Removing liberal plutocrats from the dem constituency would still leave that constituency far broader than the reps'.
Queen Elizabeth Crushes Wall Street
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
99% > 1%, so if she's fighting for "her" people, and they happen to be the 99%, then hate on, her fight is the better one.
I hope I am wrong because I am all in favor of old school liberalism as an alternative today's crony loving anti-constitution democrats / pre commies... but I suspect its all b.s. posturing.
she knows she can't get anywhere as a democrat with out Wall Street and Hollywood money.
she knows she can't get anywhere as a democrat with out Wall Street and Hollywood money.
Last edited:
House Republicans Approve New Perk For Wall Street
WASHINGTON -- House Republicans on Wednesday pushed through a bill that would delay a key section of the Volcker Rule, ignoring staunch opposition from Democrats and a veto threat from President Barack Obama.
The vote of 271-154 included just 29 Democratic supporters.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/volcker-rule-delay_n_6469902.html
WASHINGTON -- House Republicans on Wednesday pushed through a bill that would delay a key section of the Volcker Rule, ignoring staunch opposition from Democrats and a veto threat from President Barack Obama.
The vote of 271-154 included just 29 Democratic supporters.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/volcker-rule-delay_n_6469902.html
Dodd-Frank was the biggest gift to Wall Street outside of the re-appointing of Bernanke, and appointing of Yellen. I wonder which party you can lay all of that at the feet of.
Yeah, so back to Warren. Thanks for playing.
and just where exactly do those 99% get their money? Exterminate the 1% and see just how long your social security stays solvent. Every big spending social spending program relies on the 1% to keep making more and more. I don't know why you say "hate" there is no hate involved, it's just math. If we could all do better by giving the poor money and taking it from the rich I would be all for it.
By far the largest part comes from other 99%'rs.
ok, let's take all or most of their money. How long do you think that would last us? Warren Buffet and Bill Gates combined only have enough money total to run the government for a few weeks. And when we run out of the 1% money, where do we go to get more? Elizabeth will start telling me it is my patriotic duty to give more and more to the government you and she loves so much.
I don't love the government so much. I love the individual and his free spirit. I like it when he reaches the 1%. And most 1 percenters give more in charity than the government would ever ask.
Go ahead, give it all to the 99%. I'll get it back in a few years. The reason they are poor is because they continually make bad financial decisions. But that is nothing more than one pocket into the other. Best way is to grow the pie so big that nobody cares if you get a few free small crumbs.
What we really need is to leverage what working people can already do en masse, and that is make $15 trillion a year in goods and services, and give them their fair share of that. Why has the rising productivity of the 99% recently become uncoupled from compensation for the 99%? Because the 1% have captured government (and patterns of ownership. We can get into that elsewhere) and made the renting of (their) money more important than production.
Last edited:
I hear ya, those of us on the right call it "crony capitalism" and we hate it. Why do you think we hate the government so? They don't represent us, they only represent the 1% who bribe them.
The difference is, you and Elizabeth believe men are evil and greedy and need to be controlled. We believe the individual if left to his own devices is good. I guess it depends on your outlook. If you think man is greedy and bad, you need a big government to fight him.
The problem is, the government you created becomes even more greedy than the individual you first started out to control. And in the end, the greedy man and the government becomes one and the same.