thinking.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 10, 2011 9:09 PM
Comment #327431


“America did not suffer the devastation that much of the rest of the world received.”

You are always making my points for me. America was left stronger by the war. We were in a great - never to be repeated - position to sell to the rest of the world.

We also took nearly a half a million men out of the labor market permanently. It was a high price to pay.

Today we are spending more than we did during WWII, but it didn’t work to help the economy and is probably slowing the recovery. Don’t draw the wrong lessons from WWII.

Re working conditions - technologies improved and so did conditions. Nobody wants to go back to such things. When I worked in factories in the 1970s, we had conditions that most people would find intolerable today. We progress.

Posted by: C&J at August 10, 2011 10:36 PM
Comment #327442

You often make my point as well, C&J. In mfctring and production technology has replaced many of the workers. A small company can kick out a million cans of pork & beans a minute, etc.

Everybody knows that, understands that. So, why do we have to be so ignorant about it? We don’t need millions more people, legal or otherwise, coming here looking for jobs we don’t have and will never have again. Just like you said, we were in a postion - never to be repeated.

We don’t need tax breaks based on the number of children one has.

We don’t need corporate welfare to pay for foreign advertising for so called US corporations

We don’t need to pay the cost for relocating corporations overseas, and so on …

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 11, 2011 8:18 AM
Comment #327484

Actually, there is a growing danger of that as these 10 major abuses grow worse and worse (especially debt, and not only in the U.S., but globally).

The people in the middle east appear to be getting fed up with their dictators.

The people in several other bankrupt nations are rioting in the streets.


  • (01) $413 Billion for interest alone on the $14.5 Trillion federal national debt is $1,323 per person (or $5,295 for a family of four) per year.
  • (02) $413 Billion for interest alone is 19% of the $2.174 Trillion in total federal revenues for year 2011 (excluding the $1.65 Trillion deficit for 2011 for additional borrowing).
  • (03) $14.5 Trillion for the total federal national debt is $46,474 per person (or $186,897 for a family of four).
  • (04) The federal National Debt per-person of $46,474, is over 2.1 times larger than the previous record-high after World War II, which was $22,099 in year 1945 in today’s 2011 dollars.
  • (05) The federal National Debt per-person of $45,474, is over 8.2 times larger than the it was near the end of the Great Depression, which was $5,674 in year 1941 in today’s 2011 dollars.
  • (06) The total nation-wide debt of $57+ Trillion ($182,692 per person, or $730,769 for a family of four) is crushing the nation, and has been for decades.
  • (07) 10,483 foreclosure filings per day; 3,825,637 foreclosure filings on 2.87 Million properties in year 2010 are at record-high levels (up 23% from 2008).
  • (08) 4,301 bankruptcy filings per day (both business and non-business) are at record-high levels (1.57 Million) for the 12 months from March-2010 to March-2011.
  • (09) To stop the $14.5 Trillion of federal debt from growing larger, with an average interest rate of about 2.85% (e.g. $413 Billion of interest for year 2011) on the total $14.5 Trillion federal debt, the federal government would have to stop borrowing $1.65 Trillion per year ($4.52 Billion per day) over the current $2.174 Trillion in annual federal revenues (for year 2011), and pay down $420 Billion per year ($1.15 Billion per day) on the debt!?!
  • (10) Is the federal government too incompetent , corrupt, greedy, and arrogant to make tough decisions before it is too late?
  • (11) Will the federal government and the federal reserve be pressured to borrow and create more and more new money out of thin, risking a panic and the total debauchment of the U.S. dollar; motivated by massive debt of nightmare proportions, and pressures to keep paying the interest on the debt, and spending far beyond revenues?
  • (12) The massive debt problem is not going to go away for a very long time.
  • (13) The U.S. is the largest debtor nation on the planet, with only 4.7% of the total world population.
  • (14) The total $57 Trillion nation-wide debt is 3.8 times the $15.1 Trillion GDP, and the $14.5 Trillion of total federal debt is 96% of GDP.
  • (15) Where is all of that money going to come from, when most of all the money in existence in the U.S. already exists as debt, since money is created as debt at a fractional banking ratio of 9-to-1 of debt-to-reserves ???
    Where will the money come from to pay the interest alone, much less the principal of the $14.5 Trillion of total federal debt, or the $57 Trillion nation-wide debt, when that much money does not yet exist?

