• http://thefeministwire.com/2011/11/occupy-rape-culture/

     

    If Occupy wall street is primarily unemployeed young people on drugs its quite possible that it has a higher predominance of rape relative to the rest of society.

     

    If there is a rape culture then that needs to stick to the organizers, those who fund it etc.

     

    Thats how reality works.

  • comment on a post Top 1% Doubled Income In Last 30 Years - CBO Report over 2 years ago

    The core issue is something called Moore's law.

     

    Basically it says that within the silicone industry real production in terms of utility per dollar is increasing by a factor of 2 every 1.5 years.  Thats between 58% and 59% growth every year for the last 40 years.  If you are involved in this small segment of industry you get massively wildly rich.  Microsoft, HP, apple, facebook, paypal, amazon, ebay, intel, google etc.  And the problem is that the entire wealth of these industries is encapsolated down to a few thousand or tens of thousand people who COULD EASILY TAKE THEIR TOYS AND GO PLAY SOMEWHERE ELSE.  

    If you want to talk about the kennedy's, rockafellers or other rich families who are not actively "earning" their money then thats one thing.  Estate tax or some form of tax that increses with the length of time a family has been rich so Kennedy Jr would pay more than Kennedy Sr and would have to provide new value or lose the empire over time.  But if you want to talk about the Steve Jobs types as though they stole money from the occupy New York kids thats something different.

     

    The real villians here are the WORKERS at the financial institutions.  Its the stock brokers who actually start out not rich and manage to skim MASSIVE amounts of money from granny while making her 5-6% which any computer program could easily have done by investing in the S&P 500 and adjusting quarterly.  Thats who needs to be limited.  

    Steve Jobs owned 7 Billion dollars and lived in 1 house.  Stock brokers make 1 million a year and spend half of it on consumption.  In theory Jobs is thousands and thousands of times richer than me, but in practice he maybe spends 20 times more than me, In theory the broker is maybe 10-20 times richer than me but they spend 10-20 times more money on comsumption.  Controlling money doesn't rob people of things in general, but consumption does.  If Jobs bought 7 billion dollars of gold my life is unaffected unless my passion is hording gold.  If 10,000 stock brokers are willing to pay high rents in NYC then the protestors there can't afford to stay in a hotel because of the realestate realities.

     

    The real problem in this nation is that CEOs who are workers not owners have started paying themselves such high salaries when in most cases they don't actually add that kind of value.  The simple fix is to make corporate taxes such that anyone paying an employee more than the US president in sallary gets a 10% tax penalty unless they have a 70:1 ratio between highest paid and lowest paid employee or something like that.  The market would fix that problem in a heart beat.

     

    That brings back fairness.  Its fair for the janitor at google to get rich too.  But you can't hold back the googles of the world or they will simply move to the bahamas and gut your tax base.  Protect the ones who actually add value and penalize the ones who really don't.  And don't get confused about those who are holding but never spending money that isn't really competing with your consumption.

     

  • comment on a post Autocritiquing Occupy over 2 years ago

    Normal people understand 3 things of relevance

     

    1)  corporations are not people and this is a threat to democracy

     

    2)  the rich got bailed out and the poor didn't

     

    3)  Obama and the entire left establishment don't know what they are doing regarding the economy

     

    If you put your eggs in basket 1 or basket 2 you may even have tea party support.  If you try and fight basket 3 you lose lose lose.

     

    I am pretty confident the OWS will choose unwisely.  They are not fundamentally poor.  They are not terribly educated.  And they are vain reflections of the neocons who have bought into the idea that they can overpower people into agreeing wtih them.

     

    Just look at the vocabulary

     

    Occupy

    Overthrow

    agree with us before the violence starts etc.

     

    The reality is if there was a shooting war in the USA the politics would move to the right not the left.

    Almost all the organization in this country will chooose to keep their money or opt for rules where by the organized can get their money back from the disorganized quickly.

     

    The tone needs to be a basic fairness issue.

     

    Why are the super rich making so much money for doing nothing and the poor are losing everything?

     

    Name and shame works.  Name the individuals and shame them.

     

    Name and blame or Name and threaten much less so.

  • Understand what you are selling and what they are wanting to buy.

     

    Everyone wants healthcare.  Prenatal health care is free in many states because a little bit of food and vitamins can dramatically change a child's future and States make money by providing access to these services and then enjoying the taxes from a non medically compromised adult 18 years later.

