Well let see, 80% wants background check, nothing happen. And corporation are people. The right like these things but they are die hard individual freedomer. Something is a bit off here...
Mind you an oligarchy without puffy wardrobe! but the study is nothing new. it's basically robert michels with a gangsta twist.
Exactly. One of the biggest issues with government today is how the democratic functions of government work. Its tough to have true democratic representation in government when you have a system that legally favors the Republicans and Democrats. Basically, you have folks that are power hungry running for public office, who are vetted by the Republicans and Democrats, who won't fund anybody threatening actual change to the status quo, and are then elected by a minority of the population that cares to vote. Its naive for anybody to actually believe that this government is, in any way, democratic.
And the dollars keep going down in value so there's a mad rush to make more, leading to more of this corruption
Hard to argue that the USA isn't an oligarchy. Hell we elected the son of a former President, and are likely to elect the wife of another. In the USA there is such prosperity that you can carve out your little piece of the pie, but it isn't as easy as it once was more many reasons.
This topic is probably the most concerning thing that I have seen posted about the current state of our country. I doubt that it goes past 3 pages of D&D. Most of that will be people saying "yup". I guess I'm one of those because I have no other input other than to say yup and I have no idea how to fix it. Oh well, off to read a bunch more stuff about Dem/Lib this and Rep/Conservative that... As long as we are all happy enough in our current situation to do nothing more that throw rocks back and forth the oligarchy is doing it's job.
I feel the same way. I used to be bothered by this a lot more until maybe a year or two ago. Talking to most Americans, few care enough about income/wealth inequality, public education overhaul, campaign finance reform, anthropogenic climate change, banking reform, tax policy, immigration, etc. What's the point of me advocating change to a society that is okay with the status quo? The free market of voters/lack of voters has decided this is the country we want for now. Frankly, positive change comes slowly if it comes at all. Looking at the great empires and their eras, these things take centuries. I focus on my career, my family and friends, and my little niche of the American economy/society. There's little point in stressing over politics/policies that harm the country if you're not a billionaire or well organized.
The only thing that should matter is economic well-being. But the average person at an individual is not significantly vested in the economy to truly understand that economics should drive decisions. Instead, we will make decisions based on cultural, social, religious, and psychological basis rather than economics. We are willing to throw out the baby with the bath water. This can be seen in our reactions to illegal immigrants or gay rights. Rather than looking at how this gay person or illegal immigrant is helping/hurting the economy, we are much more concerned about the fact that the person is gay or illegal. Who gives a rat's ass if he/she is gay as long as their productivity is a net benefit to the economy? But we will continue to bicker about small stuff like religion/race/etc and remain divided while the elites continue to do what is in their best interest (i.e. get richer at our expense). Education? Technology? Environment? Pffffttttt we have more important things to worry about such as gays adopting orphans, muslims building mosques near freedom towers, or illegals 'stealing' all the jobs.
As somebody with a background in Economics, I think this line of reasoning is dangerous. You're right that most people aren't vested or don't know enough about economics to understand how political decisions affect the economy as a whole, but that doesn't mean that all decisions should be made on the basis of economics for many reasons. First off, there isn't universal agreement in the field of economics on what is and isn't good for an economy, and on how the rational person behaves. Suppose that a group of well thought of economists from a prestigeous school find some econometric data that would seem to indicate that having women in the workforce is bad for the economy. By this logic, we should make this illegal for the benefit of the economy as a whole. However, its plain to see that something like this would be unjust. As a matter of fact, I'm of the opinion that we base too many of our political decisions on economics, when sometimes its best to apply basic morality to the issue. Second, in a thread discussing the problem of oligarchy, your proposition that decisions should be made on the basis of economics is non-democratic because not all people are versed in economics, so you're basically saying that political decisions aren't in the sphere of the average person. Third, if we did base our decisions on economic conclusions, it would be difficult to know if problems were being solved because of the policies we implemented, or for other reasons, because the science of economics cannot be tested in the same manner as other sciences. In other words, correlation doesn't equal causation, which unfortunately is often the way things are in economics.
I fully agree. Which is precisely why we should have all of the old people in this country killed. Who cares about cultural and social mores when those darn old people are hampering our economy?
in theory, their consumption patterns warrant keeping them alive. (I think what QBall is more getting at is being data-driven and rational, and not stuck on irrational animus type of debates---which I am inclined to agree with)
The correlation (and the intuitive link) between contemporary conservative policies and the rise and reinforcement of a superrich uber class is an industrial strength pimpslap to the face. Perhaps mild marginal tax hikes and universal health care won't arrest the entire train but it sure as sh-t beats the alternative which is the Golden Corral of fat **** entitlement guised as a transexual hooker with the street name of "Freedom". Considering that you generally find yourself arguing for pro-inequality related positions, I can see why its an attractive option for you to rectumize your noggin wuth the gospel of "both sides do it ism" But really you don't have to self flagellate by dog earing your way through Atty shrugs to figure this one out.
So what do you all know about this Trans Pacific Partnership? Good ole corporate oligarchy always hard at work. Easy to do when 5 corporations (all receiving huge sums of corporate welfare ) control 90+% of the media consumed. We could use a Teddy Roosevelt, aka Trust Buster, as a president next. **** these bull**** establishment candidates.
Is there any country in the world that is a true democracy? Concentrated power and money = corruption holds true? No concentrated power and/or wipe out money as the sole mean to your livelihood and maybe you move toward a more cooperative, less corrupted society.
Do you wear a bright yellow spandex with a giant L on the chest? I'm guessing you just walk around in an asshat.