Have you ever played the game of Monopoly?
Imagine one player who can create all the money they want out of thin air.
Before too long, that person owns everything, and everyone else is broke or deep in debt.
The best way to win is quite simply not to play.

The U.S. currency is being steadily devalued, along with most international currencies, which are as bad, or worse.
The money system is quite simply a 9-to-1 Pyramid Scheme, where too much money is created out of thin air at a ratio of 9-to-1 of debt-to-reserves.
Again, where is the money going to come from to merely pay the interest on the $57 Trillion nation-wide debt, when it does not yet exist?
That is, (based on 2010 data) the M0 Money Supply is about $0.9 Trillion, M1 Money Supply is about $1.1 Trillion, and the M2 Money Supply is close to $10 Trillion.
Compare that to the $14.5 Trillion federal national debt, or the $57 Trillion of of total nation-wide debt.
Creating more debt and more money out of thin air will simply lead to a panic, and debauch the currency completely.
If that happens, it may be worse than a Great Depression.

More rampant debt and creating money out of thin air is not the solution, never has been, and never will be.
Fiscal irresponsibility has never been a good thing.

In my opinion, we have probably waited too long to turn around this Titantic mess.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least until repeated rewarding failure, FOR-SALE, corrupt, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 11, 2011 6:48 PM
Comment #327487

Both some Democrats and Republicans are right about some things, but both are very wrong about some things.

  • We do not need more taxes for everyone (if anyone). What we need first is tax reform. Like this perhaps.
  • We do not need another shamnesty for illegal aliens. We need to prosecute the greedy illegal employers, and that will solve much of the problem.
  • We do not need more debt. The federal government does not need to borrow more. It already receives $2.2 Trillion per year in revenues.
  • We do not need a fractional 9-to-1 pyramid scheme for a banking system that creates too much new money out of thin air, that intentionally targets inflation, that has caused incessant inflation for many decades, such that a 1950 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 11 cents, and a 2001 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 78 cents (or less).
  • We do not need to be giving welfare to the wealthy in the form of mega subsidies, tax breaks, etc. A lot of corporations do not pay taxes anyway. However, corporate taxes are like a regressive sales tax that is merely passed on to consumers. We do not need more wallowing in every manifestation of unchecked greed. This is mainly aimed at righty extremists.
  • We do not need a nanny state to wipe our butt, and take care of us from cradle-to-grave, that fosters dependency, and promises that we can all somehow live at the expense of everyone else. This is mainly aimed at the lefty extremists.
  • We do not need more wallowing in the blind, circular partisan warfare. We do not need more blind, misplaced loyalties to political parties that are really no different in any important way (only equally destructive).
  • We need campaign finance reform possible more than anything else, because government that is FOR-SALE is rotten to the core.
  • We do not need to spend more money on education. Throwing more money at it is not the solution. The parents are actually largely to blame. So we need better parenting too.
  • We do not need any more wars.
  • We do not need to keep rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, greedy, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election. How stupid is that? After all, the majority of voters are being tricked by a clever system that the incumbent politicians have created, in which:
    • (a) neither of the two main parties will run a challenger to run against the incumbent;
    • (b) the incumbents know their blind loyalists will never vote for anyone in the OTHER party;
    • (c) and as a result, FOR-SALE, incompetent, corrupt, and arrogant incumbent politicians are repeatedly rewarded with perpetual re-eletion;
To sum it up, we need less selfishness.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least until repeated rewarding failure, FOR-SALE, corrupt, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 11, 2011 7:10 PM
Comment #327491

C&J, loosing half a million men is a terrible loss, but there was no slack in the labor market because more than that many women joined the labor force. We certainly don’t have a shortage of labor these days, perhaps a shortage of laborers willing to work hard for something to eat.

