The Politics Thread - please direct all related posts here..

[HarthorneWingo]

Unofficially ... but dead nonetheless. I think Americans are now seeing from all the various examples out there these days (oil, coal, banks, etc.) that corporations cannot be allowed to continue to run amuck and unchecked.

I dont think so. So lets hand over the power from corporations to government? Hasn't our government run amuck?

It did under Bush ... two stupid wars and destruction of our economy and environment. Right now, the Obama administration has had to step in and save ... the banks and other companies that were "too big to fail;" it had to step in and save the economy; it will step into to regulate the mining industry; and it now has to step in to save the environment (BP). Don't you find it a little "funny" that these companies have come flying in on their leer jets begging on hands and knees for the government to bail them out of the financial pickle they got themselves and our economy in?

What we need - and hopefully what we'll get - is more, and smarter, government regulation of corporations/industry who, when unchecked, will fck everything up because of greed.

[cgf]

Greed only runs amock when people are shielded from the negative impacts of their greed. If all of those too big to fail firms where let to fail their competent competitors and profitable parts would **** be reminded to account for the potential losses.

[orangeblobman]

Isn't Obama real close to la-raza? Check this out:



SHOCK VIDEO: 'Professor' Calls for Mexican Revolt in America...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s

Shock video? What's so shocking about this to you?

[richardhutnik]

Greed only runs amock when people are shielded from the negative impacts of their greed. If all of those too big to fail firms where let to fail their competent competitors and profitable parts would **** be reminded to account for the potential losses.

And when millions work for employers who are given to greed, and them losing their jobs could result in them being homeless (no income = no money to make mortgage or rent money), then exactly how does merely saying the market will correct all this? If a company is driven only by quarterly statements, because stock price is all that matters, and executives happen to negotiate buyout packages worth MILLIONS of dollars (so if it goes south they still get paid, and if you don't have that there, they don't work for you) for security to take a job, then exactly why won't an industry collective take on too much risk, and ruin the lives of a large number of people? And in an age where increases specialization happens, how does the employee simply find a job?

Some impacts also aren't seen until down the road, when the old executive is gone. You do have stuff like decisions Ford made with the Pinto, for example. And, you also have the current lawsuits of Toyota. At the time the decisions are made, they are seen as brilliant decisions. And then how do you deal with the collective madness that affected corporate culture that you still lay people off, even as you have

I am curious here to ask exactly how corporations are any wiser than individuals or particularly lawmakers. What I see you argue is let the punishment of failure fix everything. But, if you see how life works, you see individuals commit crimes and do other things that adversely impact society. Take a corporation, and you end up with things that can impact millions, and force individuals to get stuck with the bill. Like, want one example? Is GE going to ever bother to clean up the Hudson River? Well, it screwed up big time and dumped a bunch of PCBs in it, but now, it is fighting to not have to pay for clean up.

I don't see how corporations are any smarter or wiser than individuals, except their impact on society is much larger than a single individual.

- Rich

[richardhutnik]

Fox News pushing "Drill, Baby, Drill":
http://mediamatters.org/research/201004300039

And Rush on Obama, spinning it is "Obama's Katrina":
http://www.wikio.com/video/rush-oil-sli ... na-3168758

And Fox News, "Obama's Katrina"?
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4174329/pres ... t_id=87485

- Rich

[cgf]

Greed only runs amock when people are shielded from the negative impacts of their greed. If all of those too big to fail firms where let to fail their competent competitors and profitable parts would **** be reminded to account for the potential losses.

And when millions work for employers who are given to greed, and them losing their jobs could result in them being homeless (no income = no money to make mortgage or rent money), then exactly how does merely saying the market will correct all this? If a company is driven only by quarterly statements, because stock price is all that matters, and executives happen to negotiate buyout packages worth MILLIONS of dollars (so if it goes south they still get paid, and if you don't have that there, they don't work for you) for security to take a job, then exactly why won't an industry collective take on too much risk, and ruin the lives of a large number of people? And in an age where increases specialization happens, how does the employee simply find a job?

