The biggest lie is that they favor small government, fiscal responsibly, and the free market. It is government interference in the free market at the behest of large corporations that helps maintain income inequality. SOPA should have been an eye-opener to the average liberal who believes that regulation is good. It was clearly a case of regulation being pushed by large corporations to shut small businesses down.
You see, regulations do not hut large corporations, contrary to popular belief, they hut small businesses who cannot afford the extra expenses. Thus, large corporations use regulation as a method of destroying potential competition and ensuring what basically amounts to monopolies, giving them the freedom to do whatever the hell they want.
I may sound confused switching from attacking conservatives to attacking liberals, but make no mistake, both sides are trying to f**k us over.
No, regulations do NOT hurt small businesses. Letting corporations ignore regulations is what hurts small businesses. If large corporations had to follow the same rules as everyone else their competitive advantage would be much less, and in fact I'd argue that their size will ultimately hurt them because smaller companies can be more nimble.
We don't need fewer regulations, we need to restore the regulations large corporations have legislated out and start enforcing corporate law, revoking corporate charters for companies like BP who continue to willfully ignore regulations at the cost of human life and the environment.
We also need to amend the Constitution to clearly state that Corporations are NOT people and are in fact a legal structure allowed to exist by the will of the citizens of the U.S. We need federal corporate charters so companies can no longer shop around for friendly states like Delaware who get to set corporate law for the entire country, and in some cases the world.
After all this is done, we need to stop the lobbying and bribery of our elected officials. I'd like to see a few members of congress see a little time in federal prison but I'll settle for rules that are actually enforceable and allow the people to have more say in the pay, benefits, and ethical standard with which we expect our elected representatives to live and work by.
Look, people like Steve Jobs and Wozniak wanted to do great things.
Money motivates people who are shallow -- and they don't need to innovate to get money. They can be lawyers, managers, commission sales people. What does a Hedge Fund Manger create beyond bits of paper? And MBA does nothing but look for loopholes.
I've always been motivated to be creative and make something unique - I often had to be reminded to send in an invoice.
MOST people want to make friends and do something worth doing -- we NEED MONEY, but it isn't what motivates a good doctor, or a scientist.
There are plenty of smart people who are money motivated -- but there are plenty of innovators who died poor. The people who got the money had the connections and desire for money -- and any talent related to that is purely accidental. There are millions of talented people in the US.
"Perhaps because we punish and demonize anyone who gets their income up high enough to become wealthy. "
--No. This is what those whose lives revolve around defending rich *right wingers* believe. Just because you pretend not to know there are lots of wealthy liberals and progressives who aren't so f*cked in the head to believe they're oppressed, doesn't make it so. I know it makes you feel good to believe your views represent those of the majority but the facts simply do not bear this warped mindset out. They don't. Normal people do not believe the wealthy are paying too much. Please put away the crack pipe.
The one that I think ALL of us fell prey to for a while is that the "war stimulated the FDR economy."
When I looked into it -- it turns out that the states that had the most military funding (like for training camps), had economies that had the most sluggish growth. After about 2 years of the war, the economic activity stimulated by the effort began to slow the economy -- which should be obvious for the simple reason that spending to blow up bridges, doesn't have a positive feedback into the economy like building a bridge.
One sherman tank vs. 50 automobiles. One navy cruiser vs perhaps a dozen schools. The fuel used by one Destroyer in a week is equivalent to the entire energy usage of a city of 200,000 for a year.
It kind of sickens me that I STILL have to argue with Republicans about our wars around the world based on their negative economic impacts and how "lowering the price of Gas isn't a GOAL for the Oil industry you moron" -- it's hard to keep it respectful, because I'm dealing with people who are OK with sweatshops and kids mutated by depleted Uranium because they think it preserves their comfortable way of life.
You cannot tell some Americans we don't do things because they are WRONG -- you also have to go the distance by telling them they are STUPID, BAD FOR BUSINESS, and put a little disclaimer at the bottom; "also considered evil in most places -- not including Texas and South Carolina."
I agree -- the accusation that we Demonize the wealthy is absurd...
To "complain" about the theft and corruption of Wall Street that sucked up trillions of dollars and nobody went to jail but a token Berney Madoff is considered by SOME people to be class warfare.
Wow.
Nobody feels more persecuted than these sensitive, poor little rich people, huh?
I love it...When at a loss for counterarguments to those actually being made (or if you're just too damn lazy), try to deflect and then make the issue about strict Constitutionalism. If it's not specifically in the Constitution then it's not worthy of debate. Morality, schmorality. Perfect.
