Welfare for Wall Street

[Nono]

Wall Street's Great Deflation
Greider's got it right. The blind free-market faith dinned into Americans by the corporate-owned media from birth on is looking a tad threadbare these days.

(...) The crisis has the potential to transform American politics because, first it destroys a generation of ideological bromides about free markets, and, second, because it makes visible the ugly power realities of our deformed democracy. Democrats and Republicans are bipartisan in this crisis because they have colluded all along over thirty years in creating the unregulated financial system and mammoth mega-banks that produced the phony valuations and deceitful assurances. The federal government protects the most powerful interests from the consequences of their plundering. It prescribes "market justice" for everyone else. (...) (...) If Washington wants real results, it has to abandon the wishful posture that is simply helping the private firms get over their fright. The government must instead act decisively to take charge in more convincing ways. That means acknowledging to the general public the depth of the national crisis and the need for more dramatic interventions. Instead of propping up Fannie Mae or others, the threatened firm should be formally nationalized as a nonprofit federal agency performing valuable services for the housing market. That is the real consequence anyway if the taxpayers have to buy up $300 billion in stock. (...)

[ironeagle]

We have more important things to spend our tax money on than stocks.

So many Americans decry "socialism", but what they have is socialized capitalism. When the rich get into financial problems, the taxpayers bail them out. When the poor have problems, they're left to fend for themselves. Don't tell me Americans don't want socialism, it's just that they want it for the rich rather than the poor.

[nerdvincent]

I hate USSR. But here is a fact: the only country unaffected by 1929 financial crisis was USSR.

[ironeagle]

No taxpayers do not want to bail out wall street, we do not want socialism, although it's been creeping into their heads more often because of people like you who don't have to educate, or work to the same capacity of someone else to get the same privledges. What's the point. In a socialist nation I could just sit on my but and go to work for a couple days a week as a lawn mower and get all the same benefits as if I were a 40 hour a week worker. It's bull crap. Why would I care if I was educated or care if I ever invented something, if everyone else gets to come in a steal all my earnings. Why should I have to go to work so some bum can get good health care compliments of my earnings? By the way the poor here (except non custodial parents) get a lot of help, it's the middle class who already pay all the taxes for the rest of the population and can barely afford to live. The middle class wil be the ones to suffer the most, because they will be reduced to the working poor after taxation. Taxing corporations will change nothing since more of them will leave America, leaving our citizens with no good paying jobs. Oh, well I guess, cause according to you if we just socialize and leave all our freedoms at the back of our minds, and replace them with "popular belief" and "for the good of the whole" ideas. I won't have to worry about if there is a good paying job, cause someone else will pay all my bills for me. Capitalism allows people to educate, succeed, compete, achieve, and make a life for their own families. Socialism allows people to live off of others their whole lives, punishes hard workers, punishes people who's jobs demand long hours, and overtime, ruins free trade and individual thought. I spit on it.

[The Dunedan]

Don't tell me Americans don't want socialism, it's just that they want it for the rich rather than the poor.

-This- American doesn't want Socialism for anyone, rich, poor, person or corporation. Nice try at an insulting generalization, though.

[ironeagle]

I don't want socialism of the wealthy, because it makes companies leave America, and it hinders development and manufacturing in America which is why our American made products are so expensive. Oh and if you don't support rich people then stop buying their products, stoping using their companies services, stop buying things you don't need, stop paying to watch movies, stop buying cds. It all that crap people buy that brings them in so much money. If it's something you don't need why shouldn't they profit. If you need the money so bad, put it all into an account. I know if I did that instead of renting movies, and buying take out and jewelry I don't need I would have a couple million dollars by the end of my life time. Let's face it though everyone enjoys those things, and they all want them, and you are putting the money in their bank accounts. Why should you get to buy these things and then get a refund by taking their profits and spending it on your healthcare?

[grandpa]

Quote by: ironeagle I don't want socialism of the wealthy, because it makes companies leave America, and it hinders development and manufacturing in America which is why our American made products are so expensive. Oh and if you don't support rich people then stop buying their products, stoping using their companies services, stop buying things you don't need, stop paying to watch movies, stop buying cds.

That's all good. Many are doing this, but corporations are fighting consumer independence every step of the way. This struggle is increasingly difficult to miss. How many are actually unaware of the extent of regulation in this country? -- and I mean regulation in favor of the rich.

