A Cure For Capitakism

[t.nie]

Why Republicans shouldn't be upset with the ACA.
http://billmoyers.com/2013/10/29/why...out-obamacare/

Robert Reich is a pretty smart guy. I remember seeing him on a clip talking about trickle down economics and putting to the audience the proposition "would you vote in favor of a program that made everyone better off by some margin, but benefitted a small percentage exponentially more than almost everyone else?" and all these hands went up to say no.

Then he went on to say, but wait, you just implied that you are so against a few gaining ridiculous levels of wealth that you would vote against a plan that would get everyone a better standard of living? Really?

Then he went on to explain that that was pretty much the state of things in America over the last 30 years. Some have gained excessively, and some have gained a little, but ALL have gained something under our economic philosophy.

It goes back to what is poverty, really? In our nation, some people think poverty is they can't afford their own island, or for others they can't afford the new Xbox, and for even more, they need food stamps to get food. But is that poverty, really, when compared to most in the world who define it as starvation or children dying from lack of medicines or preventative vaccinations for common childhood disease?

I think what most want is a balance within our own nation between haves and have nots. We just want to see that everyone is pulling their weight and paying something back, not a few running away with everything while our roads crumble and our schools fall apart. We don't compare ourselves to 3rd world nations, but given time, our elites will have us all working for food.

[Clayton_Wetter]

Lewandowsky the Liar

Posted on February 7, 2013 by geoffchambers


There are many kinds of psychologist. Many, possibly most, of the academic kind, who do surveys or investigate human behaviour in the laboratory, have little time for psychoanalysts, who were the subject of my previous post . Academic psychologists consider psychoanalysis to be at best, unscientific, and at worst, embarrassing charlatanism.



Getting to the bottom of Lewandowsky’s inane, irrelevant and completely biased rant study requires a sane mind and the ability to comprehend the warmist’s mindset. Not everyone is capable of delving into the minds of lunatics and fringe afflicted individuals but here we have someone who may.

Bare in mind to that Lewandowsky is another member of the American Academic left wing lunatic fringe, which either explains his actions as being normal or that he suffers from an overdose of University educationalitis. Either way, we have a mess of a human being that live in it’s own conundrum.

We have the pathetic example of Professor Stephan Lewandowsky demonstrating his biases, his Anthropogenic warmist nonsense while at the same time clearly demonstrating that he has transgressed his funding activity by producing insignificant drivel at the cost of the taxpayer. We demand a refund, by the way.

Here is the gentleman to do the surgical analysis of Lowandowsky’s fulminations

[LITE-INN]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/28/stephan-lewandowsky-flees-australia-in-wake-of-investigations/

[mudslinger47]

Robert Riech is a screaming liberal....can't believe a word he says....not unlike Klinton or Obummer.... Don't bother answering me cause you ain't got one Tnei.

[Bubstr]

Everyone talks republican and democrat, but not one word about the FED or Banksters that this thread started about. Where the clips on the first page too hard to understand? Oh, Clayton said it was hogwash, but didn't explain how the monetary system really worked.

Until you understand our economic system, you will never understand why we have such a problem in reducing our national debt. It is not as some think, just like household expenses. At home we don't borrow every dollar we spend. Well, at least we think we don't. In reality if we paid on our debt, we would run out of money long before we paid it all off. Can you picture a country with out money? Everyone is flat broke? Just a little reduction of circulating money since the recession started has effected us negatively. Watch the clips. We may not be able to do anything about it, but at least we will understand why.

[ss12]

Bubstr, understanding the FED and the bankster is way over Clayton's head. He can only understand what the right wing media tells him.

[t.nie]

Robert Riech is a screaming liberal....can't believe a word he says....not unlike Klinton or Obummer.... Don't bother answering me cause you ain't got one Tnei.

Ok, let's hear you expand on why we can't believe a thing Reich says.

So far, all you got is "Reich is liberal so he can't be truthful" which is about as legitimate an argument as "Reich's name starts with an R so don't believe a word he says."

