• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Next Capitalist Revolution

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,404
Reaction score
1,417
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From the Economist: The next capitalist revolution

Excerpt:

Capitalism has suffered a series of mighty blows to its reputation over the past decade. The sense of a system rigged to benefit the owners of capital at the expense of workers is profound. In 2016 a survey found that more than half of young Americans no longer support capitalism. This loss of faith is dangerous, but is also warranted. Today’s capitalism does have a real problem, just not the one that protectionists and populists like to talk about. Life has become far too comfortable for some firms in the old economy, while, in the new economy, tech firms have rapidly built market power. A revolution is indeed needed—one that unleashes competition, forcing down abnormally high profits today and ensuring that innovation can thrive tomorrow.


Countries have acted to fuel competition before. At the start of the 20th century America broke up monopolies in railways and energy. After the second world war West Germany put the creation of competitive markets at the centre of its nation-building project. The establishment of the European single market, a project championed by Margaret Thatcher, prised open stale domestic markets to dynamic foreign firms. Ronald Reagan fostered competition across much of the American economy.

Capitalism has suffered a series of mighty blows to its reputation over the past decade. The sense of a system rigged to benefit the owners of capital at the expense of workers is profound. In 2016 a survey found that more than half of young Americans no longer support capitalism. This loss of faith is dangerous, but is also warranted. Today’s capitalism does have a real problem, just not the one that protectionists and populists like to talk about. Life has become far too comfortable for some firms in the old economy, while, in the new economy, tech firms have rapidly built market power. A revolution is indeed needed—one that unleashes competition, forcing down abnormally high profits today and ensuring that innovation can thrive tomorrow.

Incumbents scoff at the idea that they have it easy. However consolidated markets become domestically, they argue, globalisation keeps heating the furnace of competition. But in industries that are less exposed to trade, firms are making huge returns. We calculate the global pool of abnormal profits to be $660bn, more than two-thirds of which is made in America, one-third of that in technology firms.

Some argue that the solution to capital’s excesses is to beef up labour. Elizabeth Warren, a possible American presidential candidate, wants to put more workers on boards. Britain’s Labour Party promises compulsory employee share-ownership. And almost everyone on the left wants to reinvigorate the declining power of unions (see Briefing). There is a role for trade unions in a modern economy. But a return to 1960s-style capitalism, in which bloated oligopolies earn fat margins but dole cash out to workers under the threat of strikes is something to be avoided. Tolerating abnormal profits so long as they are distributed in a way that satisfies those with power is a recipe for cronyism. .... But an economy composed of cosy incumbents will eventually see a collapse in innovation and hence a stagnation in living standards.

'Nuff said? I doubt it.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

And there is nothing like a Great Recession to make people think of "Who's getting most of it, and who's getting nothing at all". Aka, by economists, as Income Disparity ...
 
Last edited:

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
From the Economist: The next capitalist revolution

Excerpt:



'Nuff said? I doubt it.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

And there is nothing like a Great Recession to make people think of "Who's getting most of it, and who's getting nothing at all". Aka, by economists, as Income Disparity ...

It's a global depression that is coming but I want to talk about these idiots who were forged on Victim Culture and are looking for someone to take care of them.

They are future serfs for their betters.
 

RetiredUSN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
27,635
Reaction score
14,099
Location
Norfolk Virginia area.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
From the Economist: The next capitalist revolution

Excerpt:



'Nuff said? I doubt it.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

And there is nothing like a Great Recession to make people think of "Who's getting most of it, and who's getting nothing at all". Aka, by economists, as Income Disparity ...

It's a shame that the government(s) are quite often the cause by lack of oversight, and picking winners and losers, and bad policies.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
8,529
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's a shame that the government(s) are quite often the cause by lack of oversight, and picking winners and losers, and bad policies.

In their rush to wealth the 1% killed the goose that laid the golden egg … the middle class. Trickle down economics is proving to be suicide capitalism. Now rather than try to fix the problem, and do what is necessary to make everyone economically healthy, they have moved to a piranha feeding frenzy with the goal of "getting theirs while the getting is good". Trumps "tax cut" is Trickle Down v.2. Trickle Down is what got, all of, US in this bubble/crash cycle … it's not going to get us out of it and in fact, this new version, will make things exponentially worse.
 
