Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....II

[DVD Burner]

Ok ok ok,

I have had enough entertainment for right now.

I'm gonna go and make some money real quick and we can pick this up later.

OK?

Ciao for now!

[Trishntek]

If I didn't watch it, how would I know who made it?

RICH!

It's labeled on the video as such. BWWAAAA HA HA HA HA!

And no, I did not get the tax credit. And all I see are common folks gathered together because they can see past 5 minutes and realize this country is going to the poor house on the express lane. Simply put, tax credits or taxing 100% of all our income is not going to get us out of the hole the U.S. GUBMINT has been digging since the founding of the Federal Reserve. It has nothing to do with His Heinous, W, Slick Willy or Jimmy! It has everything to do with us not holding our representative gubmint accountable. It has everything to do with absolute power corrupting the system absolutely!

You want to be a gubmint dependent? Fine! I do not want to be a gubmint dependent. The only reason "social justice" exists is to make sure the standard of living is leveled to the lowest common denominator. While the elite live above the minions as has happened throughout the history of mankind. There is nothing new here,,,, just new for we who cherish the fragile, special society formerly known as the United States of America.

AH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! This is tooo funny!


YOU ARE A TEA PARTYER!


Ha ha ha ha ha!

You quoted EXACTLY word for word what everyone in the video said.

I bet you watch Fox news also.

LOL!

Well if Turks and New Left Media are your sources,,, your are indeed in a lofty place,,,,, Let us all bow to the mighty and wise DVD whose opinion is beyond repute and life is a fine example of mediocrity! Alll Hailll!!!

[DVD Burner]

Thank you for the Hail but I assure you, it's unnecessary.

There is nothing wrong with hangin with people that are smarter than you are.

Even Bil Gates does it.

[littleflower]

The problem we have though is the gubmint. Yeah GS did some unsavory things, but were they legal? Yup they sure were!

I am not a lawyer, but from my mildly educated lay perspective the emails so far from Goldman Sachs give ample evidence of fraud and insider trading.

But again, the more important thing to note is that this is a sick system. The government is at fault because it is colluding with those who are acquiring the wealth. The super rich are at fault because they are too greedy to see that they are poisoning the well. And the rest of us are at fault for not raising more of a stink about it. Saying the the government is the problem avoids facing the systemic nature of the problem.

One can blame the Equal Housing Act, but that does not explain the speculators, it does not explain the deliberate misleading of those who were clearly not going to pay back the loans, it does not explain the "securitization" of opaque bundles backed by weak mortgages, and it does not explain the "big short" taken by certain firms who sold shit while betting it would stink.

Please note that I'm not defending the government, but making it the big enemy is inaccurate. My earlier point still stands, the government's least controversial role is collective defense, and in my view we are being attacked.

but, doc......
has the system ever not been sick?

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

is there a good example of a government that isn't prone to power-mongering and greed?

i do not mean to suggest that the GS gang aren't a bunch of greedy assholes .... but i think it is a huge mistake to assume that all, or even most, of the greed and corruption lays in the hands of business people. personally, i think it's everywhere ..... some people just have more opportunity than others to take advantage. people in government, meanwhile, have more power than most, and right now i worry that they will abuse it in a huge and counterproductive way.

the solution to this problem eludes me, though.

[gyre]

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

I don't understand this question.
Is this a proposal?

[DVD Burner]

i do not mean to suggest that the GS gang aren't a bunch of greedy assholes .... but i think it is a huge mistake to assume that all, or even most, of the greed and corruption lays in the hands of business people. personally, i think it's everywhere ..... some people just have more opportunity than others to take advantage. people in government, meanwhile, have more power than most, and right now i worry that they will abuse it in a huge and counterproductive way.

the solution to this problem eludes me, though.

Well here is what Peter Buffet has to say about this:

[youtube][/youtube]

[DVD Burner]

In other news:



[youtube][/youtube]



Baseball, tourism caught in boycott of Arizona law

(Reuters) - Immigration rights activists called on baseball fans on Tuesday to stay home from Arizona Diamondbacks games as part of a broad economic boycott to protest a statewide crackdown on illegal immigration signed into law in Arizona.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6 ... mesticNews

As a backlash by Hispanic groups, organized labor and civil liberties activists gained steam, officials in two of California's biggest cities also moved to cut ties with companies based in the neighboring border state of Arizona.

Opponents of the state immigration law, the toughest on the books in the United States, urged travelers to avoid the tourism-dependent Grand Canyon state and for business groups and other organizations to hold their conventions elsewhere.

The Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association said six organizations had canceled conventions in the state, including the 11,000-member Immigration Lawyers Association, which had planned to hold its annual fall meeting in Scottsdale.

"There is widespread indignation not only in Arizona but throughout the country, and where people are under siege, they will look for ways to fight back," said Pablo Alvarado, executive director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network.

The furor was sparked on Friday when Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law a controversial measure designed by Republican sponsors to drive the state's illegal immigrants, the majority of them from Mexico, back to their home country.

Slated to take effect 90 days after the current session of the state legislature adjourns, the statute requires state and local police to determine a person's immigration status if there is "reasonable suspicion" that they are undocumented -- a mandate that critics say opens the door to racial profiling.

Opponents charge the measure amounts to an unconstitutional infringement on the exclusive authority of the federal government to control immigration, and a court challenge to the measure is widely expected.

Enactment of the measure has spurred a renewed push on President Barack Obama to make good on his campaign promise to press for comprehensive federal immigration reform.

But Arizona's Major League Baseball team, the Diamondbacks, became the first high-profile target of immigrant rights activists seeking to roll back the Arizona law, known as Senate Bill 1070.

BASEBALL 'AMBASSADORS' TARGETED

"The Diamondbacks are like ambassadors from Arizona to the rest of the country, and the world for that matter, and we want fans to stay away until the law is rescinded or neutralized," said Tony Herrera, an activist with a national group calling itself the Great Arizona Boycott 2010.

Herrera said his group is urging fans to refrain not only from going to Diamondback games, but also from buying the club's T-shirts and other merchandise. He said activists would form picket lines to pressure fans not to attend a game in Chicago against the Cubs scheduled for Thursday.

The Diamondbacks had no immediate comment on Tuesday.

Arizona is home to an estimated 460,000 of some 10.8 million illegal immigrants in the United States and form the backbone of a shadow labor force that works in industries ranging from construction and agriculture to restaurants and child care.

Calls for an Arizona boycott spread beyond the state.

On Tuesday, a Los Angeles City councilwoman introduced a resolution calling for America's second-largest city to end all contracts with Arizona-based companies and "stop doing business with the state."

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera on Monday urged the city to boycott Arizona-based businesses.

Some Arizona Democrats who opposed the immigration crackdown nevertheless are uncomfortable with the boycott and said their state as whole should not be punished.

(Additional reporting by Steve Gorman and Dan Whitcomb in Los Angeles; Editing by Mary Milliken and Eric Walsh)



AWWWW YEAH!

[FIGJAM]

The state passed a law to enforce a federal law. The legal term is illegal alien. It dosent matter how much people dont like it. It is what it is. I dont care if someone is legal or illegal, but if the law is not going to be inforced, theres a few laws id like to be exempt from.

[Trishntek]

I'll gladly display my feeble mind by asking, "What is wrong with proving your identity when suspected of breaking the law?" Whenever I've had the displeasure of an official conversation with a LEO, a proof of identity is required.

The law is written to imply an individual must be doing something to warrant reasonable cause for a crime other than invading the U.S. To think LEO's have nothing better to do than go out of their way seeking illegals is ridiculous. Yeah it is possible, but given the AZ situation, to do nothing would be worse. Maybe it will get the gubmint back to a chore it SHOULD be doing.

And DMV,,, we already know you have no opinion of your own and will disrespect anyone who does,,,, so what's new?

[DVD Burner]

I'm gonna give you a chance for your "feeble mind" to catch up by allowing you some time to read and look at the video I have already posted because it already answers all of your questions.

[DVD Burner]

ok, so here's how stupid republicans and Tea party dumb dumbs are.

Who do you think is going to win all elections in Arizona?


BWWWWAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

[dr.placebo]

but, doc......
has the system ever not been sick?

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

is there a good example of a government that isn't prone to power-mongering and greed?

i do not mean to suggest that the GS gang aren't a bunch of greedy assholes .... but i think it is a huge mistake to assume that all, or even most, of the greed and corruption lays in the hands of business people. personally, i think it's everywhere ..... some people just have more opportunity than others to take advantage. people in government, meanwhile, have more power than most, and right now i worry that they will abuse it in a huge and counterproductive way.

the solution to this problem eludes me, though.

Has the system ever not been sick? Well, no, but the current state is especially bad if you look at the concentration of wealth and the decline of the middle class. Such descriptions are necessarily relative.

The notion that this government is going to "impoverish the wealthy" is neither likely nor desirable. I would oppose any proposal that seriously advanced that notion, although I also think that the wealthy don't pay enough. I've said before that I like a meritocracy, in particular one that rewards those who contribute to the common good. I strongly disagree that the current financial mess came about through the actions of the meritorious.