Grandpa h.

Quote by: ironeagle Taxing corporations will change nothing since more of them will leave America, leaving our citizens with no good paying jobs.

Perhaps you didn't notice but American corporations that enjoy some of the world's lowest tax rates are leaving American and leaving citizens with no good paying jobs.

Quote by: ironeagle Capitalism allows people to educate, succeed, compete, achieve, and make a life for their own families. Socialism allows people to live off of others their whole lives, punishes hard workers, punishes people who's jobs demand long hours, and overtime, ruins free trade and individual thought. I spit on it.

All the progressive social democratic countries like Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Great Britain, Ireland, Australia, etc. embrace both capitalism and social programs. It's the United States that's the laggard, all to the detriment of most of its citizens.

Part of the problem is that when the terms "socialism" or "social democracy" are used a significant portion of Americans condemn the notions without the foggiest idea about what's being discussed. And their ideas--if we can charitably term them that--are so divorced from reality as to be in realm of pure fiction.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: nerdvincent I hate USSR. But here is a fact: the only country unaffected by 1929 financial crisis was USSR.

Because they were permanently backwards, being so absolutely a backwater that you aren't affected by the mainstream economy isn't a sign of success.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: sdbest So many Americans decry "socialism", but what they have is socialized capitalism. When the rich get into financial problems, the taxpayers bail them out. When the poor have problems, they're left to fend for themselves. Don't tell me Americans don't want socialism, it's just that they want it for the rich rather than the poor.

These big companies going under is in no one's interest, but then again perhaps if they are allowed to go down then someone will think the next time they play the market like idiots.

[ironeagle]

I hold the governments of China and Mexico responsible too for the corporations moving out of this country, if they would require decent pay for their workers, then these companies wouldn't have any incentive to leave America.

[Gods_Mercenary]

which is not in their interest, given that a much lower wage than what we would consider acceptable in the U.S. is livable there and brings much needed, or at least wanted, money into the country.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary which is not in their interest, given that a much lower wage than what we would consider acceptable in the U.S. is livable there and brings much needed, or at least wanted, money into the country.

So Chinese people aren't interested in higher wages? It's a fascinating theory, yet common sense sort of debunks it, let alone the rioting.
You're just denying the existence of class conflict, which is fitting (if not necessary) for an ardent capitalist pawn.

However, as Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone put it:
"We have officially spent and mismanaged our way out of la-la
land and back to the ugly place where politics really lives -- a
depressingly serious and desperate argument about how to keep large
numbers of us from starving and freezing to death. Or losing our
homes, or having our cars repossessed. For a long time America has
been too embarrassed to talk about class; we all liked to imagine
ourselves in the wealthy column, or at least potentially so, flush
enough to afford this pissing away of our political power on
meaningless game-show debates once every four years. The reality is
much different, and this might be the year we're all forced to admit
it."
Economic Realities Are Killing Our Era of Fantasy Politics | | AlterNet

Grandpa h.

[Gods_Mercenary]

So Chinese people aren't interested in higher wages? It's a fascinating theory, yet common sense sort of debunks it, let alone the rioting. You're just denying the existence of class conflict, which is fitting (if not necessary) for an ardent capitalist pawn.

Not as high wages as americans are used to, and at any rate, I was discussing the government's preference, given that it is the one that defines minimum wages and who realize that their main advantage over other nations economically is a glut of labor and therefore a glut of cheap labor.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Not as high wages as americans are used to, and at any rate, I was discussing the government's preference, given that it is the one that defines minimum wages and who realize that their main advantage over other nations economically is a glut of labor and therefore a glut of cheap labor.

You're right about China's government, but many are moving to improve conditions. It's not like their wages are low merely because they do not live here in America. It's because China's government is largely run by corporate interests, for corporate interests. I could imagine this trend reversing, though. It's not entirely outside their capabilities.

Grandpa h.

[Gods_Mercenary]

In reality, any politician interestd in a powerful future for china will still realize that attracting foreign companies to their shores with low wages is still a good move.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary In reality, any politician interestd in a powerful future for china will still realize that attracting foreign companies to their shores with low wages is still a good move.

You're right, if you mean a "powerful future" for the politicians and the corporations. Of course, low wages are no absolute guarantee of retaining such power, either. That's partly what all the cops and prisons are for.

Grandpa h.