Some impacts also aren't seen until down the road, when the old executive is gone. You do have stuff like decisions Ford made with the Pinto, for example. And, you also have the current lawsuits of Toyota. At the time the decisions are made, they are seen as brilliant decisions. And then how do you deal with the collective madness that affected corporate culture that you still lay people off, even as you have

I am curious here to ask exactly how corporations are any wiser than individuals or particularly lawmakers. What I see you argue is let the punishment of failure fix everything. But, if you see how life works, you see individuals commit crimes and do other things that adversely impact society. Take a corporation, and you end up with things that can impact millions, and force individuals to get stuck with the bill. Like, want one example? Is GE going to ever bother to clean up the Hudson River? Well, it screwed up big time and dumped a bunch of PCBs in it, but now, it is fighting to not have to pay for clean up.

I don't see how corporations are any smarter or wiser than individuals, except their impact on society is much larger than a single individual.

- Rich

Well if we let the too big to fail firms one of two things would be the case. Scenario A is one where the services they provided are desperately need and in Scenario B it isn't need. If the services these big banks provide are integral there is a lot of profits to made in the industry, so if the too big to fail guys where let to fail there would be other firms that stepped up, other more careful firms that hadn't failed themselves. If no such firms exist the massive available profits will drive a lot entrepreneurs into the field until new quality firms are established. And so there will be companies expanding, hiring and growing to replace those crap firms that we let fail who will pick up a lot of talent that lots its jobs. Now this is scenario A where we need actually have a need for the massive banking industry at its current size.

Now scenario B does suck for the workers in those fields because in scenario B there isn't as much demand to drive firms into the industry and to expand, and so a lot of those jobs would be lost for good, but while that sucks for the individuals I don't see why it should be my or your responsibility to create jobs for these people who picked jobs that aren't actually needed, I mean do we bailout the people who weld together crap and try to sell their **** that no one wants? No we don't, because there's no demand for their services, and if the demand isn't there for the survivors of the banking crash to expand, etc. then we shouldn't be bailing those people out either.

So while the oh people are suffering argument is cute it's ultimately bogus because people suffer all around the globe every day, people losing jobs because they made bad life decisions and jumped on the bandwagon of an industry that out grew it's demand is not something I think anyone but those people should be held responsible for. And if they didn't make a mistake and the demand for their industry is there the jobs will come back on their own and these people will have to persevere a period of instability through the turn over but ultimately their own usefulness will pave the way forward.

[richardhutnik]

As I see it, a reason why "too big to fail" happens is that in a corporate environment (this is a government created construct that enables an entity to come into being that allows ownership without holding owners accountable) where entities continue to merge without being slowed down. The end result is that you get entities that are so large that they end up commanding a sufficiently large chunks of the economy that them going under impacts millions. As part of this is barriers to entry and start up costs, and things like lack of expertise, which also limit how easy competition has to enter a market.

Now, let's look at the laid off worker situation. What you have is people looking to get employed, and make a living, ending up having to take on debt in order to be competitive. You get a pool of data gathered from industries that want a surplus of supply saying there will be shortages so people need to train. There is then this combination of government policies and a corporation (Sallie Mae) which gets subsidies from the government to back up its loans. Then the worker gets stuck with a debt load and ends up behind the eight ball if what they were told ends up not being true.

Ok, want to have something you may agree to here? Do you believe as many student loans would be given out, if people who took them could default from them through bankruptcy when their education proves to be of little value in the marketplace? One can't get out of student loans through bankruptcy now, even if the major isn't in demand any longer. It is a government backed racket to have the costs of labor, normally put on the backs of business, placed elsewhere, and corporations get a free ride out of it. Sallie Mae isn't allowed to fail and go under, no matter what it gives loans to people for, or what degree, no matter how little demand there is for it.

- Rich

[richardhutnik]

By the way, what happens in a society that keeps on spreading false information about professions to go into? See this one where computers are trumpeted as high paying:
http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/05/1 ... ge-majors/

And these that are said to be "most in demand":
http://smarterspend.com/2010/02/10-high ... -for-2010/

They keep saying computers, even while work gets off-shored by companies like IBM.