     

    But not everyone wants to be moving money from the middle class to pay for the poor elderly who will never pay more taxes.

     

    The first is fundamentally an investment and second is a consumption that is only attractive to those who's belief is that we are all equal earner and non earner and should have certain consumptions assured to all.

     

    Intelligent use of policy would have moved health care up to where the majority of people feel comfortable with it being.  This wouldn't have given Obama much of what he was seeking but it would have stood the test of time.  Social Security is an example of this, it doesn't really make the poor less poor.  Instead it forces the poor, and the rich foolish to invest for their future when they probably wouldn't have and by doing so improves their quality of life in a way that they are happy about once they receive it.

     

    Progressives are constantly trying to move PAST what the majority want.  Because of this people don't trust them as much as the people who want to stay where we are and move slower than what the majority is comfortable with.

     

    Clear simple example:

     

    Assertion:

    The overwhelming majority of people want to pay into a program that gives free health care to the poor.

     

    Test case:

    Circulate a petition for your HMO to give certain health care services to the homeless at the expense of those who pay into the HMO.

     

    Demonstration:

     

    If you are right this would be popular and you could effect change quickly as your HMO could advertise that they have this program and other competitors don't.

     

     

    Progressive Double think:

     

    The people want it they just don't realize they want it and they need government to force it on them first.  They would be willing to accept it but they don't actually actively want it yet.

     

    And that is how you lose elections.

  • comment on a post Cenk Rips CNN Obama Analysis By Fareed Zakaria over 2 years ago

    The tea part was willing to shut down the government.

     

    Liberals who think the government is so efficient that close scrutiny won't find things that are unpopular are foolish.

     

    America spends more money than it makes.  Why?  Why is there a massive ~70 trillion accounts shortage going forward?

     

    Because we have promised more than we can deliver and over time its balanced to promise more and more regardless of our means to pay.

     

    If you are a big fan of medicare as is, social security as is and military spending as is you really don't want to have this discussion in public.

     

    There is now a wing of the right that is willing to cut military spending in half so long as medicare/social security etc are cut in half.

     

    They are ready for the outcomes.

     

    All the compromise fantasy that the liberals have is foolish.  The idea that if the democratic party had stood up the GOP would have blinked is foolish.  Its a fundemental failure to understand the issues that are occurring.

     

    They are like children who believe in laws and fairness without understanding that laws are only effective because policemen have guns.

     

    Possible outcomes were

     

    1)  Give tea party what they wanted and pass a deal

    2)  No deal and shutdown government stop paying people, this would force the president to decide which programs actually are important and cut the rest in the span of a week.  He would have to justify all of these decisions to the public and you would own them.

    3)  Keep paying the social programs and stop paying the debt.  This would raise borrowing costs and insure that step 2 would have to happen.  There was literally no way for the tea party to lose because this is exactly what they said they would do when they were elected.

     

    Thats how politics actually works.

     

    When it comes time for Bush taxes to expire Obama could play tough.  Problem is no matter how you think people are all in favor of taxing the rich the reality is they actually aren't.  The GOP who just had a massive victory in 2010 didn't run on tax the rich.  The GOP who will retake the senate in 2012 unless they suffer a massive 66% to 33% defeat will not run on tax the rich.  If Obama says the rich should pay their fair share he will lose giving the GOP all three branches.  Is that really what you personally are pushing for?

     

    The liberals are delusional about what people actually want.  Go to dailykos.com you will actually hear people talk about how people agree with them its just that they don't realize they agree with them.  Its delusional.

     

    The loss in 2010 was massive and has built into it a senate loss in 2012.  Obama is tanking.

     

    But vote Nader because Gore and Bush are the same.  Its not like it has ever not worked out for you in the past.  After all you guys are always right.....at least in your own minds.

     

    And to think Bill and Hillary could have been taking care of all this for the last 3 years...*sigh*

     

    Thanks again Dean, kos, pelosi, kennedy, obama  thanks a whole lot.

  • comment on a post What Caused The London Riots? over 2 years ago

    England has a culture of hooliganism.  Just ask all of Europe.  They have special rules for British soccer fans because over and over again the Brits riot.  Why?  Why?  Why?  Because they have a culture of being hooligans.  Google it.

     

    What caused the riots?  Those who chose to riot.  Those who view it as a right whenever they are frustrated.