I do not think that greed and corruption lies in the hands of business people. Most people in business try to obey the laws, pay their taxes, and otherwise contribute to the health of the community. I personally work for a large corporation that has energetically sought to be egalitarian in their hiring and green in their production. And there are some executives of this firm that I believe have committed fraud (they are no longer with the company). If there is a pure hearted organization in this country then I am quite unaware of it.

It is correct to be concerned about abuse of power by the government. In my opinion the recent actions in AZ and OK bear that out. But if you look at the recent industrial "accidents" in the coal mines and oil rigs, you see that there is a lot to be concerned when government fails to protect its citizens from the abuse of power by those who value profit over life.

I want to emphasize that I don't think that government is inherently good or that those in business are inherently bad. I do think that the current system is sick and out of balance, and that the public at large is being diverted by a lot of manufactured disputes.

[ygmir]

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

I don't understand this question.
Is this a proposal?

how can you not understand that? Unless,you feel that the "Robin Hood" manifesto is your preferred method.

[littleflower]

i do not mean to suggest that the GS gang aren't a bunch of greedy assholes .... but i think it is a huge mistake to assume that all, or even most, of the greed and corruption lays in the hands of business people. personally, i think it's everywhere ..... some people just have more opportunity than others to take advantage. people in government, meanwhile, have more power than most, and right now i worry that they will abuse it in a huge and counterproductive way.

the solution to this problem eludes me, though.

Well here is what Peter Buffet has to say about this:

[youtube][/youtube]

i do not see how this addresses my question, DVD. i did enjoy what he has to say, though ... especially the part about his father giving 99% of his money to charity. please note that W.B. is giving his wealth to charities of his own choice rather than the government ... i.e. ...

he trusts charitable organizations to do the job of helping the poor more than he trusts the government.

i agree.

[DVD Burner]

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

I don't understand this question.
Is this a proposal?

how can you not understand that? Unless,you feel that the "Robin Hood" manifesto is your preferred method.

Ok, lets analyze this shall we?

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

Ok, if one is wealthy, how is it the government will impoverish them?

There is no way the lower and middle class will become wealthy from that.

So I'm gonna go against what Trishntek said and post my opinion about this "impoverished wealthy" philosophy.

Only a moron could come up with a theory like this.

Only wealthy people make themselves broke.

Please post an example of a fat rich cat that goes broke because of the government. And please dont post about Madoff. Lets leave all fraud cases out of this.

[DVD Burner]

i do not see how this addresses my question, DVD. i did enjoy what he has to say, though ... especially the part about his father giving 99% of his money to charity. please note that W.B. is giving his wealth to charities of his own choice rather than the government ... i.e. ...

he trusts charitable organizations to do the job of helping the poor more than he trusts the government.

i agree.

Ok, we posted at the same time so I'm gonna just leave it at, my answer above further addresses your question both here and previously.

[littleflower]

my tongue was very firmly in my cheek when i wrote "impoverished."

i was referring to taxes. but that's the joke anyhow .... because people like warren buffet (or the kennedys, or pelosis, or whomever) are never the target of taxation in the first place. they will retain their wealth and position with the current and proposed tax laws, unlike families making $250K /year ... and i can assure you that a middle aged family in SF or LA or NYC making $250K is NOT wealthy. it sounds like a lot, but it's no where near enough to fly a private jet around ... especially since much of that income is likely to be tied up in non-liquid assets. another huge chunk will go to their mortgage. and education. &c &c

so i will change the question to this: how much is it OK to for the government to take? 50%? 75%? 95%?

and what then? how will the government create equality by taking from those who are producing wealth and giving it to those who don't?

[DVD Burner]

my tongue was very firmly in my cheek when i wrote "impoverished."

i was referring to taxes. but that's the joke anyhow .... because people like warren buffet (or the kennedys, or pelosis, or whomever) are never the target of taxation in the first place. they will retain their wealth and position with the current and proposed tax laws, unlike families making $250K /year ... and i can assure you that a middle aged family in SF or LA or NYC making $250K is NOT wealthy. it sounds like a lot, but it's no where near enough to fly a private jet around ... especially since much of that income is likely to be tied up in non-liquid assets. another huge chunk will go to their mortgage. and education. &c &c

so i will change the question to this: how much is it OK to for the government to take? 50%? 75%? 95%?

and what then? how will the government create equality by taking from those who are producing wealth and giving it to those who don't?

Ok, fair enough.

I'm gonna put it this way, if there are individuals that make 250,000.00 a year, (singly) believe it or not there are ways to invest parts of that money to make twice the amount.

