Why I am not Voting Obama

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

The difference is that the people who work the hardest only make 7 0r 8 dollars an hr while the people who set on their fat asses telling everyone else what a bunch of lazy bastards they are make hundreds of dollers an hour.

It was the same in the USSR and China before the economic reforms, and it is the same in Greece today. The difference is that in capitaism the overseers must produce economically efficient results or the market throws them out, while politicisans in control of authoritarian governments manage to hang on while making the situation worse for everyone.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Not the whole story; people working at investment companies and banks produce nothing, but make more money from taxpayer bailouts while they back-stab the same people who bailed them out. More of the same only produces inflation. You can't keep producing non-productive income while the people who work to really produce products and services don't keep up.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Economies don't work without Banks, bankers and investment planners. The historical record of countries that try to replace them with bureaucrats isn't very good. The results have been the loss of freedom, widespread poverty and serious misallocation of resourcers.

Perhaps we could have the real workers of the world united under some self-appointed vanguard of the working class.... But wait ... that's already been tried.

The Chinese have gotten a lot richer since they cast off central planning and created opportunities for individual investors, private allocation of capital ... and even bankers and investors. Inequality is greater and there are still unnecessary restrictions on individual freedom. However, in both areas they are far better off than they were under Mao.

1 Reply

I haven't suggested taking away banks from bankers. Only regulating them to be honest. Haven't suggested confiscating businesses. Only regulating them similar to regulation as in the past. etc.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

You wrote,

Quote:

Economies don't work without Banks, bankers and investment planners.

I've said that often without your need to repeat it. There are no " self-appointed vanguard" in existence; never has, never will. Most are "at will" employment. That happens to be the law of the land.

The Chinese got richer, only because of their cheap labor, not because they have strong labor unions or labor rights.

The majority of Chinese are still very poor, and it's going to stay that way for many generations to come. Why? Because, they don't have labor laws that are prevalent in developed countries that protects laborers. Many Chinese die from their jobs - from pollution and unsafe working conditions.

If you truly believe their's is progress, you really don't know what you are talking about.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

I haven't suggested taking away banks from bankers. Only regulating them to be honest. Haven't suggested confiscating businesses. Only regulating them similar to regulation as in the past. etc.

Hmm, and which party is it that wants to regulate banks and businesses more closely? And you want to do what to the guy who is up for election, and has the best chance of making that happen? Has already made that happen, in many ways?

You are acting against your own stated interests by bashing Mr. Obama and refusing to vote for him. And rewarding the exact opposite mindset from the one you say you want. I don't understand the mindset that says this is a productive course of action.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

As I said before, Democrat politicians give lip service, but not their hearts. Action is the operative word, here.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

They have hearts; it's just not consistent. Most would identify it as wishy-washy. Does anybody know where Obama stands on anything?

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

As I said before, Democrat politicians give lip service, but not their hearts. Action is the operative word, here.

You really ought to read up a lot more on the effects of the Dodd-Frank bill to regulate the banks before claiming that the Dems have only paid lip service to this issue.

Is it as much regulation as I would want? No - but it's much, much better and stricter than it was before, and light-years better than what the GOP will put forward - and their leading presidential candidates have all vowed to repeal.

I beg you to read this:

http://nymag.com/news/features/wall-street-2012-2/index5.html

And then this:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/why-wall-street-should-stop-whining-20120208

And then try and come back and tell me that the Dems haven't done **** in this area. And the right thing to do is to refuse to help them stay in office.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

You can be happy with these half hearted measures if you like. It's my right to protest them.

0 Replies

White House refuses to reveal ties with Monsanto
rt.com
Despite requests made under the Freedom of Information Act for correspondence out of the White House, the Obama administration is refusing to comply with calls to disclose discussions with Monsanto-linked lobbyists...

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

It takes a very naive & credulous mind, or alternatively a close-minded doctrinaire streak of authoritarianism, to believe that human economic, social or political processes can be perfected by bureaucratic regulation. I'm inclined to think Cyclo fits in the second category more than the first.

The bureaucratic regulators themselves are just as careless, prone to error and subject to political influence and corruption as those they presume to regulate. The SEC had ample powers to expose and shutdown Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme, yet despite numerous reports by concerned observers and now obvious signs that his reported returns were fictions they did nothing for over 15 years while his thefts continued. Moreover the enormous potential for favoritism, political influence and profit through insider influence peddling among the regulators themselves opens new avenues for corruption. Bureaucrats are known for their indolence and venality far more than for their intelligence, agility and energy.

The command economy the current administration is trying hard to impose on us already has a notable record of cronyism, corruption and economic folly and failure. How many more Solyndras are ahead?

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

yes but he is MY scoundrel .

Do you really think that things wll appreciably change with an administration change?
Do you really think the recession will be behind us quicker? do you think the GOP cares for the welfare of the country as mucg as they do the welfare of their own party?

Id be willing to listen to a proposal for "Something else"

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I believe that ineptitude, venality, self-interest and the potential for corruption or the delusion that they know better than the people, what is really good for them, is more or less equally distributed across political parties. In such cases I generally prefer the less interventionist and controlling of the alternatives.

Do you really believe that human affairsd are perfectable at the hands of any authoritarian structure operated by human beings? I certainly don't, and far prefer freedom.

It doesn't take much knowledge and understanding of human history to observe that authoritarian political structures of all kinds end up curtailing human creativity, rewarding insiders, suppressing the general welfare and finally basic freedoms.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

In such cases I generally prefer the less interventionist and controlling of the alternatives.

I guess you MUST be a man in order to vote GOP then.

1 Reply

@parados,

So what ? I have guessed that you must be a compulsive little pedant.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

I don't need to guess about whether you have a sense of humor. It's clear you don't.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

It takes a very naive & credulous mind, or alternatively a close-minded doctrinaire streak of authoritarianism, to believe that human economic, social or political processes can be perfected by bureaucratic regulation. I'm inclined to think Cyclo fits in the second category more than the first.

I've never made that claim. What kind of person constantly forwards straw men and exaggerations instead of accurately reporting what those he disagrees with actually say about a subject?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Perhaps you haven't explicitly made such an assertion in a general sense, but that indeed is the implied foundation for repeated specific assertions you have made here. Clearly with respect to the Dodd Frank Bill, the mortgage crisis and many other topical issues you have found only benefit and no blame or problems with regulators.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Perhaps you haven't explicitly made such an assertion in a general sense, but that indeed is the implied foundation for repeated specific assertions you have made here. Clearly with respect to the Dodd Frank Bill, the mortgage crisis and many other topical issues you have found only benefit and no blame or problems with regulators.

I've consistently found that the problems with regulators are FAR less of a problem than the problems generated by lax or no regulation of the financial industry. And I think that nearly every single American would agree with me on this point. It wasn't corrupt regulators that led to the financial crash and ensuing recession that has harmed us all; it was unrestrained capitalists who did so.

You are forced to Appeal to Extremes in order to counter my argument; that's never a good sign for someone's position.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

Why I am not Voting Obama

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know