You guys never substantiate a dam thing you claim, you just go through life blindly declaring yourselves right because you say so, or because "so and so is ________ so he lies."

It's stupid logic for stupid people, but hey, if you choose to be an uneducated moron with no ability to think and reason, it's a free country. Continue to be stupid.

[t.nie]

Bubstr, understanding the FED and the bankster is way over Clayton's head. He can only understand what the right wing media tells him.

He doesn't even understand the majority of what that right wing media tells him, either. Have you ever read anything he has posted in the past that would make you think he is providing you with his own thoughts and not just parroting what Beck or Limbaugh of Fox told him that day?

I never saw the guy post anything that looked original. Anyone who reads these boards can pretty quickly figure out who the smart people are, and who the dumb ones are. And it isn't which side politically you are on, I have read some stuff on here from people obviously not liberal or Democrat that was thoughtful, original, etc.

CIRF for one stands out. I don't agree with everything the person says, but you can tell who has a brain and who the parrots are. It's just unfortunate that idiots like Terry, Freddy, Duane, Mudeater and Dirtracer2014 dominate the discussion from that side of the aisle, because those are the idiots who give conservatism a bad name.

[Clayton_Wetter]

Lewandowsky the Liar

Posted on February 7, 2013 by geoffchambers


There are many kinds of psychologist. Many, possibly most, of the academic kind, who do surveys or investigate human behaviour in the laboratory, have little time for psychoanalysts, who were the subject of my previous post . Academic psychologists consider psychoanalysis to be at best, unscientific, and at worst, embarrassing charlatanism.



Getting to the bottom of Lewandowsky’s inane, irrelevant and completely biased rant study requires a sane mind and the ability to comprehend the warmist’s mindset. Not everyone is capable of delving into the minds of lunatics and fringe afflicted individuals but here we have someone who may.

Bare in mind to that Lewandowsky is another member of the American Academic left wing lunatic fringe, which either explains his actions as being normal or that he suffers from an overdose of University educationalitis. Either way, we have a mess of a human being that live in it’s own conundrum.

We have the pathetic example of Professor Stephan Lewandowsky demonstrating his biases, his Anthropogenic warmist nonsense while at the same time clearly demonstrating that he has transgressed his funding activity by producing insignificant drivel at the cost of the taxpayer. We demand a refund, by the way.

Here is the gentleman to do the surgical analysis of Lowandowsky’s fulminations

[Clayton_Wetter]

Speaking of parrots. Some are taught well and some are not.

[15jr]

Ok this is my take on the video. Although I do agree with Mr Wolf's description of the terms Capitalism and Socialism, I do not agree with his opinion that capitalism is on it's death bed. Does it need tweaks here and there, certainly. For one we regulated and deregulated things so many times the lines have become fuzzy. The core idea of capitalism still works and is as healthy as ever. Mr. Wolf talks about workers making a product at a fixed or agreed upon wage that in the end is worth more than they were paid. That is true, but what he leaves out is the risk, materials, machinery, and regular overhead of the business. The workers did not contribute to the start up of that company. The owners or stock holders took that risk on. If the workers would like to put up all of that risk then they should be rewarded. In order to grow that business and keep those workers in a job there needs to be profit over the top of what the product costs to make. Some workers are completely happy with this arrangement and enjoy the fact that they do not take on that risk or responsibility. The idea of stability allows them time to spend with the family or hobbies and pay the bills as well as afford luxury items. Then you have the workers who see that profit statement by the company and feel they deserve more. Now by all means if they can negotiate more then more power to them, but in the end they agreed to the terms. They have no skin in the game as far as initial investment. Stockholders usually do. I feel these folks are the ones that should reap the benefits of the overall profit. Something that is often overlooked is most big corporations pay out stock as bonuses. That makes the workers stockholders as well. So in these cases they are also benefiting from the overall profits.

