"[http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty06/state.html]myth[/url]."
That's the OFFICIAL Neo-Con defense league. They ignore medical costs, education costs, insurance costs, incarceration, homelessness, US hunger and many other things.
Under Bush, due to a ruthless embrace of corporatism and capitalism, poverty has skyrocketed. In Europe and Scandinavia, under centrism and social democracy, it has plumetted.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=us ... bush&meta=
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=po ... e+us&meta=
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ch ... y+us&meta=
"The mortgage crisis stems from congress telling bankers they would regulate them if they didn't start giving more loans to poor people, minorities and people with bad credit. Thus the sub prime mortgage boom was born. The demand for property went up, so there was a housing bubble. All bubbles burst. "
No. The LACK of regulations allowed mortgage lenders to pocket hefty commissions and bonuses for unloading high risk mortgages to naive poor folks. The CEOs of the lending institutions were recently at a hearing, explaining how they deserved their record profits and multi-million dollar bonuses created from such exploitation. Obviously, they don't have such a crisis in Scandinavia because they have more regulations and protections for the consumer there. But you look at the US model, which has LESS consumer protections and a small fraction of the unionization rate, and say that the problems are due to too many consumer protections. IOW, you are blind, insane and wrong.
"Now there's good and bad to everything. The bubble bursting is fantastic for people looking to buy houses now because property values are down. During the housing bubble, there were gobs of news pieces about house property values were too expensive for people. That's a Seller's Market, now it's a Buyer's Market. You can make money on either market."
No. The rich get richer in such a scenario, while the poor get poorer. You want it to be a race to see how much wealth can be concentrated in the hands of the top 10%. That's what is happening and you like it. Let the Billionaires be free to become trillionaires and let the poor be free to fall through the cracks. profits over people. You are a champion of Disaster Capitalism.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=wo ... pay+gap+us
The worker-CEO pay gap is MUCH lower throughout Scandinavia, because of more reasonable and effective gov't market safeguards, wealth re-distribution, socialized medicine/education, higher income tax rates on the rich and much higher unionization rates (85%-15%).
"Except that the manufacturing productivity in the United States has increased since the 1980s. It's grown by a steady 3-4% per year in the United States since the 1980s. We lose more jobs to technology than we do to outsourcing. We also insource more jobs than are outsourced in the United States. One nice thing about the value of the United States dollar dropping is that insourcing actually becomes are attractive to foreign companies, so that trend is likely to go up further.'
That's the CEO / Bush Admin. spin perspective. The bottom 90% of society counts too, and that's what you forget. Basically, you are a pro-corporate slimeball who judges societies based on how well the CEOs are doing. It's not just about attactive unemployment figures, it's about poverty rates, hommelessness, medical coverage, personal bankruptcies and a living wage which keeps workers OUT of povery - a high minimum wage and high unionization rates as found in Scandinavia address this.
But you like to be in the Neo-Con bus, heading towards the greed-based precipice at 80mph, while cheering them to just go faster ! Yep, your solution is MORE corporate power and MORE militarism. MORE concentrated wealth for the rich and LESS safety net for the poor. Let the megarich be free to become trillionaires, and let the poor be free to fall through the cracks.
"You'd have a point.. Except none of that is happening!"
You are blindly oblivious to empirical reality.
"Actually, the floodgates have been open long, LONG before George W. Bush took office. "
In principle, but the DEGREE of illegal immigrant flooding has increased drastically under Bush, in order to reduce big business overhead and make the CEOs better off / more powerful. Getting those Mexicans to work for peanuts allows CEOs to exponentially increase their wealth, and that's all that matters in capitalist systems : how much freedom Millionaires have to become Billionaires (...to become Trillionaires).
"Do you not understand the difference between income tax and Capital Gains tax? You really don't seem to, since you're constantly throwing out the 15% figure in the context of income tax. The income tax rate on the highest bracket is 31% in the United States. All brackets pay 15% Capital Gains tax if they have Capital Gains."
What you don't understand is that the Scandinavian income tax code is superior, non-distorted, transparent and progressive. American CEOs should be in a system which forces them to pay a HIGHER rate than the middle class, not HALF as much (15%).
"Yeah, in America, we do the exact same thing! And it's stupid for the reason I pointed out. Someone making $196,000 actually gets more money on their check than someone making $200,000 because they end up in the next higher bracket. The same thing goes for someone making $29,000 vs $30,000, or $49,000 vs $50,000, and so on. It's stupid."
No, the US is fundamentally different than Scandinavia. 1/4 the unionization rate, a much greater gap between worker-CEO pay, 100 Billion dollars per year in American corporate welfare, a private health care system which the bottom 1/3rd of society can't afford. You are ignorant of the fact that the progressive system of fines and income taxes, in Finland for example, means that the wealthier ALWAYS pay more, in direct CORRELATION to their income. Not only that, the incomes are transparent and available to all to be looked up - they are PUBLIC.