- Rich

[cgf]

By the way, what happens in a society that keeps on spreading false information about professions to go into? See this one where computers are trumpeted as high paying:
http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/05/1 ... ge-majors/

And these that are said to be "most in demand":
http://smarterspend.com/2010/02/10-high ... -for-2010/

They keep saying computers, even while work gets off-shored by companies like IBM.

- Rich

Our society says a lot of bull, sifting through that BS is part of becoming a responsible adult. I mean I'm a film student so I can't exactly claim to be making the best life decisions in terms of career to pursue, but I know that it very well fail from a financial aspect, that's why I've developed biotech skills that I can always turn to keep some money in my pocket.

[richardhutnik]

By the way, what happens in a society that keeps on spreading false information about professions to go into? See this one where computers are trumpeted as high paying:
http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/05/1 ... ge-majors/

And these that are said to be "most in demand":
http://smarterspend.com/2010/02/10-high ... -for-2010/

They keep saying computers, even while work gets off-shored by companies like IBM.

- Rich

Our society says a lot of bull, sifting through that BS is part of becoming a responsible adult. I mean I'm a film student so I can't exactly claim to be making the best life decisions in terms of career to pursue, but I know that it very well fail from a financial aspect, that's why I've developed biotech skills that I can always turn to keep some money in my pocket.

Are you doing some sort of black market genetic engineering people here shouldn't ask details about?

- Rich

[cgf]

By the way, what happens in a society that keeps on spreading false information about professions to go into? See this one where computers are trumpeted as high paying:
http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2010/05/1 ... ge-majors/

And these that are said to be "most in demand":
http://smarterspend.com/2010/02/10-high ... -for-2010/

They keep saying computers, even while work gets off-shored by companies like IBM.

- Rich

Our society says a lot of bull, sifting through that BS is part of becoming a responsible adult. I mean I'm a film student so I can't exactly claim to be making the best life decisions in terms of career to pursue, but I know that it very well fail from a financial aspect, that's why I've developed biotech skills that I can always turn to keep some money in my pocket.

Are you doing some sort of black market genetic engineering people here shouldn't ask details about?

- Rich

Nah, just assembling sequence which is boring and tedious work...for now...

[richardhutnik]

Our society says a lot of bull, sifting through that BS is part of becoming a responsible adult. I mean I'm a film student so I can't exactly claim to be making the best life decisions in terms of career to pursue, but I know that it very well fail from a financial aspect, that's why I've developed biotech skills that I can always turn to keep some money in my pocket.

Are you doing some sort of black market genetic engineering people here shouldn't ask details about?

- Rich

Nah, just assembling sequence which is boring and tedious work...for now...

So, looking to go for some patent and/or due stuff like get a breakthrough on par with working cold fusion? Do you have actually ideas on how to translate what you are doing into money, or are you just hoping that it pans out?

By the way, I wrote what I wrote, partly because it goes against the ideals of libertarianism, which generally denies the existence of humans existing in things called "societies" which have an impact on individuals. In the case of what I wrote, there is fallout from society buying into a bunch of lies and spreading them as norms. People do get hurt in the process. One can give the libertarian (or anarch-capitalist) that everyone needs to fend for themselves, and if you don't make it, tough. Well, when you get your revenues from ongoing activity of a large number of people, and they are at a place where they can't make it, you aren't going to make it either.

- Rich

[cgf]

Are you doing some sort of black market genetic engineering people here shouldn't ask details about?

- Rich

Nah, just assembling sequence which is boring and tedious work...for now...

So, looking to go for some patent and/or due stuff like get a breakthrough on par with working cold fusion? Do you have actually ideas on how to translate what you are doing into money, or are you just hoping that it pans out?

By the way, I wrote what I wrote, partly because it goes against the ideals of libertarianism, which generally denies the existence of humans existing in things called "societies" which have an impact on individuals. In the case of what I wrote, there is fallout from society buying into a bunch of lies and spreading them as norms. People do get hurt in the process. One can give the libertarian (or anarch-capitalist) that everyone needs to fend for themselves, and if you don't make it, tough. Well, when you get your revenues from ongoing activity of a large number of people, and they are at a place where they can't make it, you aren't going to make it either.