If an individual cant do that, well then too bad, but I sure know how to do it.

Taking 25% in taxes from 250,000.00 is really a bit but I can assure you it will not go all or in the least bit to the poor. And besides, do you have a better suggestion as to how to get all the homeless people off the street or would you prefer them to just be there, get arrested only to be back on the street again?

What are your suggestions?

[gyre]

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

I don't understand this question.
Is this a proposal?

how can you not understand that? Unless,you feel that the "Robin Hood" manifesto is your preferred method.

I have no idea what the robin hood manifesto is.

I probably should have edited for clarity, but the idea is so out there I was wondering what it is in response to, or if I missed the post referring to it.

using government to impoverish the wealthy

[can't sit still]

How much should the GOV take? It all depends where they take it from and how they take it. In the general economy, taxes have a 3X negative multiplier. They raise taxes $ 1 and the economy declines $ 3. It also depends what they do with it.
If GOV spends $ 1 trillion on infrastructure improvements, it facilitates commerce and employs people. If they spend that same amount on overpriced defense [offense] hardware, it does far less good for the general economy.
If it goes into bonds, it's almost useless.
Imagine a farmer who has a great year and comes up with $ 100,000 extra. If he buys gold, the money isn't working in the general economy. If he buys more land and produces more and hires more people, he's helping the general economy. If he buys GOV bonds, he's financing a non-productive parasite.
GOV may promote some R&D,, for defense, of course but, if the money is burned up paying for expensive lawyers to argue with each other, it's just burned up by parasites who produce nothing.

[Trishntek]

Agree CSS.

I find it a shame that we are so alienated from the gubmint where it has become "them" and "us". Taking instead of investing. It would truly be a wonderful world if we had a government we could gladly support and trust. The character of our leadership is corrupt. Their priorities are not ours. Their goals are not our goals. Their motive is selfish, greedy and unconstitutional.

[DVD Burner]

So stop paying taxes.

This is not a new idea nor a new topic on this board. In the other politics thread it's mentioned several times how to not pay the taxes legally.

[littleflower]

but, doc......
has the system ever not been sick?

is there any proof that using government to impoverish the wealthy will lead to more prosperity in the lower and middle classes?

is there a good example of a government that isn't prone to power-mongering and greed?

i do not mean to suggest that the GS gang aren't a bunch of greedy assholes .... but i think it is a huge mistake to assume that all, or even most, of the greed and corruption lays in the hands of business people. personally, i think it's everywhere ..... some people just have more opportunity than others to take advantage. people in government, meanwhile, have more power than most, and right now i worry that they will abuse it in a huge and counterproductive way.

the solution to this problem eludes me, though.

Has the system ever not been sick? Well, no, but the current state is especially bad if you look at the concentration of wealth and the decline of the middle class. Such descriptions are necessarily relative.

The notion that this government is going to "impoverish the wealthy" is neither likely nor desirable. I would oppose any proposal that seriously advanced that notion, although I also think that the wealthy don't pay enough. I've said before that I like a meritocracy, in particular one that rewards those who contribute to the common good. I strongly disagree that the current financial mess came about through the actions of the meritorious.

I do not think that greed and corruption lies in the hands of business people. Most people in business try to obey the laws, pay their taxes, and otherwise contribute to the health of the community. I personally work for a large corporation that has energetically sought to be egalitarian in their hiring and green in their production. And there are some executives of this firm that I believe have committed fraud (they are no longer with the company). If there is a pure hearted organization in this country then I am quite unaware of it.

It is correct to be concerned about abuse of power by the government. In my opinion the recent actions in AZ and OK bear that out. But if you look at the recent industrial "accidents" in the coal mines and oil rigs, you see that there is a lot to be concerned when government fails to protect its citizens from the abuse of power by those who value profit over life.

I want to emphasize that I don't think that government is inherently good or that those in business are inherently bad. I do think that the current system is sick and out of balance, and that the public at large is being diverted by a lot of manufactured disputes.

i wonder about the rich/poor divide. certainly it is very wide, but .... when i compare the current middle class to what my parents had, i wonder whether the gap is so very important. methinks the vast majority of people can get what they really need in the current system. and a great many do not think they need a big house or expensive car ... it's a personal failing, IMHO, to hold a grudge against those who have them (and no, i don't have either.)

risky jobs are nothing new. coal mines are much safer to-day than 40+ years ago. i'm not sure it makes sense to require them to be foolproof, any more than we can expect our retirement investments to be 100% safe. the government will investigate, lawsuits will ensue, negligent people will be punished, life will go on.

but government meddling can cripple this country without any guarantee of improvement. they take more and more of our money and reduce our personal choices by making laws to "protect" us. and who are the government? they are people, always different people ... some you agree with, some you don't. but once the power is in their hands, it can be difficult to take back. it's hard to explain how i feel about it, other than to say that it's crazy to make policy based on a few accidents, or ultra-greedy people, or random incidents because they may have an adverse affect on a great majority.

life involves risk. always has, always will. there are unscrupulous people. always have been, always will be. helping those in need is fine, but you can't take too much from those who produce wealth to support those who don't. it's all a manner of balance, i think.