"The EPA regulations driving mom and pop gas stations out of business isn't capitalism. The smoking bans driving local taverns out of business only to be replaced by chain stores isn't capitalism either. There's gobs of examples of the government making policies which interfere with business which only kills off the small businesses, and none of that is capitalism."
Capitalism facilitates monopolies because it doesn't re-distribute wealth or have strict scrutiny for collusion or exploitation. Again, only in the most Capitalist system could Microsoft have flourished. In Capitalism, it is the moral right for profits to go to where the status-quo market scenario dictates, and if the right market buttons are pushed, you get more and more mergers/buyouts and greater concentration of corporate power. It's DUE to LACK of limitations on the process of monetary flow. In a centristic Scandinavian system, you allow modest semi-capitalist market forces to be counterbalanced by modest semi-socialist socio-economic infrastructure. This allows the rich to be rich, to a certain point, and still protects the bottom 1/3rd of society economically.
To blame rampant corporatization on smoking bans means you are an insane, oblivious, moronic extremist. The minimalist regulations in the US are much less than what they have in Scandinavia, and that's why the US has much worse poverty, homelessness, crime, incarceration, personal bankruptcies due to medical expenditures and predatory lending, far lower unionization, insanely exponential CEO income increases, etc. Corporations in the US are milking the Bushian system of capitalist economics, and the only standard of economics in such a system is what is best for the corporate elite, and every one else deserves to suffer, starve and rot if they can't attain adequate capital or aren't born into wealth. To claim that you prefer a system which would eliminate the very few market safeguards the US has, means you support the right of Bill Gates to become a Trillionaire, which is exactly what would happen.
"You can't bitch about corporations out of one side of your mouth and preach about regulations out of the other, because regulations only kill off the smaller businesses. They might impact the larger ones, but they're the death nail for the small ones. If all you want are large corporations, by all means, keep on regulating."
No. Like I said, Scandinavia has MANY MANY more SOCIALISTIC governmental market interventions, regulations, scrutiny, fines, penalties and 4X the unionization rate - THAT keeps the concentration of corporate power in check, redistributes wealth, provides universal education and health care, creates adequate consumer and worker protections, and gives them FAR better socio-economic statistics/indicators than the US.
"Again, the corporate tax rates in those countries are at least 25% lower(40% in the US versus 30% in Scandinavian countries). Your pal Obama wants to raise the corporate tax rate more here in the United States. The United States already has the highest corporate tax rate in the Western industrialized world, and Obama and Hillary want to raise it higher. You want to talk about outsourcing then?"
Like I said, the US corporations don't mind paying the higher corporate tax rates because they get 100 BILLION per year back in corporate welfare, exclusive gov't and military contractual favoritism and the CEOs are triumphing more in the US than anywhere else. Corporations like Boeing don't mind paying higher corporate tax rates because they are part of the military-industrial complex which salivates over the attacks on Iraq, Syria and Iran which they get to take part in. It is apparently a surface number/rate you are unable to scratch and see beyond. GE doesn't mind paying higher corporate tax because it's like a bribe to be part of the imperialistic rampaging, and the CEOs get to pay 15% in come tax, like Buffet.
"These two [life expectancy and infant mortality] go hand in hand."
If the US had socialized medicine as they do in Scandinavia, their life expectancy wouldn't have dropped in the rankings list and infant mortality rates wouldn't be so repulsively high. But Bush-Brained corporatists have other elitist ideas : "if i can't make a buck of your medical problems, you WON'T be treated !!!".
"Socialized medicine is great for infants, pretty shitty for elderly. The number of prostrate cancer survivors in the United States is around 80%, in the UK and other places with socialized medicine, it's 50%."
Life expectancy and quality of life are rated MUCH higher in SCANDINAVIA because of SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. They aren't bankrupted by medical expenditures, which is partly why thier poverty rates are so much lower. Socialized medicine REDUCES infant mortality rates. That's why those in the US are so HIGH : it's not PROFITABLE FOR THE PRIVATE MEDICAL INDUSTRY TO REDUCE THEM.
"Yeah, great example when talking about the United States. Our education is socialized, our teachers are all unionized, and the results of our education system are pretty shitastic."
No. The US has the LEAST SOCIALIZED EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM compared to Europe and Scandinavia. The paltry and woefully insufficient gov't regulations the US has for education are the CAUSE of the low education rankings, and ELIMINATING THE INADEQUATE level of gov't education intervention, opportunities and support would only make the problem WORSE , NOT BETTER. It would make it LESS afordable, and more available to only the upper 1/3rd of society, because it would be exclusively FOR PROFIT - and high demand would mean very high prices, and quality education ONLY available to the richest elites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Finland
"Do you know what a publically traded company is? The stock market? Ever heard of dividends? I LOVE sharing corporate profits. That's why I buy stock!"
Worship the dollar sign, profits over people... to the EXTREEEEEEEME !!!!!!