Last edited:

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
In their rush to wealth the 1% killed the goose that laid the golden egg … the middle class. Trickle down economics is proving to be suicide capitalism. Now rather than try to fix the problem, and do what is necessary to make everyone economically healthy, they have moved to a piranha feeding frenzy with the goal of "getting theirs while the getting is good".
Because the smart ones know that the crash is coming, that we messed up.

Even the not smart ones have a fear that it is....something does not feel right.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
8,529
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Because the smart ones know that the crash is coming, that we messed up.

Even the not smart ones have a fear that it is....something does not feel right.

I have come to the crossroads in my life and I always knew the right path, but I never took it; because it was too damn hard.

Al Pacino - "Scent of a Woman"

America IS great, but we are at a crossroads and we need to take the right path, RIGHT NOW! We need to do the hard things that will make ALL AmeriCANs Great. That's what made America GREAT and that's what will keep it that way.
 
Last edited:

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
America IS great, but we are at a crossroads and we need to take the right path, RIGHT NOW! We need to do the hard things that will make ALL AmeriCANs Great. That's what made America GREAT and that's what will keep it that way.

So you are in the group that feels something important is of kilter....that is a start.

Look, there pretty much is no America anymore...... there is no longer a single thing that binds us together, there is nothing that we all believe in, the social glue has been allowed to degrade to the point that the society is breaking down....And we tend to be unwilling to maintain our borders...And we are in the middle of a civil war over what America should become......And the Left especially has decided that running over people is fine, that getting to UTOPIA demands that the unfit be thrown overboard "SHUT UP AND DIE!"
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
8,529
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So you are in the group that feels something important is of kilter....that is a start.

Look, there pretty much is no America anymore...... there is no longer a single thing that binds us together, there is nothing that we all believe in, the social glue has been allowed to degrade to the point that the society is breaking down....And we tend to be unwilling to maintain our borders...And we are in the middle of a civil war over what America should become......And the Left especially has decided that running over people is fine, that getting to UTOPIA demands that the unfit be thrown overboard "SHUT UP AND DIE!"

That's a lie, IMHO, that's treason. Get thee behind me Satan!
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That's a lie, IMHO, that's treason. Get thee behind me Satan!

Alan Watts used to say that the real church...what matters....is not the building we call "The Church", it is what takes place in that building.

Same theory goes here, and America is not great, in fact it is so not great that it almost does not exist anymore.

America as well as the American Dream are almost dead now...in many ways it was suicide.

Very hard times are coming.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
70,524
Reaction score
40,163
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
From the Economist: The next capitalist revolution

Excerpt:



'Nuff said? I doubt it.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

It's times-change boyz-'n-girlz - difficult decisions must be taken because the present modus-operandi is going nowhere except onto its next Great Recession.

And there is nothing like a Great Recession to make people think of "Who's getting most of it, and who's getting nothing at all". Aka, by economists, as Income Disparity ...

The article also says this:

Several old-economy industries with high prices and fat profits lurk beneath the surface of commerce: credit cards, pharmaceutical distribution and credit-checking. When the public deals with oligopolists more directly, the problem is clearer. America’s sheltered airlines charge more than European peers and deliver worse service. Cable-tv firms are notorious for high prices: the average pay-tv customer in America is estimated to spend 44% more today than in 2011.

Second, governments should tear down barriers to entry, such as non-compete clauses, occupational licensing requirements and complex regulations written by industry lobbyists. More than 20% of American workers must hold licences in order to do their jobs, up from just 5% in 1950.

It would seem that government has not been so much the solution but a big part of the problem. Of course, the article did not state what defined "abnormal profits" - is it simply that a company is "too big" (like Walmart or Amazon) or is there a percentage of profit at which the rest should be taken (stolen?) by the government for 'proper' redistribution?