“position to sell to the rest of the world.” By running trade deficits with rest of the world.

We are spending more today and millions of Americans enjoy a higher quality of life because of it. You yourself have commented that it has never been better in America. And besides, a stealth bomber probably costs as much as a squadron of B24’s did. Imagine how much more it cost us to build the Reagan than it cost to build the Yorktown. You could get more bang for the buck in 1942.

Is technology the only reason working conditions have improved? I have no problem in admitting that technology has helped to improve working conditions. Do you have trouble admitting that there were other factors involved as well?

If you watched POV rather than God vs Satan, you would have gained some insight into how agribusiness uses demands for technological upgrades from their contracted farmers, forcing them to go into debt to purchase that technology and thus controlling them. If they don’t do the upgrades, they loose their contract. If they loose their contract, they go bankrupt. Improvements in quality or quantity are not comparable to the costs of the technology.

Roy, there are some, especially in Congress who feel that corporations are deserving of entitlements, after all, corporations are people to.

Eliminating child deductions, good luck.

There are a number of people in this country who would have all forms of birth control banned.

Capital prefers to have a labor glut rather than a labor shortage, they just don’t want to be taxed to provide for the excess.

When you have millions with no means of support, capital can rationalize to justify 57 cents an hour.

Posted by: jlw at August 11, 2011 7:48 PM
Comment #327506

Rest assured … the majority of the wealthy have exactly what they designed.

In 1967, the wealthiest 1% owned 20% of all wealth in the U.S.

Today, in 2011, the weathiest 1% now own over 40% of all wealth.

  • Over 40% of all weatlh in U.S. is owned by a tiny 1% of wealthiest of 312 Million U.S. Population:
  • 045.0% +—————————————-
  • 042.5% +—o————————————
  • 040.0% +-o-o—————————-o-o- (over 40% owned by 1% of wealthiest)
  • 037.5% +o—-o————————o——-
  • 035.0% +——-o———————o———
  • 032.5% +———o——o—o——-o———
  • 030.0% +———-o—o——o—-o———-
  • 027.5% +————o———o—-o———-
  • 025.0% +————————o—o———-
  • 022.5% +————————o-o————
  • 020.0% +————————-o————-
  • 017.5% +—————————————-
  • 015.0% +—————————————-
  • ————1—1—1—1—1—1—1—1—2—2
  • ————9—9—9—9—9—9—9—9—0—0
  • ————2—3—4—5—6—7—8—9—0—1
  • ————0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0—0 YEAR

There are 10 major reasons for this.

But, there are extremist leftists and extremist rightists that do not want to admit their roles in this disaster. BOTH are guilty. BOTH are pathetic.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least until repeatedly rewarding failure, FOR-SALE, corrupt, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 11, 2011 9:22 PM
Comment #327532

d.a.n, a racous debate?? Called the ‘head in the sand’ syndrome. I appreciate your factual information and graph pictorals thats worth a thousand words.

With less definition for sure, we can state our situation in a few short bullets.


Otherwise - - -

Mitt Romney says ‘corporations are people’. Mitt Romney is part of the problem.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 12, 2011 1:28 PM
Comment #327638

Capital was able to achieve that 50% increase in their percentage of wealth buy buying government and by dividing the constituencies. This has allowed capital to greatly reduce their tax obligations to the nation, eliminate any pretense that capital is in any way obligated to patriotism, replace progressive wage increases with wage stagnation and easy credit, creating a great ally in the process, debt. And, kill any resistance to capitals immigration policy. Divisiveness among the constituencies have enabled capital to make gains, sometimes using the illusion of stalemate.