[gyre]

We are rapidly approaching a ratio of capital in the hands of so few relative to everyone else, that only exists in fascist countries....with the exception of the usa.

The survival of democracy and this ratio are considered to be connected.

This risk was recognized in the days of robber barons, but we have already passed the ratio that terrified them.
I think Buffett has addressed this issue more than once.

The trend continues in this economy, and continues accelerating.

[gyre]

Quote of the Day

Senate To Goldman Sachs

"Do you think you should be marketing and promoting shitty investments to your customers?"

The answer was yes.

__________________________________________________________

Noteworthy that the Goldman Sachs hearings led the news in the rest of the world, but could not be broadcast here without censorship.
We're talking about the Senate.

Even in UK, that bastion of censorship, they had too much respect for the Senate to require subtitles.

[DVD Burner]

Quote of the Day

Senate To Goldman Sachs

"Do you think you should be marketing and promoting shitty investments to your customers?"

The answer was yes.

__________________________________________________________

Noteworthy that the Goldman Sachs hearings led the news in the rest of the world, but could not be broadcast here without censorship.
We're talking about the Senate.

Even in UK, that bastion of censorship, they had too much respect for the Senate to require subtitles.

[youtube][/youtube]



Too much fun!

[DVD Burner]

It's fucking amazing what idiots will do with lots of money or how they can make even more lots of money....


SITTING ON THEIR FUCKING DUMB LAZY FUCKING ASSES DOING NOTHING............sorry......DOING NOTHING BUT LYING!


Mind you, these are the same kinda folk that call others that dont look like them just what I called these ass wipes.


How much were/are these ass wipes making a month sitting on their asses?

Oh and I bet they are worrying about taxes also.


And please dont tell me about the culture of Goldman Sachs. I WORKED FOR GOLDMAN SACHS FOR A FUCKIN YEAR!

In Chicago no less. In the fuckin Sears towers and ate everyday in the Wolfgang puck restaurant.

[knowmad]

To capitulate to capitalism without capital is to be civil without Civilization.

[DVD Burner]

One last thing about these GS idiots, yes they are idiots. Why are they idiots?

Because they thought they were slick and no one would go through all of the 22,000 pages or so, of emails in time enough before they got to the hearing.

Another reason why stupid people should not be rich.

[DVD Burner]

Jeb Bush Opposes Arizona Immigration Law

Wednesday, 28 Apr 2010 09:18 AM


By: Dan Weil

http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Jeb-Bush ... /id/357137

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush says he opposes the new Arizona immigration law, making him the first top national Republican figure to do so.

The new rules make policemen check the status of any immigrants they reasonably suspect to be here illegally and arrest them if they can't prove they are here legally.

"I think it creates unintended consequences," Bush told Politico. "It's difficult for me to imagine how you're going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well."

Bush explains that after giving a speech Monday night, a Hispanic man expressed his concern that the law will foster racial discrimination and unfair targeting of Hispanics.

"He said, 'My parents live here, my grandparents live here — I'm Mexican-American. I could be picked up.'"

The uproar that sparked the Arizona bill is understandable, Bush says. But he maintains that immigration should remain a federal issue.

"I don't think this is the proper approach," he said.

Bush and his brother believe comprehensive immigration reform is the way to go. Jeb Bush favors tougher border security and permitting more immigrants to become citizens.

He sees a bright spot in the Arizona law, calling it "an opportunity, not a problem." That’s because it makes clear the need for a new federal immigration law.

Today Bush will be part of a conference call sponsored by Conservatives for Comprehensive Immigration Reform to push for such a law, The Washington Post reports.

Carlos Gutierrez, who served as Commerce Secretary under George W. Bush, will also be on the call.

Bush said it represents a "nationwide strategy call with key business and Evangelical leaders to share convictions around the need for immigration reform this year."

Bush's comments Tuesday coincided with former Florida Republican Senate candidate Marco Rubio’s announcement that he too opposes the Arizona law.