Government is quick to quash competition (e.g. preferring taxi unions over Uber) and creating the need for 'certification' of workers (e.g. only lawyers may file financial reports for guardians of estates/persons and only 'professionals' may file their taxes). There has also been a push to make all gun 'transfers' go through a tiny number of FFL licensed 'dealers' (for a fee, of course) to close 'loopholes' where such a monopoly is left out of 'the process"'.
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
74,544
Reaction score
29,819
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In their rush to wealth the 1% killed the goose that laid the golden egg … the middle class. Trickle down economics is proving to be suicide capitalism. Now rather than try to fix the problem, and do what is necessary to make everyone economically healthy, they have moved to a piranha feeding frenzy with the goal of "getting theirs while the getting is good". Trumps "tax cut" is Trickle Down v.2. Trickle Down is what got, all of, US in this bubble/crash cycle … it's not going to get us out of it and in fact, this new version, will make things exponentially worse.

Trickle down to small, medium and large US businesses is a thing...and it's a good thing. If that also requires trickle down to globalists, so be it.

Trump tax policy is a very good thing for workers, small, medium and large US businesses. Trump has other policies that are not so good for the globalists, their lobbyists and their Congressional toadies.

Ask yourself why the US Chamber of Commerce is against everything Trump does. Then look at who they donate to and lobby for.

Globalists are enormously threatened by Trump.
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,404
Reaction score
1,417
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
AN OLIGARCHIC MARKET BINGE

It would seem that government has not been so much the solution but a big part of the problem. Of course, the article did not state what defined "abnormal profits" - is it simply that a company is "too big" (like Walmart or Amazon) or is there a percentage of profit at which the rest should be taken (stolen?) by the government for 'proper' redistribution?

What is unsaid but the objective of the writer was to simply point out that the American economy has been on an OLIGARCHIC BINGE.

Successive Federal Governments have overlooked the key problem that generates Income Disparity. It is the aggregation of companies that reduces competition, establishes price-levels and installs an Market Oligarchy.

Oligarchy = An oligopoly is a market structure in which a few firms dominate. When a market is shared between a few firms, it is said to be highly concentrated. Although only a few firms dominate, it is possible that many small firms may also operate in the market.

The American economy has been twisted and turned. Oligopoply has been the process by which markets aggregate themselves by means of corporate buyouts. It is a very dangerous market evolution because it effectively installs a "means of non-competition" of market entrants.

That is, the market is supposed to be "competitive", but a closer investigation shows that there is very little competition amongst the major players; so the competitive effect on prices is nullified. The major companies - without negotiating directly since that would be patently illegal - find a "comfortable price-range" around which to all place themselves. There is thus no real price-competition, and - if any - it centers around means other than pricing. For instance, publicity.

How bad is market oligopolization in America? That question is best answered by giving examples (as from here):
Oligopolies are prevalent throughout the world and appear to be increasing ever so rapidly. Unlike a monopoly, where one corporation dominates a certain market, an oligopoly consists of a select few companies having significant influence over an industry. Oligopolies are noticeable in a multitude of markets. While these companies are considered competitors within the specific market, they tend to cooperate with each other to benefit as a whole, which can lead to higher prices for consumers.

Common Industries Overshadowed By Oligopolies:
Cable Television Services
Entertainment Industries (Music and Film)
Airline Industry
Mass Media
Pharmaceuticals
Computer & Software Industry
Cellular Phone Services
Smart Phone and Computer Operating Systems
Aluminum and Steel
Oil and Gas
Auto Industry

Specific Current Examples of Oligopolies:
*National mass media and news outlets are a prime example of an oligopoly, with 90% of U.S. media outlets owned by six corporations: Walt Disney (DIS), Time Warner (TWX), CBS Corporation (CBS), Viacom (VIAB), NBC Universal, and Rupert *Murdoch’s News Corporation (NWSA).
*Operating systems for smartphones and computers provide excellent examples of oligopolies. Apple iOS and Google Android dominate smartphone operating systems, while computer operating systems are overshadowed by Apple and Windows.
*The auto industry is another example of an oligopoly, with the leading auto manufacturers in the United States being Ford (F), GMC, and Chrysler.
*While there are smaller cell phone service providers, the providers that tend to dominate the industry are Verizon (VZ), Sprint (S), AT&T (T), and T-Mobile (TMUS).
*The music entertainment industry is dominated by Universal Music Group, Sony, BMG, Warner and EMI Group.

