Revolution! New form of government.: Kleptocracy

President Bush is touring the midwest trying to drum up support for his decidedly not "teeny-tiny" tax cut, which includes tax cuts on stock dividend income and raises the amount of money that business can write off from equipment purchases to $100,000 from $25,000.
Meanwhile, stocks have fallen on average %25, wiping out many family fortunes; and the number of unemployed has swelled by 1.7 million.

At Enron, managers exploited the ignorance of the employed as to whether the company was solvent or not and pocketed all the value of the pension packages (which were largely invested in the company). Effectively, a few management barons filched the retirement years of the employees.

The Bush tax cuts come right out of social security.

What form of government exists in the U.S.A.?

 

This goes hand in hand with economic imperialism, to show that capitalism is a failed system, because it is not self-enclosed. As America's former 'unlimitied' opportunity and wealth start to run out(as in 'permanently owned by fewer and fewer entities) further wealth has to be taken, whether from other countries, or from less powerful members of society.

 

[russ_watters]

Hehe. Funny post, schwarz. Keep 'em coming.

Zero, "self-enclosed" doesn't make any sense (redundant?). Do you mean self-sufficient? I'm sure you know that the US runs a pretty large trade deficit - money is flowing OUT of the US, not into it. But we won't ever run out because our economy expands faster than money leaves and faster than the population grows. EVERY segment of the US population is getting richer and always has (over a timeframe greater than 10 years).

Also, if capitalism doesn't work, could you suggest one that has been shown to work better?

Zero, one of the most important and taken for granted freedoms in the US is the freedom to LEAVE if we don't like it here. It really seems like you'd be happier living somewhere else. Unless of course complaining is what makes you happy - wait, were you in the Navy?

 

The United States is called A Republic and a Democracy in many of my old and new history books. They aren't so different yet you have two choices. oh well

 

Upon the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, a Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Ben Franklin, "Well Doctor, what have we got - a republic or a monarchy?" "A republic," replied Franklin, "if you can keep it."

 

Originally posted by russ_watters
Zero, "self-enclosed" doesn't make any sense (redundant?). Do you mean self-sufficient? I'm sure you know that the US runs a pretty large trade deficit - money is flowing OUT of the US, not into it. But we won't ever run out because our economy expands faster than money leaves and faster than the population grows. EVERY segment of the US population is getting richer and always has (over a timeframe greater than 10 years).

Maybe 'self-contained' would be a better choice of words...the point I was making, that you would probably agree with, is that our economy depends on expansion to sustain itself. There isn't as much room for growth as there used to be...and the line between nations is blurred by multinational ownership of corporations.

Zero, one of the most important and taken for granted freedoms in the US is the freedom to LEAVE if we don't like it here. It really seems like you'd be happier living somewhere else. Unless of course complaining is what makes you happy - wait, were you in the Navy?

I was in the Marines...and this comment is unworthy of you. Is 'Love it or leave it' some sort of mantra for people who don't agree with me?

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Zero
Maybe 'self-contained' would be a better choice of words...the point I was making, that you would probably agree with, is that our economy depends on expansion to sustain itself. There isn't as much room for growth as there used to be...

I'd take that further and say that in order for ANY economy to be considered a success it must constantly be expanding. But I would disgree with the second part - there is ALWAYS room for growth. Growth at its most basic (in a capitalist system) is simply be a function of rpms - how fast the money goes around in a circle.

Is 'Love it or leave it' some sort of mantra for people who don't agree with me?

No, it really was a legitimate question. It really seems like it is painful for you to be living here. If I were that dissatisfied and I didn't expect a remedy, I might consider moving. The systems you appear to advocate are inherrently incompatible with the American ideal. It just looks like you're wanting something that can't be had here.

Immigrants come here because they think they can find something better in the US. But people who think they can find something better elsewhere do NOT (generally) leave the US. WHY? I think I may know - people know but they don't want to ADMIT that there ISN'T a (much) better system than the one we have here.

 

Originally posted by russ_watters
I'd take that further and say that in order for ANY economy to be considered a success it must constantly be expanding. But I would disgree with the second part - there is ALWAYS room for growth. Growth at its most basic (in a capitalist system) is simply be a function of rpms - how fast the money goes around in a circle.

I disagree...the wealth collects in fewer and fewer hands, and doesn't keep moving around.


And as far as the 'love it or leave it' attitude...consider that I'm treating the US like your ideal economy: there's ALWAYS room for growth!

 

Of course, Nicool003 is right, it is certainly a Republic on paper.
A Democracy would do away with the electoral college, and a Monarchy would have the same family ruling for more than a generation.
Franklin may have meant that any weak Republic can default to Monarchy if the government is unified under one party. That was certainly the situation in Weimar Republic in the '30's.

In Texas, the Democratic representatives refused to attend senate votes, (which would have redrawn representative districts to exclude their party), and are being hunted down by troopers and bounty hunters.

"We'll smoke 'em out" says He, was He really talking about al-qaeda?

