If you are including the debt I feel terrible. You're right.

On Nov 13, 1:50 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is hardly anything more important to thriving functioning
> capitalism than productivity, and sharing the fruits of productivity.
> It is notable that productivity among U.S. workers actually
> skyrocketed over the last decade and a half, but real wages have
> flattened or declined.
> Where did the surpluses go? To parasitic financializers who have seen
> their share over all corporate profits grow from 10% to over 45% in
> recent decades.
> After costing trillions and wiping out the world economy, what asset,
> good, or service do big banks produce that has genuine public worth?
>
> • “Expert advice”, in which brokers intentionally sell junk to
> consumers, as shown in investment bank emails?
> • “Financial services”, which turn out to be so laden with hidden fees
> and loosened/fabricated credit qualifications that the lendee is worse
> off?
> • Allegiances that concentrate financial wealth the top 0.1% of the
> population, causing the vast majority of the world to get poorer?
>
> If anything, citizens would stand to gain more by paying big banks to
> close their doors.
>
> Big banks have largely stopped lending to businesses or individuals
> because that’s not profitable enough and because they need to retain
> capital to reduce their exposure due to their own foolish
> overleveraging. This depresses community and small business
> entrepreneurship and productivity.
>
> Bottom line: Big banks’ “services” take far more in costs than they
> provide in benefits. Much would be gained, and little lost, if they
> were allowed to fail or were decommissioned outright for their
> criminal behavior.
>
> The bail outs could have been given to individuals and families
> instead of the banks - we would probably have been looking at $120,000
> a family.
>
> It's not the roar of the crowd rigsy - we might call that socially
> approved epistemic authority.  It's about forming decent culture and
> that we are less individual than we are made to think.  Ask people if
> they have a figure on what the TARP and the rest have cost each one of
> us - you'll generally come up dry.  If people struggle even with
> basics like this what chance complex schemes of internal training?
>
> On 13 Nov, 19:28, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The US has lots of problems it does not want to admit to.. There is one
> > extremely dangerous quake off the northwest coast  ..  that will happen
> > more sooner than later.
> > Allan
>
> > Matrix  **  th3 beginning light
> > On Nov 13, 2012 1:59 PM, "rigsy03" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > You seem to see morality as a group thing rather than an individual
> > > struggle between good and evil- which is a religious/spiritual matter.
> > > As for individualism, it is a necessary tension against "the roar of
> > > the crowd". There are too many examples to list.
>
> > > On Nov 12, 9:49 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Even one person one vote isn't it on its own.  Majorities are
> > > > manipulable and often wrong.  If you look at an issue like abortion -
> > > > which I think should be available and also avoided by better sexual
> > > > practice - there might be a majority against for all sorts of
> > > > superstitious reasons.  The US relies on Roe v Wade rather than
> > > > statute.  For all the romanticism of Irish republicanism, they leave a
> > > > young, raped girl to 'her fate'.  I believe there comes a time when we
> > > > should have help to slip from the mortal coil but one can immediately
> > > > see problems.  Molly talks of embracing pardoxes - but much of the
> > > > difficulty concerns cultural ideologies based in the manipulation of
> > > > ignorance.  Any half-wit should be able to grasp that the treatment of
> > > > wages as a cost to be hammered down is inconsistent with a developed
> > > > economy and genuinely available opportunity for most.  Yet our
> > > > politics treats the dominant ideology of a race to the bottom on wages
> > > > as as taken as read as any Soviet claptrap.  Worker unions are to be
> > > > detested, yet managers, owners and professionals are more unionised
> > > > than any set of mine workers in history.
>
> > > > Science more or less accepts we are good and evil and that the unit
> > > > that promotes good behaviour is the social.  Virtue ethics arise in
> > > > writing within an unchallenged slave economy - I don't want to be
> > > > 'pure' and live off the backs of others (though inevitably as I grow
> > > > creaky I do).  I'm sick of phrases like 'flexible employment' that
> > > > mean a return of 'you, you and not you' casual labour and managerial
> > > > abuse in a unitary framework of the employment relationship.
> > > > Disgusted would be a more accurate term - much morality comes with
> > > > that feeling (scientifically).
>
> > > > The story of what is happening in America and the imposition of
> > > > 'individualist' ideology (a bad joke when one looks at the lack of it
> > > > in American Football) has been long told.  When are we individual and