Are such oligopolies "dangerous"? Hardly, if they want to keep their privileged-price positioning. Are they competitive? Only to the extent that the "price range" of competition is limited but remains high. Should any one entity leave the grouping by an attempt at "gouging the market" by reducing drastically market-prices, then the others are likely to follow.

Meaning total revenues diminish until the "betrayer" finally decides to go back to the oligopolistic price-structure previously in place. (Typically this happens by means of buy-outs whereby the oligopoly is strengthened since the buyer is one of the pre-existing companies.)

MY POINT

Some call that market-competition, but I don't. Market competition is best when BUYERS are paying sensible prices but not oligopolistic prices. Which typically happens when either the nature of product or service is reproducible competitively with difficulty. (Google and Facebook are two such examples.)

And in some industries that has not happened since a great long time - particularly those that have supplanted non-Internet market-based products/services with Internet-based products/services ...
 
Last edited:

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,404
Reaction score
1,417
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's a shame that the government(s) are quite often the cause by lack of oversight, and picking winners and losers, and bad policies.

Governments change so often that I wouldn't blame that outcome particularly on governments. I would blame it nonetheless on political parties that are sustained by extravagant contributions by rich-individuals who are seeking a "payback". That payback inevitably is intended to enhance their investment performance. (This present PotUS has just lowered upper-income taxation as retribution for those who financially supported his campaign*.)

What I blame government for is the fact that We, the Sheeple, elect people who gouge markets by reducing competition. This happens, ipso facto, because there is less market-competition resulting from the fact that we have allowed market-aggregation into oligopolies to happen.

When it does, the market becomes far less competitive, and we, the sheeple, pay higher prices for goods/services that we purchase ...

*And it was not illegal because the money went not to "buy votes" but to convince sectors of the electorate to vote for a given party. The effect is the same, but the latter mechanism is not illegal. (Unless, of course, that trickery were made illegal by law that limited contributions to any political party to a sizable but not incommensurate sum of money. Say a maximum of $5K to a party per person annually regardless of election years.)
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
70,524
Reaction score
40,163
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It's a shame that the government(s) are quite often the cause by lack of oversight, and picking winners and losers, and bad policies.

Yep, I find it odd that (our federal?) government is both defined as helping to cause the problem and the (only?) solution.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
8,529
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Globalists are enormously threatened by Trump.

That's a lie as with the rest of your post. Globalists prop up trump because they need his signature. Trickle down can only be viewed as a good thing if you ignore what's happened to our economy since it was brought in under Reaganomics. The middle class is disappearing the American dream is a nightmare for most AmeriCANs while a very few have gotten fabulously wealthy.
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
74,544
Reaction score
29,819
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That's a lie as with the rest of your post. Globalists prop up trump because they need his signature. Trickle down can only be viewed as a good thing if you ignore what's happened to our economy since it was brought in under Reaganomics. The middle class is disappearing the American dream is a nightmare for most AmeriCANs while a very few have gotten fabulously wealthy.

There's been no trickle down for the past 30 years. During that time we've had nothing but Globalism. Believe me, the globalists haven't trickled down anything.

Trump is ending that.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
8,529
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There's been no trickle down for the past 30 years. During that time we've had nothing but Globalism. Believe me, the globalists haven't trickled down anything.

Trump is ending that.

Trump just started TrickleDown 2.0, the "Globalists" are the 1% - are the Oligarchs … all the same thing … no matter what you call them, they have trump in their pocket.
 

James972

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
22,166
Reaction score
808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
In their rush to wealth the 1% killed the goose that laid the golden egg … the middle class. Trickle down economics is proving to be suicide capitalism. Now rather than try to fix the problem, and do what is necessary to make everyone economically healthy, they have moved to a piranha feeding frenzy with the goal of "getting theirs while the getting is good". Trumps "tax cut" is Trickle Down v.2. Trickle Down is what got, all of, US in this bubble/crash cycle … it's not going to get us out of it and in fact, this new version, will make things exponentially worse.

Wow, you've perfectly parroted current libcommie talking points. You get an A+ for transcription! So, you want trickle down welfare instead of trickle down capitalism?

Did you notice Trump is president
 

James972

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
22,166
Reaction score
808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The middle class is disappearing the American dream is a nightmare for most AmeriCANs while a very few have gotten fabulously wealthy.