- Rich

It's something I did throughout high school to pay for my weed. there are a lot of labs looking for sequenced genomes, so what happens is one lab figures out a huge number of short strips of the genome and what I would do is take the hundreds of short bits, cut out the tails and ends where the results get imprecise and then assembling those little strips into the whole long genome of the virus or bacteria that the lab wants to know about.

I'll write back about the rest later, as I've got to run.

[knicks33and49]

Greed only runs amock when people are shielded from the negative impacts of their greed. If all of those too big to fail firms where let to fail their competent competitors and profitable parts would **** be reminded to account for the potential losses.

And when millions work for employers who are given to greed, and them losing their jobs could result in them being homeless (no income = no money to make mortgage or rent money), then exactly how does merely saying the market will correct all this? If a company is driven only by quarterly statements, because stock price is all that matters, and executives happen to negotiate buyout packages worth MILLIONS of dollars (so if it goes south they still get paid, and if you don't have that there, they don't work for you) for security to take a job, then exactly why won't an industry collective take on too much risk, and ruin the lives of a large number of people? And in an age where increases specialization happens, how does the employee simply find a job?

Some impacts also aren't seen until down the road, when the old executive is gone. You do have stuff like decisions Ford made with the Pinto, for example. And, you also have the current lawsuits of Toyota. At the time the decisions are made, they are seen as brilliant decisions. And then how do you deal with the collective madness that affected corporate culture that you still lay people off, even as you have

I am curious here to ask exactly how corporations are any wiser than individuals or particularly lawmakers. What I see you argue is let the punishment of failure fix everything. But, if you see how life works, you see individuals commit crimes and do other things that adversely impact society. Take a corporation, and you end up with things that can impact millions, and force individuals to get stuck with the bill. Like, want one example? Is GE going to ever bother to clean up the Hudson River? Well, it screwed up big time and dumped a bunch of PCBs in it, but now, it is fighting to not have to pay for clean up.

I don't see how corporations are any smarter or wiser than individuals, except their impact on society is much larger than a single individual.

- Rich

People wouldn't be homeless and starving, most Libertarians aren't heartless money-driven monsters. In a libertarian state, there would be a flat tax with no deductions and a negative income tax. The super rich use all kinds of loopholes in the tax code, which nullifies the redestributive factor and makes hardworking americans pay more. Libertarians advocate a negative income tax so people would have a minimum guaranteed salary, which is much more efficent and less corrupt than welfare. You file your taxes, and you are assured of a certain minimum salary. The thing is the government is inefficient and wasteful, which hurts everyone and doesn't create jobs, but stifles job creation.

[cgf]

The super rich may use loopholes to save some money, but they still pay a huge portion of the taxes. I think it's something like the top 5% pay 40-50% of the taxes, which isn't that far off from the top 10% owning 70% of the wealth number. Just some food for thought about the railing against loopholes and the rich that you tend to hear from all sides.

[richardhutnik]

People wouldn't be homeless and starving, most Libertarians aren't heartless money-driven monsters. In a libertarian state, there would be a flat tax with no deductions and a negative income tax. The super rich use all kinds of loopholes in the tax code, which nullifies the redestributive factor and makes hardworking americans pay more. Libertarians advocate a negative income tax so people would have a minimum guaranteed salary, which is much more efficent and less corrupt than welfare. You file your taxes, and you are assured of a certain minimum salary. The thing is the government is inefficient and wasteful, which hurts everyone and doesn't create jobs, but stifles job creation.

It is hard to say what anybody who is a Libertarian advocates and then say that is what all Libertarians advocate. I have attended a number of Libertarian meetings in the area, and they can't even agree on anything. The heart of why they are there is dislike for government, eventhough what they dislike will have a wide degree of disagreement.

As I see it, there isn't anything in Libertarianism regarding what taxes are, except less. And I believe the belief is that the best will rise to the top, and you enable people to have arms so they can shoot and kill losers who wander on the property of owners when they try to walk off with something. I speak here in terms of someone who is philosophical Libertarian, rather than just politically. Someone can politically be Libertarian, but have a life philosophy that is is Christian, or Atheist, or capitalist.