Enough about that. On to the socialism side. He paints a very nice picture of communities coming together to coop production. That is a great idea with the exception being someone or some group will still be leading the way. And in that case someone will always make more or get more than the others. Isn't this essentially what Capitalism is? I like co-op idea for one reason. It gives initiative to motivate. The biggest problem with those who complain about capitalism is they don't want to risk what it takes to start a big business. Co-op's could be their answer. How do you implement this? I have no clue. There are certainly hurdles to overcome and some people will not work well with others. If they can get past this hurdle I like it. If they are suggesting forceful take over of business like the GM takeover then I am totally against it. The reason why is outside interference. It sets an unfair advantage to one company when the gov essentially strips away the stockholders rights to give to the workers. Those stockholders had an investment in the business. The workers had jobs, and there is a big difference. At what point do we keep the government from taking over all American owned companies and turn them over to the workers?

Anyway those are my opinions on this.

[LITE-INN]

Ok this is my take on the video. Although I do agree with Mr Wolf's description of the terms Capitalism and Socialism, I do not agree with his opinion that capitalism is on it's death bed. Does it need tweaks here and there, certainly. For one we regulated and deregulated things so many times the lines have become fuzzy. The core idea of capitalism still works and is as healthy as ever. Mr. Wolf talks about workers making a product at a fixed or agreed upon wage that in the end is worth more than they were paid. That is true, but what he leaves out is the risk, materials, machinery, and regular overhead of the business. The workers did not contribute to the start up of that company. The owners or stock holders took that risk on. If the workers would like to put up all of that risk then they should be rewarded. In order to grow that business and keep those workers in a job there needs to be profit over the top of what the product costs to make. Some workers are completely happy with this arrangement and enjoy the fact that they do not take on that risk or responsibility. The idea of stability allows them time to spend with the family or hobbies and pay the bills as well as afford luxury items. Then you have the workers who see that profit statement by the company and feel they deserve more. Now by all means if they can negotiate more then more power to them, but in the end they agreed to the terms. They have no skin in the game as far as initial investment. Stockholders usually do. I feel these folks are the ones that should reap the benefits of the overall profit. Something that is often overlooked is most big corporations pay out stock as bonuses. That makes the workers stockholders as well. So in these cases they are also benefiting from the overall profits. Enough about that. On to the socialism side. He paints a very nice picture of communities coming together to coop production. That is a great idea with the exception being someone or some group will still be leading the way. And in that case someone will always make more or get more than the others. Isn't this essentially what Capitalism is? I like co-op idea for one reason. It gives initiative to motivate. The biggest problem with those who complain about capitalism is they don't want to risk what it takes to start a big business. Co-op's could be their answer. How do you implement this? I have no clue. There are certainly hurdles to overcome and some people will not work well with others. If they can get past this hurdle I like it. If they are suggesting forceful take over of business like the GM takeover then I am totally against it. The reason why is outside interference. It sets an unfair advantage to one company when the gov essentially strips away the stockholders rights to give to the workers. Those stockholders had an investment in the business. The workers had jobs, and there is a big difference. At what point do we keep the government from taking over all American owned companies and turn them over to the workers? Anyway those are my opinions on this.

but does wolff believe it or just parrott for Karl Marx who said capitlism how many years ago

[LITE-INN]

The Economics of Colonialism: Britain and Kenya,"[6] was eventually published in book form in 1974.from richard wolff now who has background from Kenya

[LITE-INN]

Speaking of parrots. Some are taught well and some are not.

and and some are sent down the wrong path

[15jr]

I believe he does believe it. What caused him to come to his conclusion I have no idea. I certainly believe he thinks Socialism and Production Co-op's are the way of the future. I don't believe that is the case. I still believe in capitalism, but as I said it could use some tweaks. I wouldn't be against an organic production co-op as long as it was just that. I do not believe in government run takeovers of private business just to give the workers the upper hand. I see that is a way of stifling innovation in both the start ups as well as major corporations.