 

[Dissident Dan]

Originally posted by russ_watters
No, it really was a legitimate question. It really seems like it is painful for you to be living here. If I were that dissatisfied and I didn't expect a remedy, I might consider moving. The systems you appear to advocate are inherrently incompatible with the American ideal. It just looks like you're wanting something that can't be had here.

Immigrants come here because they think they can find something better in the US. But people who think they can find something better elsewhere do NOT (generally) leave the US. WHY? I think I may know - people know but they don't want to ADMIT that there ISN'T a (much) better system than the one we have here.

There are several rebuttals to this.
1) Not being complacent with the government does not mean that you think that you can find something better elsewhere
2) You assume that it is "painful" for someone to live here just because he has problems with the way things are done, which is incorrect.
3) I haven't seen Zero advocate anything "inherently incompatible with the American ideal"...maybe with your ideals, but that's another thing.
4) People often complain because they care...and want things to change, not because they want to run away.
5) I have never taken comparative government or studied societal differences in different countries in much detail, so I don't have much of a basis to make a comparison. It seems that most Western European countries have a pretty good thing going for them...anywhere from slightly worse to a little better.
**EDIT**
6) People have attachments to the places and people that they know, and it generally takes A LOT for a person to expatriate.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Zero
I disagree...the wealth collects in fewer and fewer hands, and doesn't keep moving around.

Historical facts say you are wrong. Once more: EVERY income group is increasing. Even the poor are getting richer.

And as far as the 'love it or leave it' attitude...consider that I'm treating the US like your ideal economy: there's ALWAYS room for growth!

That is certainly true. But what you are looking for here is something that was never intended and will never happen.

I haven't seen Zero advocate anything "inherently incompatible with the American ideal"...maybe with your ideals, but that's another thing.

Zero has denounced capitalism. Capitalism is an essential part of America.

It seems that most Western European countries have a pretty good thing going for them...anywhere from slightly worse to a little better.

I certainly agree. I have stated previously that most western countries have very similar government/economic systems.

 

I would counter that only increased economic imerialism keeps American capitalism afloat...and while the poor may be getting 'richer', they are not doing so easily, but by working more hours...and the rich are increasing their wealth at a much faster rate. The ratio between executive and worker pay has gone from 40:1 to 200:1 in the last 20 years...so my argument still stands.

 

: EVERY income group is increasing. Even the poor are getting richer.

That's just flat wrong. Unemployment up 2.4x10⁶ since 2001. Under Clinton, lower income groups grew slower than higher income groups, but at least had jobs. Now those jobs are gone, because the moneyed class can invest in CDs and yachts and belch Pinot Nior and whatever they do.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Zero
I would counter that only increased economic imerialism keeps American capitalism afloat...

But as noted earlier, net wealth is flowing OUT of the US, not into it. So that would make it negative economic imperialism.

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
That's just flat wrong. Unemployment up 2.4x10⁶ since 2001. Under Clinton, lower income groups grew slower than higher income groups, but at least had jobs. Now those jobs are gone, because the moneyed class can invest in CDs and yachts and belch Pinot Nior and whatever they do.

Historical, schwarz. You can't get good history from inside a cycle. Compare dates at least 10 years apart. And you'd be surprised about how bad it is on the downslope of this cycle - its nowhere near as bad as you think it is.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/histinctb.html [Broken]

 

The historical facts should be comfort to those who were planning on retiring on the dough they lost in the market since 2001, eh? Instead of unemployment benefits and health care, unemployed workers can enjoy tax breaks on their stock dividends.

 

It's called a republic. We are represented by the government. The running of the government in a rational manner is in your own interests, since it is you that the government represents.

Say class warfare again, and count thyself as another moron. You are the government! Period! Why do you believe, incessantly, that the federal government can spend your money better than you can? Why do you believe that it is the government's responsibility to assure your own welfare? Why do you believe that it is the governments responsibility that no one should be richer than you, nor that you should be richer than anyone else.

WTF is wrong with you? This is the land of the free. This is the place where you can be a total badass and have it actually mean something! This is not some social country where you can sit on your ass all day and collect free government money. This is not a communism where excelling as a human being will gain you nothing in comparison with the most insufficient moron around! We make life worth living just by being us. What do we need with government anyway? Support a defense force. Yes! And umm...well...wtf else do we actually...really need?

Why must we be taxed so heavily? Why must we be taxed for production so heavily? The whole formation of the US was because of excessive taxation! And here you are, but 200 yrs later professing some sort of twisted longing to be taxed even more? WTF, I mean, seriously, WTF is wrong with you?

 

Look, Ganshauk, if you don't believe in the ideas of society and community, you can always become a hermit. For the rest of us, who choose to live in a society, we also choose to pay taxes, because what is good for the society is eventually good for the individual as well.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
The historical facts should be comfort to those who were planning on retiring on the dough they lost in the market since 2001, eh? Instead of unemployment benefits and health care, unemployed workers can enjoy tax breaks on their stock dividends.

Yes, actually it should be a comfort. Because anyone who has invested based on stock market history is doing just fine. There are specific and well established guidelines for investing. And they WORK if you follow them. The problem is that many people invest irrationally and don't follow the guidelines.