     

    There was a questionable shooting of someone who appears to be a minor crime figure.

    Did he shoot first?  Did he shoot at all?  Was the gun an illegal weapon in England a sign that he was a drug dealer?  I don't know.  And honestly you don't know either.

    Nor do all the rioters.

     

    They all buy into the theory that society is victimizing them and any action on their behalf is justified because they are the victims here.

     

    The eloquent man is clearly stating their worldview.  The inability of the poor to speak proper english - societies fault.  The inability of the poor to gain an education either in school or from personal study outside of organized school - societies fault.  The choice of the poor to do drugs - societies fault.  The inability of the poor to get high paying jobs while speaking poor english, being generally willfully ignorant in addition to being uneducated, doing drugs and generally having a problem with authority - societies fault.

     

    He is using the talking points of the mob.  Maybe like the mafia lawyer he claims no involvement.  Maybe he just happens to share their worldview.  Maybe illusions to race riots in the past and the interviewers non involvement didn't mean he himself was involved.

     

    But the more we stand with the mobs talking points.  The more we try to absolve those who destroy any personal responsibility the more we take up their worldview and strengthen their cause.

     

    What next how the Vancouver riots were all about how society has let sports watchers down somehow?  Didn't listen to their feelings?  Those poor rioters who felt they had to riot just to show that they should be the center of the universe.

     

    So who caused the riots?

     

    Liberals who breed the belief that the poor are so inferior, minorities are so inferior, teens are so inferior that they are incapable of being responsible for anything.  Thats the world view that created these riots.

     

    Until you can stop viewing the poor as subhuman and actually expect from them the same behavior you expect from your own children you will continue to create this culture of riots and extreme poverty.

  • comment on a post PCCC: 300,000+ GOTV calls made in Wisconsin over 2 years ago

    Make no mistake progressives did this with their inept political skills.

     

    Moderate center is the best you can hope for.

     

    If  Al Gore is too conservative for you then you get George Bush.

     

    If Hillary Clinton is not to your liking then you get the Obama/Carter replay.

     

    Progressives can either learn their place in the grand scheme of things or continue to have their agenda dismantled piece by piece.

     

    Its DLC or GOP pick one.

  • comment on a post Why Does Cenk Uygur Criticize Obama? over 2 years ago

    Bill Clinton understands what needs to happen.

     

    Bill Clinton is willing to go against his own base to do the right thing.

    His recent argument for lower corporate taxes and closing the corporate tax loopholes is a clear example.  As is the obvious lets cut spending and raise taxes but make it gradual so that it doesn't kill the recovery.  Such an obvious idea but only Bill Clinton is rooting for it.

     

    This is a Pelosi, Dean, dailykos recession because Bill and Hillary Clinton would have fixed this mess by now to the point that people would be SURE they were the right team for the next 5 years.

     

    Thanks for the slow recovery progressives.

     

    Thanks again for taking democracy from us Howard Dean

  • You just can't.

     

    The crime of sending Obama over Hillary in 2008 was not just that he isn't as politically savvy as the Clintons and doesn't have the experience, connections and generally respect that they do, it was also that he will be our guy for 8 years.

     

    And after that 8 years you will still have to tip toe around and pretend like he knew what he was doing until we get a real black president who actually knows what he is doing.  Even then you won't be able to be really honest about Obama being woefully under prepared and generally not nearly as clever as he was packaged as being.

     

    But on the bright side it will be easier to elect a black president in the future.  

     

     

    Only way your could possibly primary him would be with a black candidate.  

  • comment on a post Wall Street Tax To Pay For Public Colleges? over 2 years ago

    If we end up with waitresses who have advanced literary degrees that cost $40,000 this will be a total waste of money.  Of if you grow millions of want to be musicians with $30,000 in guitar lessons etc.

     

    If we convert those waitresses into PHD chemists or PHD geneticists thats a total different story.

     

    The education would have to be focused on fields that actually make America Richer and also on students who actually will be able to do something with that knowledge.

     

    Having every blue collar worker take 4-6 years out and then return to being blue collar workers would sacrifice literally 10% of their total working lives.

     

    Unless you are changing their career direction this will be a massive mistake.

  • comment on a post As gas prices rise, public seeks alternatives to oil over 2 years ago

    Going solar for our car oil will cost about 8.5 trillion at current prices.  Thats ~$21,500 per person for the solar generation alone.  This doesn't count having to buy a new car to use the solar power.