Congress is now hiding behind it’s debt committee. Taken as a whole, that committee is pro entitlement cuts and anti new tax revenue.

Posted by: jlw at August 13, 2011 5:21 PM
Comment #327657


The basic problem that you consistently refer to in your posts is debt, both public and private sector debt. The term, debt, seems instinctively bad. However, debt is the basis of our monetary system. Without debt, there would be virtually no money in our society. It is what drives our economic system. From that perspective, it might be considered a virtue. Too little debt and the system grinds to a halt with depression. On the other hand, too much debt can result in excessive inflation and difficulties servicing the interest.

The real issue then, it seems to me, is the nature of the monetary system. It is not very well understood. We spend a lot of time arguing about something that we have very little understanding. Those that do directly address the issue are outlier politicians like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinch and are generally dismissed as cranks.

Posted by: Rich at August 14, 2011 3:28 AM
Comment #328261


Money is just a tool.
But like with all tools, it can be abused.
Some debt is not necessarily a terribly BAD thing, and never asserted that it was.

The problem is TOO much money created AS DEBT (i.e. at a ratio of 9-to-1, or higher, in the U.S.).
The problem is TOO much debt, too much inflation, and incessant inflation year-after-year, resulting in:

  • A 2001 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 78 cents (or less).
    The problem is the $57 Trillion nation-wide debt of nightmare proportions (6.5 times the $9 Trillion M2 Money Supply of 2011).
  • A 1990 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 58 cents.
  • A 1970 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 17 cents.
  • A 1950 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 11 cents.
  • A 1913 U.S. Dollar is now only worth 04 cents.

There has been NO deflation since year 1967 ; only incessant inflation:

    ____Year-to-Year Percent Change in Value of Year 2011 U.S. Dollar (rounded to closest cent)______
  • +25% |__0_______________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +24% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +23% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +22% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +21% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +20% |___0______________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +19% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +18% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +17% |____0______________________0______________________________________________________________________
  • +16% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +15% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +14% |_____0_______________________0____________________________________________________________________
  • +13% |______0_________________________0_________________________________0_______________________________
  • +12% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • +11% |_________________________________0_________________________________0______________________________
  • +10% |__________________________________0_________________________0____0________________________________
  • +09% |_____________________________________0_______________________0____________________________________
  • +08% |____________________________________________0____0_____________0____0_____________________________
  • +07% |_____________________________________________________0__________0_________________________________
  • +06% |________________________________________________________000________________0______________________
  • +05% |___________________________________________________________0__________0_____0_____________________
  • +04% |______________________________________________________________0________0__0_______________0_______
  • +03% |_____________________________________________________________________________0000_00_0000___000__0
  • +02% |_____________________________________________________________________0__00_______0_________0____0_
  • +01% |____________________________________________________________________________________0____0________
  • +00% +000______0000000__000000000_0_00___00_000000_0000_000_00_______________________________________0__ YEAR
  • _01% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _02% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _03% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _04% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _05% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _06% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _07% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _08% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _09% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _10% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _11% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _12% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _13% |_______0__________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _14% |________0_______0_________________________________________________________________________________
  • _15% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _16% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _17% |_________________0________________________________________________________________________________
  • _18% |__________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • _____111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111222222222222
  • _____999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999000000000000
  • _____111111122222222223333333333444444444455555555556666666666777777777788888888889999999999000000000011
  • _____345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901

QUESTION: So, again, where will the money come from to merely pay the annual interest of over $1.623 Trillion per year (at only 2.85% which is probably lower than reality), when the Currency Money Supply=M0 is only about $1 Trillion ($0.723 Trillion less than all Currency), and the M1 Money Supply is only $2 Trillion, and the nation-wide debt of $57 Trillion is 6.5 times larger than the $9 Trillion M2 Money Supply (as of year 2011) ?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 26, 2011 2:26 PM
Comment #328262

Inflation and Deflation from 1913 to 2011 …

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Congress with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 26, 2011 2:34 PM
Post a comment