 

Originally posted by russ_watters
Yes, actually it should be a comfort. Because anyone who has invested based on stock market history is doing just fine. There are specific and well established guidelines for investing. And they WORK if you follow them. The problem is that many people invest irrationally and don't follow the guidelines.

Well, except for when you invested based on the advice of professionals who intentionally lied to you to line their own pockets...or if you invested in the company you worked for over 30 years, based on fudged financial reports.

 

No, its not right that Enron bosses walked off with the filched loot. It is unethical.

Fact is, somebody pays for the deficit, and its not the people who rang up the tab.

 

WTF is wrong with you? This is the land of the free. This is the place where you can be a total badass and have it actually mean something!

I feel like a total badass when I see to MOABS blasting big buildings in baghdad, just like in the movies.

We make life worth living just by being us. What do we need with government anyway? Support a defense force. Yes! And umm...well...wtf else do we actually...really need?

Oh shoot. Jesus will teach the children! Toxic waste is very healthy for you. You can learn how to preform self-surgery on the internet. This rhetoric you're talking sounds very cool, but Reality is very different.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, except for when you invested based on the advice of professionals who intentionally lied to you to line their own pockets...or if you invested in the company you worked for over 30 years, based on fudged financial reports.

So fraud is real history? I said history (let me say it again). Anyone who has invested based on stock market history is doing just fine.

No, its not right that Enron bosses walked off with the filched loot. It is unethical.

More than that, its illegal. And people have been arrested over it. Its got a long way to go though.

 

1. Stocks dropping fast is NOT a problem. People pulling their stocks out when they're low is a problem for them. One year ago was a good time to buy stocks, yet no one was. Where's the intelligence?

2. Whoever created the poll, you should have defined the terms in the poll. Especially the one you made up.

 

Oh, it could be a very profitable time for stock ownership, in BP and Haliburton. Problem is, can you trust those guys to pay their taxes and do their job in Iraq? The record of nation building is pretty bad as far as world bank and imf goes.

2. Whoever created the poll, you should have defined the terms in the poll. Especially the one you made up.

I thought it was clear that in a Kleptocracy, government institutions actively steal public money, s/a Russia post 1989.

 

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
I thought it was clear that in a Kleptocracy, government institutions actively steal public money, s/a Russia post 1989.

Well then of course it's a kleptocracy!

The United States government takes its citizens money by force, with guns. Ever try not giving it to them? You receive 20+ years in a federal prison.

 

It wouldn't be so bad if corporations and teh richest 1% didn't escape their fair share of taxes, while the IRS looks to spend more chasing down people who may not deserve the earned-income credit, than they will spend to investigate major offending companies.

 

Originally posted by Zero
It wouldn't be so bad if corporations and teh richest 1% didn't escape their fair share of taxes, while the IRS looks to spend more chasing down people who may not deserve the earned-income credit, than they will spend to investigate major offending companies.

Oh, please. "fair share"? And of course you're the one who decides what's far right?

Man, your type of people are the problem. You're jealous of the achievers, and want them to have to PAY for their success.

That's sickening to hear.

 

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Oh, please. "fair share"? And of course you're the one who decides what's far right?

Man, your type of people are the problem. You're jealous of the achievers, and want them to have to PAY for their success.

That's sickening to hear.

Fair share, in teh case of companies, would be anything at all. There are companies, profitable ones, that pay less taxes than you do. By less, I mean less in dollars, not as a percentage.

 

L.A., by public money I mean PUBLIC MONEY. Not uncollected taxable income. I guess I thought that the term was colloquial enough to be in general vocabulary.

Man, your type of people are the problem. You're jealous of the achievers, and want them to have to PAY for their success.

That's totally wrong. See lots of indigenous capitalism in 3rd world countries? Hell no. What you see is capitalism from already industrialized countries using 3rd world countries as DC's and serf labor camps. Point being, rich capitalists in industrialized nations owe most their wealth to the infrastructure already in place. They PAY TAXES to support the infrastructures that keep them rich. Regulation is there to keep them from cheating the system and destroying the environment.

 

We Need a new form of Government!

All Governments seem Good in the beginning, and in theory. Our Government is like a Car and even cars need to have tune ups. When is the last time our government had a tune up? I don't mean adding amendments, that's like adding on to your car not fixing. So when?

 

[Njorl]

Originally posted by russ_watters
I'd take that further and say that in order for ANY economy to be considered a success it must constantly be expanding. But I would disgree with the second part - there is ALWAYS room for growth. Growth at its most basic (in a capitalist system) is simply be a function of rpms - how fast the money goes around in a circle.

In the hay-day of the industrial revolution this was true, but it has not been true for some time. At one point, all savings, other than the "stuff the mattress" kind, were invested in growth. There was always some readily apparent profitable avenue for excess capital. Money never stagnated. This is no longer true. It was the thesis of Keynes work on the depression. Money stopped moving because, despite the fact that the stock market was rising, there was a shortage of profitable new ventures. Money was borrowed, stocks were bought, but there was no real investment. Money sat still. Still money dies. You might think this is impossible in this day, but it has been crushing Japan for 10 years now.

Oh, and for the topic, our government is a republic. Our political system is democracy.

Njorl