(March 8, 2016 at 3:47 pm)scoobysnack Wrote: Everyone talks about the left/right paradigm, but no one talks about the ones above it. The ultra rich. What do they want? They want centralized power, and bigger government because in the end they pull the strings. This is why large banks funded communist Russia, because  when you control the capital flow of money, you control the people who receive it. They want to solidify their power, by making people dependent on them. Free people are not dependent, but everything is so inverted, that some think government programs like welfare creates independence. It's like someone taking out a million dollar loan and claiming they are a millionaire. No they are a million dollars in debt to the lender, just like welfare recipients are in debt to the government. Not that they will pay it back, but they will always vote for those who offer bigger government. That's the democratic base to an extent.

The ultra rich want as much power as they can singularly control. In the United States, this is much easier to accomplish on the state level, hence why the right has always been big on states having the power to basically do whatever they want, free to own other people as property, free to run their state according to what they view as Christian principles, free to change the rules so that those in power stay there. They idolize the wealthy and inspire the working class to be dependent on them as 'job creators', which is also a really effective way for the wealthy to pocket a greater share of what the working class produces.

Welfare does create a sort of dependence when it is barely enough for subsistence and it is combined with a depressed job market. There's no room for growth when everybody is poor because demand is not there when no one can afford anything. This should not be the case, we can produce more wealth than ever while requiring less labor than ever. Everyone should be living a good life in this circumstance. The reason it's not the case is because the right, and their big money owners, have fooled people like you into thinking that jobs get outsourced because people are paid too much, and not because shareholders and executives feel entitled to the majority of the wealth produced by the people they employ.

Of course, big money owns a lot of Democrats, too. And these Democrats are beneficiaries of the system, many of them conservatives at heart. In large part, however, these are Democrats who are against the welfare state and collaborate with Republicans to minimize it wherever and whenever possible. The further you get from the influence of Wall Street, the more favorable the idea of a welfare state becomes.

The fact of the matter is this: we wouldn't need a welfare state if employers paid workers fairly and didn't feel entitled to take as much as they can get away with. There would be more jobs because a lot more people would have a lot more money, creating a lot more demand and also enabling a lot more people to start businesses of their own to meet this new demand.

Trickle-down economics is fraud, and the people really picking your pockets are pointing at other people whose pockets they've picked and telling you "Hey, that guy's picking your pocket". The average taxpayer ($50,000 income per year) pays $36 annually to fund SNAP programs, and almost $6,000 per year to fund corporate subsidies and cover revenue lost to tax havens. This is money corporations are reporting as profits, and most of it goes in the pockets, portfolios and hedge funds of shareholders and executives, most of whom are already fabulously wealthy people. Wal-Mart posts $100 billion in profits every year while costing taxpayers, on average, $900,000 per store because they pay their employees so little that they require welfare and SNAP to subsist.

You're being played, my brother.

(March 8, 2016 at 3:47 pm)scoobysnack Wrote: Free people are not dependent, but everything is so inverted, that some think government programs like welfare creates independence.

Ok, so tell me, if you haven't got two dimes to rub together, how free and independent are you? If you have to labor for your next meal or to feed your kids, how free and independent are you? If you haven't got health insurance because you can't afford it, how free and independent are you?

Talking points, straight from the "libertarian" narrative. Some say it's just hot air from a lower orifice, since the only ones being free and independent are the ones having the necessary funds to enjoy that luxury and not having to strive for the most basic things in life.

What was that again about what billionaires want?

Quote:Of course, big money owns a lot of Democrats, too.

Something that Sanders should have thought about.

(March 8, 2016 at 5:28 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Of course, big money owns a lot of Democrats, too.

Something that Sanders should have thought about.

He has. That's why he keeps asking Clinton to release her Goldman Sachs speech transcripts. If she wasn't owned by big money, she'd have done it by now.

(March 8, 2016 at 4:19 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(March 7, 2016 at 1:41 am)Minimalist Wrote: The oceans are dying.



The rain forest are disappearing.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news...23/?no-ist


The climate continues to warm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/scienc...rming.html


There is insufficient fresh water.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2...-conflicts

Here's a photo of Peking.



There are now more guns than people in the US.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...then-some/

And Donald Fucking Trump is the likely republicunt nominee for president.

Right about now a heart attack looks pretty good, man.

That's why we outsourced heavy manufacturing to China.  The intent is to kill them off with pollution.

This is the way Pittsburgh looked in the 1950s http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...-smog.html

Now China looks like that.

I'm surprised this has escaped the notice of so many people.

I seriously doubt this was a planned action to achieve that result. Our government isn't that smart. China has a very big problem though. Gee, I guess it isn't such a good idea to let industry run rampant without regard for the environmental cost. I hope the Ferengi Libertarians are paying attention. China is finding out firsthand the cost of letting corporations run amok.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-ele...ll-n534171

Does this scare anybody but me? Does Cruz remind anyone else of GWB - a stupid fuck who appeals to the stupid masses?

(March 8, 2016 at 5:55 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: China has a very big problem though.

China combines the worst of both worlds. Oppressive political system and unchained capitalism without any workers rights to mention. Yes, you could say, China, or rather the Chinese people, have a very big problem. But not for the reasons the newest Wyrd brainfart insinuates.

Companies move there because wages are a pitance and there are hardly any workplace security regulations. Despicable, yes, but the only big plan is making even more money for the shareholders and CEOs.

(March 8, 2016 at 6:21 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-ele...ll-n534171

Does this scare anybody but me? Does Cruz remind anyone else of GWB - a stupid fuck who appeals to the stupid masses?

All republicunt candidates remind me of Bush.  Cruz is just sleazier.

(March 8, 2016 at 6:59 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 6:21 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-ele...ll-n534171

Does this scare anybody but me? Does Cruz remind anyone else of GWB - a stupid fuck who appeals to the stupid masses?

All republicunt candidates remind me of Bush.  Cruz is just sleazier.

I definitely agree with sleazier. Maybe it's superficial but I see that stupid, fucking grin and I have to resist the urge to reach into my monitor and throttle him.

It's a liability.

(March 8, 2016 at 7:10 pm)AFTT47 Wrote: Maybe it's superficial but I see that stupid, fucking grin and I have to resist the urge to reach into my monitor and throttle him.

You're not the only one.