"Both our parties are left wing, hince the 40% corporate tax rate and all the silly regulations."
You are blindly ignorant. It's not the rate, it's how much coddling the gov't gives to those corporations WITH said tax revenue. The US corps get it back in societal POWER several times over. It's basically a bribe, and bribes are ALLOWED in Capitalist systems. Big business only benefits from the current US system. Big Business and the military (together, they are a team), are part of a trillion dollar Pentagon monster whose activities are determined by profitbility for the Big Business leaders and CEOs.
Only an insane extremist would see the Democrats and Republicans as left-wing. The US has the greatest amount of capitalism and corporatism on earth. the current US system and paradigm is all about the flow of capital. If the US would elect a centrist, or a semi-socialist, the bottom 2/3rds of society would be much better off. The regulations and interventions you constantly point to, are part of an infrastructure which aids and empowers the corporate elite. They are not socialist or semi-socialist infrastructure elemnts, as they do not re-distribute wealth to the bottom 3rd of income earners. Instead, they are part of a capitalist system SUPPORTED by big business, which basically robs from the poor to give to the rich. That, combined with free market economics, sentences to the bottom 3rd of Americans to a lifetime of stress and struggle. Only a higher unionization rate, and more gov't regulations protecting the consumer and workers will change things... universal health care as well.
"What side of World War 2 was Finland on? Remind me again."
Finland fought against BOTH the Germans AND the Russians. They were officially neutral.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=fi ... ar+2&meta=
I'm only referring to post WW2 Scandinavian Social Democracy. Finland embraced it AFTER WW2, in 1960.
Since WW2, where is the evidence of Scandinavian social democracy causing the millions of civilian deaths caused by the US after WW2 (Vietnam, Chile, Central America, Iraq, etc.). Scandinavian social democracy is pacifist - a concept incomprehensible to military-industrial complex whores. In terms of civilian deaths caused by imperialistic (mainly profit driven) military-corporate excerises, the US (since WW2) has outscored Scandinavia my a factor of a millions.
"My comment was about if you were a soldier, which one would you rather work under? Blackwater people make 3 to 6 times as much as United States Army soldiers. They're better outfitted and they don't have to deal with politically correct bullshit RoEs like having to call up a superior officer to return fire when fired upon. In other words, would you rather have the equipment, be allowed to defend yourself in a fire fight, and make gobs and gobs of money doing it if you were a soldier?"
Human existence shouldn't be all about bribes and social adherence to where the money flows. According to that standard, the US should invade Iran, Syria, Venezuala, even Canada because Blackwater and it's employees would reap financial rewards.
"Again, the lowest bracket of the income tax ladder got the majority of the cuts, that's if they pay income taxes at all. Stop listening to the bullshit in political ads and look it up."
Again, American billionaire CEOs get to pay a 15% income tax rate while their middle class workers have to pay double that. To add insult to financial injury of the poor and middle class, the corporations and military then get a trillion dollar windfall.
GE, Boeing, Microsoft, Blackwater & Halliburton LOVE blind, oblivious, capitalist extremists like you. With idiots like you, they get to own the world, and DESTROY it for PROFIT, while finacially GOUGING the (financially unprotected) poor as they fall through the cracks.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection
I know you want Bush & Co. to be to the extreme right, 5 notches to the right of center. But just because he is 'only' 4 notches to the right of center, doesn't mean he is even remotely socialist. It simply means he is predominantly capitalist (90%), and if you were to make him anymore capitalist, the rich would simply profit even MORE exponentially on the backs of the poor and middle class. Meanwhile, the quality of life and standard of living in Scandinavia is much higher because their federal governments fluctuate from the Kucinich point on the spectrum, and at FARTHEST to the John Kerry (center-right) point on the spectrum.
What right-wing maniacs don't understand, is that they do NOT have Socialism in Europe and Scandinavia. They have a fluctuation bewteen center-left, center and center right, as determined by their proportionally representational parliamentary democracies. This means centrism (AKA, a pizza parliament). No one party gets to dominate (as under Bush), compromises must be made, ruling for 8 straight years isn't allowed, and PR (prop.rep.) means that EVERY vote counts. NO votes are lost. There is a direct numerical relationship between the % of the popular vote a party gets and the # of parlimentary seats they get.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po ... etherlands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po ... in_Finland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po ... _in_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po ... in_Denmark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po ... _in_Norway
The socio-economic statistics and emprical evidence shows that the extremes
(pure socialism/communism --------------------- pure capitalism/corporatism)
do NOT work, except for the elites in military, gov't and corporations, and the top 1/3rd of wealth earners.
In Scandinavian centrism, the ENTIRE society benefits most.... not just the elite.
The US (and Canada) should have 5-10 parties via a system of proportional representation : the extremes of political ideologies would be prevented from manifesting and dominating. Common sense compromise would have to be attained, and the betterment of the *entire* society (poor, middle and rich) would be the standard via non-ideological policies.