> > > > when are we selfish prats?  You look very individual when you step the
> > > > big forward, stiff the sweeper, dummy the fullback and dive over the
> > > > line.  Try doing that without the guy who gave the precision pass, the
> > > > guys running interference and all the attrition that knackered the big
> > > > forward giving you the edge.
>
> > > > My grandson has just had a small knee operation free at point of
> > > > delivery.  The hospital had a room with Xbox (all donated).  We get
> > > > some stuff right.  Must go to collect him.
>
> > > > On 12 Nov, 09:20, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I think it is it should be one person one vote,,  and the corporate
> > > > > wallet closed completely  and with a maximum amount that can be
> > > > > donated (nation wide ) with no exception,,
>
> > > > > effectively the excessively rich and companies and the companies..
> > > > > The super pacs need to be forced to revel all donors and the amount
> > > > > they donated.. and that is a minimum  these organizations should be
> > > > > totally removed.  the Pacs as a republican invention and they need to
> > > > > be brought into control.
>
> > > > > the US has created a political money quagmire..
> > > > > Allan
>
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 4:48 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > It's back to humane values and sensible choices, perhaps. We don't
> > > > > > have to buy into the cultural or commercial hoopla. I will think 
> > > > > > more
> > > > > > about this.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 11, 2:45 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >> You are right rigsy - but we have to get somewhere beyond.  What is
> > > it
> > > > > >> in our arguments, sentiments and the rest that hold us back?  And
> > > may
> > > > > >> be very wrong?
>
> > > > > >> Allan is right we could vote better with our wallets.  We could, 
> > > > > >> for
> > > > > >> instance, all bank with mutuals and have more local economies
> > > > > >> (Andrew).  Problems are as Andrew says when the wallet is empty and
> > > > > >> also that we already have 'one dollar one vote'.
>
> > > > > >> I doubt the academic-legal-commercial argument as argument at all.
> > >  We
> > > > > >> have a paedophile scandal in the UK - but even the media reporting
> > > it
> > > > > >> has forgotten it reported such a generation ago (the key
> > > documentaries
> > > > > >> were called 'Cathy Come Home'.and 'Johnny Go Home') and misses the
> > > > > >> point that they key point is what evidence we can believe when 
> > > > > >> false
> > > > > >> accusations are so easy to make and make life very difficult for
> > > real
> > > > > >> victims.  Our public inquiry systems are proving increasingly
> > > > > >> untrustworthy.  When one teaches critical reasoning it quickly
> > > becomes
> > > > > >> clear most people are no good at it.  I'm quite sure our mainstream
> > > > > >> media has almost no clue and that many lawyers, judges and
> > > politicians
> > > > > >> would fail standard tests.  But surely the route here cannot be to
> > > > > >> elite groups of philosopher kings - but should be towards properly
> > > > > >> available facts - leaving us with problems about who controls that
> > > > > >> production.  'The rich', whoever they are, already do this.
>
> > > > > >> On 11 Nov, 11:33, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > >> > Matriarchies are what started the problems and from history they
> > > tend
> > > > > >> > to love war..
> > > > > >> > they are not a solution..
> > > > > >> > Allan
>
> > > > > >> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > > I think that matriarchies are back in style- in all races and
> > > nations-
> > > > > >> > > and think it will be just as suffocating as the patriarchy.
>
> > > > > >> > > On Nov 11, 1:39 am, andrew vecsey <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> > >> Voting with your wallet could be an effective way to change
> > > things and put
> > > > > >> > >> the wealthy exploiters out of business. Buying cheap products
> > > is more
> > > > > >> > >> expensive in the long term  anyways. Buying food from local
> > > markets is also
> > > > > >> > >> healthier. As long as we all play the game, the game will keep
> > > playing
> > > > > >> > >> until every business becomes a monopoly and globalization will
> > > take over
> > > > > >> > >> our wallets. Once our wallets are gone, we are really screwed
> > > and will have
> > > > > >> > >> no other choice than to play robin hood. So much for free
> > > markets.
>
> > > > > >> > >> On Sunday, November 11, 2012 12:41:52 AM UTC+1, archytas 
> > > > > >> > >> wrote:
>
> > > > > >> > >> > We lack simple explanation that isn't  crass Allan.  I have
> > > little
> > > > > >> > >> > doubt the rich have stolen the wealth they have and it
> > > should be taken
> > > > > >> > >> > from them - but how do we do this without it ending up with
> > > big
> > > > > >> > >> > government that doesn't work any better?  I think we are
> > > tranced by a
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

-- 



Reply via email to