     

    I favor the eventual move to solar/wind/thermal/nuke.

     

    But we need to do it slowly as recent studies suggest most American's don't have a spare $2000 let alone a spare $21,500

     

    If we set a hard goal of increasing the renewable percentage by 1% each year or maybe 10% annual growth of its current less than 10% number.  Or alternately of spending 200 billion per year on buying solar.

     

    But we are going to get more than 50% of our power from oil/coal for a long long time.

  • comment on a post Hello???? What happened to MyDD? over 2 years ago

    A wing of the party was told to F off and they did.

  • comment on a post 9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes over 2 years ago

    1)  The poor not paying tax is a massive massive massive problem.

    If you ever reach a point that the voting majority isn't paying taxes your civilization dies.

    Its human nature to convince yourself that if something appears to be free and you like it that you want more of it.  The second 50%+1 of the voting public is getting something for free at any political level your system breaks.  I mean either the rich bring out the guns and kill everyone breaks or the poor seize control and start printing worthless money breaks.  Either way civilization as you know it ends.

     

    2)  Social security is mostly not a tax.  Its forced savings.  Don't call it a tax.  If it really were a  tax our tax rate would be ~50% of income.  You can't say the rich have all the money, so the poor shouldn't pay any tax and then say the rich don't pay their share of taxes.  It just makes you look like you don't understand reality.

     

    3) This may very well be a real thing.  During history there have been periods where we had economic growth.  We should move our taxes for both the rich and the poor towards the rates that occurred during the start of those periods.  I don't personally know where the sweet spot is but it shouldn't be that hard for someone to figure out.

     

    4)  I make a lot of money and I don't pay federal tax.  I am using almost all that money to pay a mortgage and maintain rental property.  I drive a 1998 honda civic and have a very basic lifestyle without any big non investment spending.  Am I rich?  If you look at gross income you could argue I am.  If you look at personal consumption I am clearly very poor.  People like me are what drive economies, if I had $50,000 I would invest it and still be driving a 1998 honda civic.  If 75% of america had $50,000 it would be gone in a heartbeat.  I do not however have a lot of assets.

     

    I pay a usage tax on my real estate in the form of property taxes.  This is not a tax on income, its a tax on assets.  And its a tax on the typical middle class asset, there is no rich person equivalent.  I support a small tax on total assets for the rich.  Something in line with real estate tax rates in the rich states  IE like 1%.  This would level the playing field so that you can't sit on a billion dollars of non investment money just waiting for future generations to sit idle spending.  

     

    5)  Reagan totally destroyed America by selling the idea that we can have a secure future borrowing from Japan and China while pissing away our industry.

     

    But I have a question I don't know the answer to.  Did the rich really get richer or did the poor have more kids?   In my line of work I need all 16+ years of schooling and the latter 6 really needed to be pretty focused.  Anyone with a similar background of education and with my same level of abilities can make the same amount of money.  In engineering you don't actually need the formal education, its hard enough that if you can do it you can raise to the top even if you have no college at all.  But its hard enough that very very few can get by without the college.

     

    What I am getting at is that I am the product of a lifetime of direction by my parents.  The first 22+ years need to get a certain amount of stuff done or its nearly impossible to catch up.  I have about 6 years of education that have to happen one year after the other from algebra to calculus to physics based on calculas to industry specific physics based on physics with calculus to even more focused industry specific based physics based on industry specific physics.  It would take literally 6 years to replace me with an adult with a different background.  Adults don't have 6 years.  And that would only put you where I was 10 years ago.

     

    I support the education initiatives to produce the next generation of industry that will create the value for me to retire on.  Creating real genuine opportunity for people to create shared value is awesome.  But pretending like most of the middle class/rich are just lucky isn't the way to do it.  The rich people who started a business and made it grow really have a skill set that is valuable to all of us.  Knock them down by making it easier for others to join them.  Take half their money when they die.  Let them do their thing while they are alive.  

     

    6 Corporation taxes need to match the rest of the world or they will just move.  If I move anywhere in the world I will make about the same amount of money because I am making that value and I take it with me when I leave.  To some extent industry creates the value.  Industry should pay some taxes but all their wealth gets taxed as income at some point in ADDITION to being taxed as corporate taxes.  This isn't some great unfairness if its Rich tax + Corporate tax= plenty of money taxed.

