• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

American pig

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
What is far more worrisome is that only a few hundred American citizens control most of America's economic wealth and political power. So they are in control of a third of the world's wealth and assets and the greatest military on the planet ... just a few hundred, unelected, and mostly unknown, individuals. And the rest of the world's wealth and power is also under the control of a very small number of individuals. And none of these people gained control of all that wealth and power by caring about the well-being of others.

This is the ultimate failure of capitalism.
Good points.
Back in the '50s and '60s, Kennan's 50% was distributed through the population, while today's 33% is concentrated among just a handful of what used to be called Robber Barons or Economic Royalists. Our country is again an oligarchy, beginning to resemble the unregulated, wild West capitalism of the '20s.

Roosevelt's New Deal regulations created an economic boom and large middle class that were the envy of the world. Regulations in the public interest limited the rapacity of corporatists and bankers, but they bristled at having to cut their workers in on profits.

Various interest groups have been chipping away at these for 70 years. The distribution of the anti-regulation Powell Memo organized the movement and, ten years later, Reagan's trickle down economics and the Koch's Anarcho-Capitalist reorganization -- after David's failed, Libertarian vice Presidential campaign -- put the whole movement into high gear.

Since then, privatization and deregulation have been strangling the middle class. Wages have stagnated, while cost-of-living has increased, as more for-profit private interests have replaced non-profit government agencies.
 

Spiderman

Veteran Member
Good points.
Back in the '50s and '60s, Kennan's 50% was distributed through the population, while today's 33% is concentrated among just a handful of what used to be called Robber Barons or Economic Royalists. Our country is again an oligarchy, beginning to resemble the unregulated, wild West capitalism of the '20s.

Roosevelt's New Deal regulations created an economic boom and large middle class that were the envy of the world. Regulations in the public interest limited the rapacity of corporatists and bankers, but they bristled at having to cut their workers in on profits.

Various interest groups have been chipping away at these for 70 years. The distribution of the anti-regulation Powell Memo organized the movement and, ten years later, Reagan's trickle down economics and the Koch's Anarcho-Capitalist reorganization -- after David's failed, Libertarian vice Presidential campaign -- put the whole movement into high gear.

Since then, privatization and deregulation have been strangling the middle class. Wages have stagnated, while cost-of-living has increased, as more for-profit private interests have replaced non-profit government agencies.
You make me feel dumb with all that knowledge
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I was studying globalism and came across this:
The word itself came into widespread usage, first and foremost in the United States, from the early 1940s.[5] This was the period when US global power was at its peak: the country was the greatest economic power the world had ever known, with the greatest military machine in human history.[6]

As George Kennan's Policy Planning Staff put it in February 1948: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population
Globalism - Wikipedia
Makes me feel kinda like a pig *oink oink*. Does America still have about 50% of the world's wealth?
I highly doubt it but thought I'd ask. America is kind of a hog.
View attachment 20159
That's what happens when you get rid of the gold standard.

Endless flow of money free for the printing at one's heart's content!!! Shopping time!!! 1% bonus points redeemable for life.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Does the master not feed his slaves, so long as they provide him a profit? Sure. And that's all that matters, your think? Pity the slave that gets old, or sick, however. Or the slave child that dreams of someday being free from poverty and servitude.

Wealth and power, when it's accumulated too unevenly, creates tyrants, and tyrants create victims. The more powerful the tyrant, the more victims there are, and the greater their suffering.

So, you consider yourself a slave?
 

Akivah

Well-Known Member
What is far more worrisome is that only a few hundred American citizens control most of America's economic wealth and political power. So they are in control of a third of the world's wealth and assets and the greatest military on the planet ... just a few hundred, unelected, and mostly unknown, individuals. And the rest of the world's wealth and power is also under the control of a very small number of individuals. And none of these people gained control of all that wealth and power by caring about the well-being of others.

This is the ultimate failure of capitalism.

Yeah, why have hundreds of people that got their wealth by, "shudder", working for it? We should go back to dictatorships that have one person (or family) owning all the wealth, and who inherited it. That is the ultimate success of dictatorships.
 

Spiderman

Veteran Member
Yeah, why have hundreds of people that got their wealth by, "shudder", working for it? We should go back to dictatorships that have one person (or family) owning all the wealth, and who inherited it. That is the ultimate success of dictatorships.
If the dictator was enligtened to know what's best for the people, why not?
 

Phantasman

Well-Known Member
I think those who put us in this position were ruthless, clever and playing the long game.
Can we say ATTORNEY?

Nothing like the founding fathers. The Attorney at Law position has become an insatiable trek to create law (as lawmakers) to support their ravenous appetite at making money. No country has as many laws as America. You cannot always use laws to fix problems.(which is proof by the current immigration fiasco). Sanctuary cities are created by attorneys (acting like politicians) who know how to subvert the very laws attorneys before them implemented.

It's a game. One the attorneys always win, even if they lose. They become judges, congressmen, President, etc.

This is the "swamp", IMO.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Can we say ATTORNEY?

Nothing like the founding fathers. The Attorney at Law position has become an insatiable trek to create law (as lawmakers) to support their ravenous appetite at making money. No country has as many laws as America. You cannot always use laws to fix problems.(which is proof by the current immigration fiasco). Sanctuary cities are created by attorneys (acting like politicians) who know how to subvert the very laws attorneys before them implemented.