Sad that liberal unions, taxes, budget deficits, and regulations have shipped so many middle class jobs to China and that 30 million illegals were invited in to take the remaining jobs and bid down wages. Sad that the successful liberal attack on our schools, families, and religion has rendered so many Americans unfit for middle class jobs.
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,404
Reaction score
1,417
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
LIFE IS A LOTTERY?

It's a global depression that is coming but I want to talk about these idiots who were forged on Victim Culture and are looking for someone to take care of them.

They are future serfs for their betters.

I know a great many people who are dirt-poor and they rarely employ the words "victim" in explaining themselves.

This is a concoction of the Rabid Right, to which you are evidently a full-fledged member. Because you are unable to understand the underlying reasons for poverty and the FACT that one is born-into-that-particular perversity. One certainly does not chose it.

Also, as a result of that fact, poverty is a type of Social Incarceration in an income strata that allows no-exit. Except perhaps by the Great Good Fortune of a Lottery Ticket! (Which simply bilks many people of income they can ill afford to lose.)

Do your really-'n-truly think a Lottery Ticket should decide one's level on the ladder of Societal Existence?

IT NEEDN'T BE

It should be "ability". And how do we inculcate our children with "ability". By a proper career in Education - that is, from Primary to Secondary and then onto Tertiary Education. It is in the latter that one graduates at the very least with a basic formation in a knowhow or at the other end in a Doctorate Degree.

How and where one ends-up socially is determined purely by inherent intellectual capacity and will and luck.

But as the springboard to whichever level remains the Opportunity to Obtain the Knowledge/Competence Credentials with which to succeed with the least cost-impediment possible*.

Duhhhhhhhhh ...

*If each city in each state has a fire-department and a police-department to protect its citizens, why cannot each state provide a means to obtain a basic-level of qualification (typical post-secondary education) with which to find a decent job; and even more if sufficiently educated? (Especially in present times as we evolve out of the Industrial Age and into the Information Age?)
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
LIFE IS A LOTTERY?



I know a great many people who are dirt-poor and they rarely employ the words "victim" in explaining themselves.

This is a concoction of the Rabid Right, to which you are evidently a full-fledged member. Because you are unable to understand the underlying reasons for poverty and the FACT that one is born-into-that-particular perversity. One certainly does not chose it.

Also, as a result of that fact, poverty is a type of Social Incarceration in an income strata that allows no-exit. Except perhaps by the Great Good Fortune of a Lottery Ticket! (Which simply bilks many people of income they can ill afford to lose.)

Do your really-'n-truly think a Lottery Ticket should decide one's level on the ladder of Societal Existence?

IT NEEDN'T BE

It should be "ability". And how do we inculcate our children with "ability". By a proper career in Education - that is, from Primary to Secondary and then onto Tertiary Education. It is in the latter that one graduates at the very least with a basic formation in a knowhow or at the other end in a Doctorate Degree.

How and where one ends-up socially is determined purely by inherent intellectual capacity and will and luck.

But as the springboard to whichever level remains the Opportunity to Obtain the Knowledge/Competence Credentials with which to succeed with the least cost-impediment possible*.

Duhhhhhhhhh ...

*If each city in each state has a fire-department and a police-department to protect its citizens, why cannot each state provide a means to obtain a basic-level of qualification (typical post-secondary education) with which to find a decent job; and even more if sufficiently educated? (Especially in present times as we evolve out of the Industrial Age and into the Information Age?)

You did not track my post at all but I will take this opportunity to note that we are not generally honest enough to call things what they are anymore.

We used to be better.
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,404
Reaction score
1,417
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
We used to be better.

Oh, were we?

Then how did we ever elect a Donald Dork?

By means of a mechanism that is outdated and incorrect, we accepted that the person who won the Popular-vote had it robbed from her and the prize went to a first-class dunce who had lost the popular-vote. FOR THE FIFTH TIME IN OUR HISTORY AS A NATION!

And we've got two more years of this dunce, if someone does not declare him mentally unfit for the job. Which he has demonstrated amply well time and time again.

