A number of people have written insider accounts concerning bonuses and how to get circles of insubstantial transactions going to make them. Housing poor people was only a convenient ruse to get more of this going. The group as a whole is rather poor in terms of knowledge of public choice theories that try to bring about a convergence of personal interests and public interests in decision-making (don't kill the messenger). I suspect most of us would break out backs for the common good, but this is not because we are vestal virgins believing in some Soviet Paradise. I suspect Craig keeps reds under his bed in order to count them to cure insomnia, but he is not entirely wrong. Many years ago the US had a policy of castration for offenders (including masturbators), which has now demonstrated that eunuchs live longer than those retaining balls (really). Giving loans to people who could not really be seen as capable of repaying them was an equally stupid experiment - but also rather incidental to the credit crunch. The real issues lie in a lack of public scrutiny - a very Soviet problem that generates a lack of trust. Most of us are not stupid enough to end up like Boxer (Animal Farm) as he is carted off to the knackers' yard.
On 4 Mar, 03:14, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > "...They are currently trying to run this country into the > ground at full speed and succeeding...." - DJ > > I truely don't understand how you can say that after the Bush years. > There is very little 'ground' left to run into. All the money was > given to the military industrial complex....and then the banks...and > then the largest corps. ..and then.... > > This was the neocon plan all along. This is not conjecture. It is > clearly stated in many of their manafestos. They wanted to spend all > of the public wealth (read: give it to the 'haves') and leave the > funds dry. That way there would be nothing left for any sort of social > welfare. I'd say they were quite successful. What little tinkering the > Dems are doing seems to at least share the additional debt being > racked up with haves and have-nots.. since the latter have been > ignored for way too long I see little harm in comparison. If I had a > dollar for every time I heard 'the middle class'.....I'd be rich. > The notion of the common good has waxed and all but disappeared. > > On Mar 3, 5:55 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Republican majority, yes. Republican controlled, um, I think not. > > Semantics, perhaps, but the Dems did some damage and were a general > > nuisance with what passes for a filibuster these days. Repubs don't > > have enough to filibuster now. We actually have a Dem. controlled > > Congress. They are currently trying to run this country into the > > ground at full speed and succeeding. I'm on pins and needles waiting > > to see what moonbats get appointed as supreme court justices. > > Conservatives don't have the votes to block anything. > > > Please don't mistake me for a fan of Bush. Clinton, despite being a > > lying hound dog, was the better president. I would not have admitted > > that in 2004, but I freely admit it now. He absolutely deserved the > > impeachment but even back then I was glad he wasn't removed from > > office. > > > dj > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:22 PM, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > "...In fact, at the beginning of Bush's administration, he brought > > > the > > > problem before the then democratic controlled congress...." - Craig > > > > Before we revise history too much, when bush took office, the House > > > was controlled by the Republicans and was throughout his > > > administration. The Senate started out controlled by Cheney...the tie > > > breaker of 50/50.....later a republican switched to independent. And > > > it switched back and forth. So, historically, the congress was > > > Republican controlled when Bush took office. > > > For those who have forgotten, the vote to impeach Clinton was made by > > > a Republican controlled branch too. > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/107th_United_States_Congress#Party_summary > > > > On Mar 3, 10:04 am, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Slip, > > >> Are you serious? You think its the financial institutions fault? You > > >> really think they would have lent to people that they knew wouldn't > > >> pay them back out of their own free will? The institutions were > > >> coerced to do what they did. Equal Housing Opportunity, imposed by > > >> the government, is what brought this whole thing to fruition. The > > >> institutions would not have lent to people that could not afford to > > >> pay the institutions back. They are in the business of making money, > > >> not throwing it away. > > >> In fact, at the beginning of Bush's administration, he brought the > > >> problem before the then democratic controlled congress. They gave him > > >> a big middle finger and told him not to mess with their Equal Housing > > >> Opportunity pet project. He backed off, and that is why we are in the > > >> mess we are in now. If he would have went after that as aggressively > > >> as he did Iraq we might not be in as big of economic mess now. > > > >> On Mar 2, 9:27 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > I apologize for the belated welcome but nevertheless, Welcome! > > >> > What you have to understand, wood, is that many people have not the > > >> > slightest idea of financial calculation and are "told" by financial > > >> > experts that they "can" afford the house, the car, the credit card. > > >> > We cannot blame the people alone but more so the financial > > >> > institutions that have taken advantage of those who cannot perceive > > >> > their own financial worth and capability of repayment. The US > > >> > unfortunately is full of sharks that have taken control of government, > > >> > taken control of the poor situations in which people live. > > >> > Who