In this, you can have people argue that, if society doesn't have certain value it holds, and values citizens live up to, no amount of freedom is going to make a difference. Observed what happened in Iraq to see what happens when you just unleash freedom on people. You get looting and pillaging, and not a semblance of any order.

- Rich

[HarthorneWingo]

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/13/spill-expands/

Experts: BP disaster spilling the equivalent of two Exxon Valdezes a week.

Based on “sophisticated scientific analysis of seafloor video made available Wednesday,” Steve Wereley, an associate professor at Purdue University, told NPR the actual spill rate of the BP oil disaster is about 3 million gallons a day — 15 times the official guess of BP and the federal government. Another scientific expert, Eugene Chiang, a professor of astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, calculated the rate of flow to be between 840,000 and four million gallons a day. These estimates mean that the Deepwater Horizon wreckage could have spilled about five times as much oil as the 12-million-gallon Exxon Valdez disaster, with relief only guaranteed by BP in three more months. Watch video of oil flooding out of one of the two remaining leaks, which BP had suppressed for weeks:

On Tuesday, BP America president Lamar McKay testified under oath before the Senate that “you can’t measure what’s coming out at the seabed.”

Update In an email to ThinkProgress, Dr. Wereley clarifies: "My analysis is based strictly on what is seen in the video, so only one pipe and only for that brief period of time. I’m making no claims about what happened earlier or what may happen in the future."

[HarthorneWingo]

Hey, here's something that all parties appear to agree on:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/13/spi ... -carolina/

As Tar Balls Wash Up On Gulf Coast, Support For Drilling Plummets In North Carolina

As BP attempts to once again plug the massive oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico, balls of tar have begun washing up on the “prized white sands” of the Louisiana and Alabama coasts, alongside dead dolphins, sea turtles and 600 dead catfish. The Coast Guard released these photos yesterday of tar on Raccoon Island in Louisiana, “a protected bird breeding sanctuary with a variety of breeds“:



***
***

In April 61% of voters said they supported it with only 26% opposed. Now in the wake of the spill in the Gulf support has declined to 47% with 38% of voters against it. This is the first time PPP has ever found less than majority support for drilling in the state.

It’s unusual to see that big a change in how North Carolinians feels about a particular issue in such a short period of time, but it’s clear the spill has given many voters in the state second thoughts. 50% said it made them less supportive of allowing drilling off the state’s coast, compared to 28% who said it made no difference, and 22% who said the spill actually made them more supportive of drilling here.
PPP notes that the tumble in support for drilling has “come across party lines,” with a 17 point drop among independents, a 16 point drop among Democrats, and an 11 point drop among Republicans. A recent Rasmussen poll found that support for oil drilling nationally has “fallen dramatically” since the spill.

[richardhutnik]

The super rich may use loopholes to save some money, but they still pay a huge portion of the taxes. I think it's something like the top 5% pay 40-50% of the taxes, which isn't that far off from the top 10% owning 70% of the wealth number. Just some food for thought about the railing against loopholes and the rich that you tend to hear from all sides.

People who have most of the money pay most of the taxes. That is why it ends up that way. The top 5% have far more than 40-50% of all the wealth, so that is why they end up paying more taxes.

Here is a chart from 2007:
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays- ... taxes.html

- Rich

[knicks33and49]

Rich, I have no doubt that there are some people out there who believe that

"As I see it, there isn't anything in Libertarianism regarding what taxes are, except less. And I believe the belief is that the best will rise to the top, and you enable people to have arms so they can shoot and kill losers who wander on the property of owners when they try to walk off with something. I speak here in terms of someone who is philosophical Libertarian, rather than just politically. Someone can politically be Libertarian, but have a life philosophy that is is Christian, or Atheist, or capitalist."

But that is certainly an extreme fringe view. Just like there are people who believe all private property should be seized and redistrubuted and controlled by the government. Obviously these are radical views, and the majority of americans don't hold them. I honestly don't see how one can support big government, UNLESS you work for the government. They pay extremely high wages, the average pay is more than the private sector and the hours and quality of life are considered very good. In essence it is a very cushy job, and most of these people are just bureaucrats who contribute absolutely nothing to society. Instead of private companies being able to expand and hire new workers, they have to pay high taxes to support the bloated government.