the favorite of thr politicians is stick in my pocket.. Allan On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:32 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> The scheme is how politicians can continue to get elected by > rephrasing the whatever tune to their constituents. There are a lot of > ways to say "let's spread the money around" (Baracky Malarkey). > > On Jan 24, 7:00 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think the problem equates to an organised crime skim. > > > > On Jan 24, 7:32 am, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > the pipe line is not a real loss it goes through a lot of sensitive > > > habitat.. the loss of it thank the republicans,, The economic whoa > is > > > brought on by Reagan.. and the two Bushes,, > > > > > When you blame the destruction caused by three economic tornadoes on > the > > > person and people trying to clear up the economic wreckage ,,, made > more > > > difficult by people doing everything they can to retain the economic > mess > > > because it is very profitable to them. > > > > > I think the economic bail out money needs to be repaid.. completely > > > before bonuses and with interest.This bail out money is not and never > > > should be considered free money. Yes these are the very people who > brought > > > on the present economic crisis. > > > Allan > > > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:44 AM, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I want to be Eliot Ness! But that's the problem it wouldn't be me > it'd be > > > > some other bozo with his own agenda and friends and my wants and > needs > > > > would be way down his list if on it at all. This is why I generally > support > > > > less power for government not more. Less power means less money. And > visa > > > > versa. > > > > > > Just read about the IMF predicting Euro Eco Meltdown unless they get > more > > > > money to Spain and Italy RIGHT NOW. More alarmist claptrap or dire > actual > > > > need? Like our friend Kenny, idk. What I do know, or at least think > I know, > > > > is that Spain and Italy fully expect to get their bailout. Like you, > Neil, > > > > I'm bothered that the very rich get bailed out with no consequences > for > > > > their bad investments and bad decisions while, as you note, us > > > > middle-classers foot the collective bill. I want to see some > investment > > > > bankers lose their shirts. The Solyndra's and MF Global Execs should > be > > > > going to prison but they won't be. They didn't break any > laws(apparently) > > > > just the public's trust. > > > > > > I'd love to bust into their warehouse and shoot the place up with > double > > > > barrel shot-guns and confiscate their houses and boats and jet > airplanes > > > > but at the same time I don't want to give that power to others that > might > > > > want to do the same to my beloved energy companies. Houston energy > > > > companies. It's a conundrum. > > > > > > Still waiting for my pipeline from Cananda Mr. President... > Wondering if > > > > your speech tomorrow will be about how we're all going to be energy > > > > independant under your guidance without explaining how your bans on > > > > domestic drilling while bank rolling drilling in Brazil(???) will > help us > > > > do that. Nah, it's going to be about how it's not your fault. Bush > and a > > > > do-nothing Congress will get all the blame. Wait and see if I'm > right. I > > > > don't think Mr. Obama understands what leadership is. He's very good > at > > > > covering his ass though. Very, very good. > > > > > > dj > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 3:44 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> If you haven't guessed, I should make it clear I think the modern > > > >> marxism is very old and hapless. There are now much more severe and > > > >> data-based concerns within economics than these clapped out fuddy- > > > >> duddies can muster. Obama is about to try and tell the US public > that > > > >> not prosecuting the wealthy over mortgage fraud and using pension > > > >> money to pay out a bogus settlement is a success. I doubt we need > any > > > >> "social epistemology" (the current term for marxism) to help us but > > > >> rather some untouchable cops and new rules on who gets to Capitol > Hill > > > >> or Westminster. Our problems are moral. > > > > > >> On Jan 23, 4:37 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > > http://www.lrb.co.uk/v34/n02/slavoj-zizek/the-revolt-of-the-salaried-. > > > >> .. > > > > > >> > The above is a link to the London Review of Books. The argument > made > > > >> > is fairly sound and reminds me how little Marx and rival American > > > >> > writing on economics of his time have been understood. It starts > with > > > >> > a bit on Microsoft - for me a classic case in modern economics > and the > > > >> > creation of "rent" - a concept put forward in Marx's time by Henry > > > >> > George in "Poverty and Progress". There's a compelling logic in > the > > > >> > argument made most in here will get. My own view has long been > that > > > >> > the needed arguments don't exist in economics or politics because > we > > > >> > won't face up to them. "Rent" is key in this, but the real issue > is > > > >> > we cannot free ourselves of ideology because of the comfort it > gives > > > >> > us - a perverse comfort that leads to much obscene discomfort in > the > > > >> > world. > > > > > >> > Most of us think that it's fair for someone to work hard and take > what > > > >> > reward comes. We like simple dross like this. It has a > compelling > > > >> > logic as long as we don't examine it too closely. The problem, of > > > >> > course, is that our cosy belief in this prevents us looking at > what it > > > >> > produces - rich people with inordinate political and other power > over > > > >> > the lives of others and what constitutes "hard work", "smart > work" and > > > >> > "reward". We can easily note the compelling logic of modern > marxism > > > >> > rather suits the interests of - gosh - the modern marxist > industry. I > > > >> > know quite a few who live very easily on what I consider glib > > > >> > critique. Habermas sought to establish (as an ideal type) a form > of > > > >> > dialogue with the only interest at work being Reason - but that's > > > >> > rationalist fantasy. > > > > > >> > The questions we need to address are about bureaucracy and human > > > >> > nature. One conundrum is that most of us can see that most > > > >> > accumulated wealth has not been fairly acquired, but also that > handing > > > >> > over supervision of this to a set of commissioners is likely to > be > > > >> > worse than leaving things alone - though I don't think most of us > > > >> > realise quite what modern reality is. > > > > > -- > > > ( > > > ) > > > |_D Allan > > > > > Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > -- ( ) |_D Allan Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