     

    7) small job destruction over time is generally a good thing.  Computers destroyed jobs, they let one secretary do the work of two making one lose their job.  They made one accountant able to do the job of two making one lose their job etc.  But there is also a lot of pork in corporate tax breaks and that should all be public info so that normal people can understand what is going on.  Education that makes people valuable and able to start their own business is the kind of jobs we need not on the job welfare in the form of using two secretaries instead of having computers.

     

    8)There is a sweet spot for taxes.  I don't know what it is and it likely changes based on the economic situation but its never 0% and its never 100%  People trying to push it up or down often say some pretty stupid things.

     

    9)  The only countries that are "doing it better" that I can see are Germany and China.  Singapore does it a lot better but its so small that it doesn't count.  Its like saying united states of Bill gates (population 3) is kicking America's ass because the GDP per capita there is hundreds of millions of dollars per person per year.

     

    China is kicking our ass based on industrial capacity

    Japan is kicking our ass based on industrial capacity but doesn't have the birthrate to be a factor

    EU doesn't have the birth rate to continue to exist as a civilization

    Brazile/Russia/India/are generally not kicking our asses long term.

    Germany is kicking our ass based on industrial capacity 

    Note the author of the report thinks his own reasoning is crap as he didn't count social security as tax when comparing with germany.  USA 30% tax is only possible if you don't count social security and social security payroll taxes.  

     

    America has been the strongest civilization in the world for 50+ years.  It has done that with a system of culture and government that is the strongest in the world.  Since the 80s we have overspent and that will catch up with us.  That overspending is not how we got to be powerful.

     

    We need to return to the system that created the wealth if we want more.  The clinton years were pretty good.  If we went back to the spending levels per capita then and tax rates then and the demographics then I think we will have the same kinds of results.  Germany, Japan, China all have periods of massive growth also, all of these were caused by industry expansion.

     

    Growth is good for the poor.

    GOP may be confused about how you get growth.

    But growth and education are the only things you can do long term to help the poor.

    You either make them into people who are creating value and can take the value with them if they leave the country or you are just pushing welfare off the books and actually hurting everyone.

     

    A bus driver making $80,000 in NYC isn't more valuable than a bus driver making $10,000 in China.  They are both bus drivers.  That $70,000 would be better spent on education for an engineer to make a self driving bus that will permanently remove the position of bus driver and instead re-route that money to automated bus driver engineer who would actually make $80,000 if his job were moved to China.

  • comment on a post Clinton Resign: Free Speech Needs a Champion over 3 years ago

    Peace in Ireland

    Calls for fair trade with China that would actually work (china has to provide same worker security and retirement nets or gets tarrif, so they pay their workers or us)

    Calls for women's rights from a First Lady in China.

    And 8 years of prosperity.

     

    Grace as secretary of state even thought the rest of the administration is bush league.

     

    Those bastards.

     

    One man decides that his voice is suitable for a venue created by our nation for the secretary of state as though he were an equal and there are calls for her removal.

     

    Free speech means you can have your own venue.  Free speech doesn't mean  you get to hijack someone else's venue.  If I showed up at obama's speeches with a megaphone to shout him down you would change your tune in a heart beat.

     

    But I agree Obama should step down immediately over this.

    Surely the buck stops with him right?

    He is the president.

    The 4 am calls aren't going to Hillary are they?

  • comment on a post Clinton Resign: Free Speech Needs a Champion over 3 years ago

    Peace in Ireland

    Calls for fair trade with China that would actually work (china has to provide same worker security and retirement nets or gets tarrif, so they pay their workers or us)

    Calls for women's rights from a First Lady in China.

    And 8 years of prosperity.

     

    Grace as secretary of state even thought the rest of the administration is bush league.

     

    Those bastards.

     

    One man decides that his voice is suitable for a venue created by our nation for the secretary of state as though he were an equal and there are calls for her removal.

     

    Free speech means you can have your own venue.  Free speech doesn't mean  you get to hijack someone else's venue.  If I showed up at obama's speeches with a megaphone to shout him down you would change your tune in a heart beat.

     

    But I agree Obama should step down immediately over this.

    Surely the buck stops with him right?

    He is the president.

    The 4 am calls aren't going to Hillary are they?

Diaries

Advertise Blogads