It's a game. One the attorneys always win, even if they lose. They become judges, congressmen, President, etc.

This is the "swamp", IMO.
Lawyers may help work out the legal details, write the bills, do the filings, argue the cases &c, but, essentially, they work for politicians. It's the politicians who introduce the bills, and it's the special interests -- often Corporations and big banks -- with their armies of lobbyists, ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) &al, who decide what legislation is needed, inform the politicians, and hand them the bills to be introduced.

You often can use laws to fix problems, though. Hasn't all the social progress we've made in the past 200 years been enabled by new laws, often enacted despite passionate opposition from traditionalists?

Question: What do you mean by the immigration fiasco, and how are laws or lawyers creating problems related to it?
 

Phantasman

Well-Known Member
[QUOns herselfTE="Valjean, post: 5474290, member: 57767"]Lawyers may help work out the legal details, write the bills, do the filings, argue the cases &c, but, essentially, they work for politicians. It's the politicians who introduce the bills, and it's the special interests -- often Corporations and big banks -- with their armies of lobbyists, ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) &al, who decide what legislation is needed, inform the politicians, and hand them the bills to be introduced.

You often can use laws to fix problems, though. Hasn't all the social progress we've made in the past 200 years been enabled by new laws, often enacted despite passionate opposition from traditionalists?

Question: What do you mean by the immigration fiasco, and how are laws or lawyers creating problems related to it?[/QUOTE]
Lawyers once dominated Congress, but they are being “squeezed out” today by those who have made politics a career, according to a new research paper.

In the mid-19th century, nearly 80 percent of members of Congress were lawyers, according to the paper (available here). The percentage fell to less than 60 percent in the 1960s and less than 40 percent in 2015. The Washington Post covered the findings by study author Nick Robinson, a visiting lecturer at Yale Law School and an affiliated fellow at Harvard Law School’s Center on the Legal Profession.- abajournal 2016

Breaking the immigration laws already in place results in no accountability. It was a waste of time creating them if law "enforcement" doesn't enforce them.

Wish I could do the same with property taxes, license plates or speeding tickets.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There are lots of laws on the books that aren't rigorously enforced, usually laws with little social consequence if ignored. Then there are laws that are unjust or cruel, and it's a moral duty to oppose these.

Laws are made for man, not man for the law. There's nothing sacred about law. It's constantly changing, and varies regionally. There is no moral duty to obey it.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
And your point? Do you not eat regularly? Do you not own a computer or smart phone? Do you not have a roof over your head? So what if someone else has a dollar more than the next guy, it's up to us to choose how we live.

Meh, it's fine to see the freedoms you have as being worth the price of (for example) wage inequality. I get that. You can't magically address one and not impact on the other, and that can be missed in comparisons to other countries or economic systems.

But just compare your country to your country historically. The trends around wage inequality aren't great. 'Victim' mentality is one thing (and I agree it's destructive). Still, there's a story here, imho.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Meh, it's fine to see the freedoms you have as being worth the price of (for example) wage inequality. I get that. You can't magically address one and not impact on the other, and that can be missed in comparisons to other countries or economic systems.

But just compare your country to your country historically. The trends around wage inequality aren't great. 'Victim' mentality is one thing (and I agree it's destructive). Still, there's a story here, imho.

Really trying to understand what you're getting at here.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
If one wants what they see as wealth and power I'd say their energy would be better spent in achieving what they see as desireable than wasting that energy on self pity and finger pointing.
Most people don't covet wealth or power. They just want the opportunity to live freely, relatively securely, and happily. And they are willing to work in exchange for that. It's those few among us that have to have more than they need, more than they deserve, and more than everyone else, that ruin it for us all. And have since the dawn of mankind.

And you defend them at every turn. You must really hate your fellow humans.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Most people don't covet wealth or power. They just want the opportunity to live freely, relatively securely, and happily. And they are willing to work in exchange for that. It's those few among us that have to have more than they need, more than they deserve, and more than everyone else, that ruin it for us all. And have since the dawn of mankind.

And you defend them at every turn. You must really hate your fellow humans.

How can you live freely if you are constantly worrying about what someone else has or wants?
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I think those who put us in this position were ruthless, clever and playing the long game.
That's why Stanyon admires them so. He and many others, here. Perhaps they secretly want to be those people. Or they just like seeing their fellow humans exploited and suffering. Who knows?
 

PureX

Veteran Member
How can you live freely if you are constantly worrying about what someone else has or wants?
No one cares about what anyone else has or wants except the people who are trying to take it away from everyone else. The problem is that those among us that want to take it away from everyone else can never get enough no matter how much they have. And they ruin everything they touch with that boundless greed, and their inhumane indifference toward the well-being of everyone else. They are toxic to the well-being of humanity.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
No one cares about what anyone else has or wants except the people who are trying to take it away from everyone else. The problem is that those among us that want to take it away from everyone else can never get enough no matter how much they have. And they ruin everything they touch with that boundless greed, and their inhumane indifference toward the well-being of everyone else. They are toxic to the well-being of humanity.

Have you personally met anyone who has taken anything of yours in this sense?
 
Top