It should be easy to empirically refute or prove. With your GIANT conservative brain -- please don't just leave us hanging by merely dangling your wisdom like a worm on a hook. Don't just say it isn't so and flutter off to another blog to write the wrongs and injustice done to the 35% bracket who actually pay 15% because its dividends.
The .1% NEED your support so that they can get that 3rd Yacht this year. Only YOU can save the endangered great American parasite known as the JOB CREATORS!
I'm sure half of them are curled up in fetal position right now, as they wrap a warm protective blanket of Municipal Bonds over their cold skin. "Mommy, they said we were greedy on Digg today!" Mommy is the safe word that mistress Stephanie uses to take off the nipple clamps and start "story time." Reading the Limbaugh Letter adds $500 to her fee.
@mablung - He doesn't debate each point because it's much easier to just say a smarmy comment and run off. There are a group of people on here that will just bury any article that comes from alternet. They don't even bother to read it, it's just easier to say it's all lies and run away. Quite pathetic.
The bit about corporations being not people is possibly the single most important thing you said there. That protection, originally intended to simplify things like who owns the land a company purchases and such, and so it's the company that pays, not the owner, if a worker gets injured on the job, has been used and abused to avoid legal consequences of deliberate actions. This needs to end.
Regulations CAN both hinder and protect smaller corporations.
MOST regulations are not sponsored by well meaning, intrusive Liberals, but by the Big Multinational corporations.
Things like Sarbanes-Oxley do NOTHING to protect consumers, but the create mounds of reporting work that puts a BARRIER TO ENTRY for all but the largest, most bureaucratically talented corporations.
leodinJan 25, 2012Buried
The biggest lie is that they favor small government, fiscal responsibly, and the free market. It is government interference in the free market at the behest of large corporations that helps maintain income inequality. SOPA should have been an eye-opener to the average liberal who believes that regulation is good. It was clearly a case of regulation being pushed by large corporations to shut small businesses down.
You see, regulations do not hut large corporations, contrary to popular belief, they hut small businesses who cannot afford the extra expenses. Thus, large corporations use regulation as a method of destroying potential competition and ensuring what basically amounts to monopolies, giving them the freedom to do whatever the hell they want.
I may sound confused switching from attacking conservatives to attacking liberals, but make no mistake, both sides are trying to f**k us over.
mablungJan 25, 2012Buried
I'm not trying to troll you. Why not debate each point and cite sources? That would be a much better tactic than your current one.
stubearJan 25, 2012Buried
No, regulations do NOT hurt small businesses. Letting corporations ignore regulations is what hurts small businesses. If large corporations had to follow the same rules as everyone else their competitive advantage would be much less, and in fact I'd argue that their size will ultimately hurt them because smaller companies can be more nimble.
We don't need fewer regulations, we need to restore the regulations large corporations have legislated out and start enforcing corporate law, revoking corporate charters for companies like BP who continue to willfully ignore regulations at the cost of human life and the environment.
We also need to amend the Constitution to clearly state that Corporations are NOT people and are in fact a legal structure allowed to exist by the will of the citizens of the U.S. We need federal corporate charters so companies can no longer shop around for friendly states like Delaware who get to set corporate law for the entire country, and in some cases the world.
After all this is done, we need to stop the lobbying and bribery of our elected officials. I'd like to see a few members of congress see a little time in federal prison but I'll settle for rules that are actually enforceable and allow the people to have more say in the pay, benefits, and ethical standard with which we expect our elected representatives to live and work by.
ageofmasteryJan 25, 2012Buried
How did they narrow it down to just 5?
vitriolandangstJan 25, 2012Buried
Look, people like Steve Jobs and Wozniak wanted to do great things.
Money motivates people who are shallow -- and they don't need to innovate to get money. They can be lawyers, managers, commission sales people. What does a Hedge Fund Manger create beyond bits of paper? And MBA does nothing but look for loopholes.
I've always been motivated to be creative and make something unique - I often had to be reminded to send in an invoice.
MOST people want to make friends and do something worth doing -- we NEED MONEY, but it isn't what motivates a good doctor, or a scientist.
There are plenty of smart people who are money motivated -- but there are plenty of innovators who died poor. The people who got the money had the connections and desire for money -- and any talent related to that is purely accidental. There are millions of talented people in the US.
vitriolandangstJan 25, 2012Buried
They narrowed it down to only 5 --- impressive!