of you out there would not want to have a better home, car, and > > >> > other amenities in life? > > >> > What is happening now is an "Atrocity" perpetrated by the wealthy in > > >> > control of the government. > > > >> > On Mar 2, 8:02 pm, wood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > As much as I would love to blame, the government for this mess, but > > >> > > the government is not entirely to blame—The problem is closer to > > >> > > home. > > >> > > People only have themselves to blame for putting themselves into > > >> > > situation they could have avoid only if they were mentally stronger, > > >> > > and not be blinded by false dreams and value. In trying to live the > > >> > > “American dreams” people makes premature decision; buying house they > > >> > > know they cannot afford, cars they can’t maintain… All for what? > > >> > > People need to change their outlook on life and stop falling victim > > >> > > to > > >> > > mind imprisonment. In the drive to establish independency and > > >> > > individuality, everyone has become the same. > > > >> > > On Feb 26, 4:17 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > "... Now our government is trying to keep deadbeats in houses they > > >> > > > can't afford and shouldn't have gotten loans for in the first > > >> > > > place. > > >> > > > It's asinine." - DJ > > > >> > > > What is even more 'asinine' and is not being talked about at ALL in > > >> > > > any media is that those of us who don't even own a house, whether > > >> > > > we > > >> > > > could afford one or not ...and rent or...whatever, live on the > > >> > > > street, > > >> > > > at parent's home etc. are among those who are PAYING the banks to > > >> > > > help > > >> > > > keep people in homes! It's not even asinine, it is criminal! > > > >> > > > On Feb 26, 2:42 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > > Government is the problem because they manage the tax code. > > >> > > > > It's so > > >> > > > > confusing the guy hired to be in charge of it can't figure out > > >> > > > > how to > > >> > > > > pay his taxes. Let's make it easy. How about a flat tax on all > > >> > > > > income and consumption? Without the loopholes that are so > > >> > > > > abundant > > >> > > > > for the extremely wealthy to avoid taxes. I love the idea. Of > > >> > > > > course, this would eliminate Congress's major power of > > >> > > > > reward/punishment ability so it will never happen. The > > >> > > > > bribes...oops, > > >> > > > > I mean campaign donations... would dry up. > > > >> > > > > dj > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM, ornamentalmind > > > >> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > Yes, it is fran. Today many who pay a lot in taxes, not > > >> > > > > > percentage > > >> > > > > > wise, but in amount based on a large income don't mind at all. > > >> > > > > > Only a > > >> > > > > > select vocal few are heard in the media to the point that such > > >> > > > > > propaganda about the government being the problem > > >> > > > > > (Ronnie)....has > > >> > > > > > become a common myth. I've said it many times...when I was a > > >> > > > > > kid, my > > >> > > > > > father paid 91% of his income in taxes...and, we did VERY > > >> > > > > > well....no > > >> > > > > > complaints. Today, in most cases, the poor pay a higher > > >> > > > > > percentage of > > >> > > > > > their income in taxes than the rich. Robin Hood aside, this is > > >> > > > > > absurd > > >> > > > > > no matter the argument. > > > >> > > > > > On Feb 25, 9:28 am, frantheman <[email protected]> > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> Don's - of course - purely rhetorical suggestion about the > > >> > > > > >> non-payment > > >> > > > > >> of taxes seems to echo a certain US American mythology that > > >> > > > > >> there's > > >> > > > > >> something un-american about paying taxes, as well as there > > >> > > > > >> being > > >> > > > > >> something inherently suspect about (central) government. > > > >> > > > > >> Nobody likes paying taxes and very few would even consider > > >> > > > > >> paying more > > >> > > > > >> than they absolutely have to - including me. But I must also > > >> > > > > >> acknowledge that taxation is the basic method for paying for > > >> > > > > >> things > > >> > > > > >> which a country/community/society feels need to be organised > > >> > > > > >> collectively. It belongs to the basic ideas of > > >> > > > > >> self-definition of a > > >> > > > > >> country/community/society to decide what these collective > > >> > > > > >> tasks are > > >> > > > > >> and how far they should be funded by the common purse. > > > >> > > > > >> Even as a non-US American, I seem to remember that the > > >> > > > > >> rallying cry > > >> > > > > >> for the American Revolution was not, "No taxation," but > > >> > > > > >> rather "No > > >> > > > > >> taxation without representation." The USA established itself > > >> > > > > >> on this > > >> > > > > >> basis as a representative democracy. Everything else flows > > >> > > > > >> from that. > > >> > > > > >> To use the language of 18th Century political thinkers, > > >> > > > > >> that's the > > >> > > > > >> basic social contract and there's no way to opt out of it and > > >> > > > > >> back to > > >> > > > > >> the "state of nature." As far as I recall, the US fought a > > >> > > > > >> rather > > >> > > > > >> spectacular civil war about that very issue. Those who wanted > > >> > > > > >> the > > >> > > > > >> right to opt out lost. > > > >> > > > > >> None of this, of course, addresses problems of injustice > > >> > > > > >> within > > >> > > > > >> particular taxation systems. But, strictly seen, that's what > > >> > > > > >> has to be > > >> > > > > >> sorted out within the representative democracy framework. Or, > > >> > > > > >> if your > > >> > > > > >> conscientious objections lead you to refuse, then you must > > >> > > > > >> accept the > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