He went to Puerto Rico to throw paper-towels at the crowd that had suffered a loss close to at least 1340 lives (if not more). Had he done that in the US, they would have thrown the towels back at him ...
 

Lafayette

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
7,404
Reaction score
1,417
Location
France
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
YOU ARE LIVING IN AN OLIGARCHIC MARKET-ECONOMY

When the public deals with oligopolists more directly, the problem is clearer. America’s sheltered airlines charge more than European peers and deliver worse service. Cable-tv firms are notorious for high prices: the average pay-tv customer in America is estimated to spend 44% more today than in 2011..

I frankly do not understand why Obama did not go after the oligopolists. Maybe it was because "they" (the Replicants) had him by the short&curlies from 2010 onwards with their majority in the HofR.

Or was it his Attorney General who was a lawyer and is now having opened subsequently his office in Las Vegas. Evidently, he was thinking of his post-Obama days as a private lawyer?

Anyway, what any economist would have (should have) forecast is how Income Disparity would worsen:
5-15-18pov-f1.png


In every distribution of income chart I have ever posted, it is the magic date of 1980 (Reckless Ronny's ascent to the White House throne-room) that distinguishes when (exactly) the Income Disparity figures really&truly worsened. What did Ronnie do to deserve all those statues they've made of him?

He reduced upper-income taxation from the 70% level to below 30%! (See graphic history of upper income tax rates here.)

Which is how oligarchs (that is, those who defy the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) and create markets that are in the hands of a select number (rarely more than 4 or 5 companies obtaining a majority of the business volume) where prices remain high without there being the slightest provable direct collusion ("price fixing") amongst them. (Note that the Clayton Act did not really see oligopolistic market-tendencies to reduce competition that would come later and exist predominantly today.)

Which means oligarchs are screwing the American consumer, for the benefit of TopManagement (with both skyrocketing salaries but also "marvelous stock-options") boosted by high profit-margins derived from no real market-competition;

You are living in an oligarchic market-economy ...
 
Last edited:

James972

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
22,166
Reaction score
808
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Oh, were we?

Then how did we ever elect a Donald Dork?

By means of a mechanism that is outdated and incorrect, we accepted that the person who won the Popular-vote had it robbed from her and the prize went to a first-class dunce who had lost the popular-vote. FOR THE FIFTH TIME IN OUR HISTORY AS A NATION!

And we've got two more years of this dunce, if someone does not declare him mentally unfit for the job. Which he has demonstrated amply well time and time again.

He went to Puerto Rico to throw paper-towels at the crowd that had suffered a loss close to at least 1340 lives (if not more). Had he done that in the US, they would have thrown the towels back at him ...

Trump has his issues for sure but the real question is: is he better or worse than a liberal, all things considered? Take a look at his many problematic marriages for example. Yet, the Family research Council supports Trump. Why? Because Trump is pro family, relatively speaking. Liberals, conversely, have launched an all out attack on the concept of love and family itself with their feminist, divorce, abortion, resilient kids, and welfare agenda.
 

I'm Supposn

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,656
Reaction score
243
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Excerpted from https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/11/15/the-next-capitalist-revolution
" ...There is a role for trade unions in a modern economy. But a return to 1960s-style capitalism, in which bloated oligopolies earn fat margins but dole cash out to workers under the threat of strikes is something to be avoided. ...".
Lafayette, although the right wing of USA's political spectrum do not explicitly acknowledge their positions, they're proponents of government's policies and laws that favor employers and effectively hinder organization of employees and such organizations from protecting employees' interests.

Most of those same USA right wingers are opposed to the federal minimum wage.
I'm a proponent of the federal minimum wage rate being gradually increased until it reaches the designated purchasing power, and there after monitored and annually updated to retain that purchasing power. There cannot be a sufficient median wage rate, if the nation's minimum wage rate's insufficient.
The purchasing power of the nation's median wage rate indicates the nation's median living standard.

Most of those same USA right wingers' are also opposed to USA entering mutual “most favored agreements” that prohibit participants from treating each other's commercial entities or products in any lesser manner than they treat those from any other foreign nation, but does not prevent the agreeing nation's trade policy from favoring their own enterprises and products.
Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

We all do better when we all do better.
Respectfully, Supposn
 
Top Bottom