AntiKoolaidJan 25, 2012Buried
"Perhaps because we punish and demonize anyone who gets their income up high enough to become wealthy. "
--No. This is what those whose lives revolve around defending rich *right wingers* believe. Just because you pretend not to know there are lots of wealthy liberals and progressives who aren't so f*cked in the head to believe they're oppressed, doesn't make it so. I know it makes you feel good to believe your views represent those of the majority but the facts simply do not bear this warped mindset out. They don't. Normal people do not believe the wealthy are paying too much. Please put away the crack pipe.
charlotte_webJan 25, 2012Buried
Pure communism has never existed in the world; it's an unsustainable model.
asfinktersezwutJan 25, 2012Buried
I've been to Cuba. There is a vast inequality there too.
vitriolandangstJan 25, 2012Buried
The one that I think ALL of us fell prey to for a while is that the "war stimulated the FDR economy."
When I looked into it -- it turns out that the states that had the most military funding (like for training camps), had economies that had the most sluggish growth. After about 2 years of the war, the economic activity stimulated by the effort began to slow the economy -- which should be obvious for the simple reason that spending to blow up bridges, doesn't have a positive feedback into the economy like building a bridge.
One sherman tank vs. 50 automobiles. One navy cruiser vs perhaps a dozen schools. The fuel used by one Destroyer in a week is equivalent to the entire energy usage of a city of 200,000 for a year.
It kind of sickens me that I STILL have to argue with Republicans about our wars around the world based on their negative economic impacts and how "lowering the price of Gas isn't a GOAL for the Oil industry you moron" -- it's hard to keep it respectful, because I'm dealing with people who are OK with sweatshops and kids mutated by depleted Uranium because they think it preserves their comfortable way of life.
You cannot tell some Americans we don't do things because they are WRONG -- you also have to go the distance by telling them they are STUPID, BAD FOR BUSINESS, and put a little disclaimer at the bottom; "also considered evil in most places -- not including Texas and South Carolina."
vitriolandangstJan 25, 2012Buried
I agree -- the accusation that we Demonize the wealthy is absurd...
To "complain" about the theft and corruption of Wall Street that sucked up trillions of dollars and nobody went to jail but a token Berney Madoff is considered by SOME people to be class warfare.
Wow.
Nobody feels more persecuted than these sensitive, poor little rich people, huh?
Asking for justice is not DEMONIZING.
seanstuartJan 25, 2012Buried
The rich are capitalists, except when they're communists.
novenatorJan 25, 2012Buried
This list is just the tip of the iceberg. Conservatives (mainly Republicans) lie about just about everything in the economic sphere
AntiKoolaidJan 25, 2012Buried
I love it...When at a loss for counterarguments to those actually being made (or if you're just too damn lazy), try to deflect and then make the issue about strict Constitutionalism. If it's not specifically in the Constitution then it's not worthy of debate. Morality, schmorality. Perfect.
treehugger87Jan 25, 2012Buried
This is not a capitalist system, this is a crony capitalist system.
omgscienceJan 25, 2012Buried
It's not wise to throw stones when you live in a glass house. Both parties are owned by corporate interests and yet Americans keep them in power...
vitriolandangstJan 25, 2012Buried
Citation needed.
It should be easy to empirically refute or prove. With your GIANT conservative brain -- please don't just leave us hanging by merely dangling your wisdom like a worm on a hook. Don't just say it isn't so and flutter off to another blog to write the wrongs and injustice done to the 35% bracket who actually pay 15% because its dividends.
The .1% NEED your support so that they can get that 3rd Yacht this year. Only YOU can save the endangered great American parasite known as the JOB CREATORS!
I'm sure half of them are curled up in fetal position right now, as they wrap a warm protective blanket of Municipal Bonds over their cold skin. "Mommy, they said we were greedy on Digg today!" Mommy is the safe word that mistress Stephanie uses to take off the nipple clamps and start "story time." Reading the Limbaugh Letter adds $500 to her fee.
killersquirelJan 25, 2012Buried
@mablung - He doesn't debate each point because it's much easier to just say a smarmy comment and run off. There are a group of people on here that will just bury any article that comes from alternet. They don't even bother to read it, it's just easier to say it's all lies and run away. Quite pathetic.
strenothJan 25, 2012Buried
The bit about corporations being not people is possibly the single most important thing you said there. That protection, originally intended to simplify things like who owns the land a company purchases and such, and so it's the company that pays, not the owner, if a worker gets injured on the job, has been used and abused to avoid legal consequences of deliberate actions. This needs to end.
vitriolandangstJan 25, 2012Buried
Regulations CAN both hinder and protect smaller corporations.
MOST regulations are not sponsored by well meaning, intrusive Liberals, but by the Big Multinational corporations.
Things like Sarbanes-Oxley do NOTHING to protect consumers, but the create mounds of reporting work that puts a BARRIER TO ENTRY for all but the largest, most bureaucratically talented corporations.