Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
While standing in the food line, people would learn how to actually communicate with one another.
They would have time to think about what really is important and what is petty and shallow and hype.
People would become healthier as they stopped overeating and walked to get where they are going.
For a preview of benefits, immediately shut down all television and cable systems, ipods, movie theatres, and other escapist nonsense ...
The last paragraph is, to me, the most discouraging.
I agree with most of the article but lose faith in the writer if he thinks the Democrats can save the economy.
>Let's hope President Obama knows his history of the Great Depression, or has sound advisors who do.<
Werd--and that they can outwit/discredit the right-wing Wurlitzer who will be screaming from the rafters about "socialism." (It's the '00 version of calling him a "traitor to his class" and all. :)) Those New Deal programs worked and put people to work--and if not for them, this country would have faced armed revolution back in the '30s.
Hoover and Reagan and Bush...need I say more?
-which is where I buy a lot of my clothes. (I'm retired, don't go anywhere much...I buy a lot of things there for the thrill of the hunt, disgust with the prices, selection, and quality at the Forever 21 and H&M packed malls, and of course the satisfaction of scoring a beautiful silk blouse for $5.) There's nothing there to buy any more. I mean, the racks are all half empty, and what bits of clothing hanging there are utter junk - stained, cheap, dirty, polyester. Some say it's a seasonal thing, that when they put away the winter clothing, that's all that's left until donations come in. But I have a feeling people are hanging ON to those so-last-year's fashions, instead of dropping stuff off after Christmas. Now, if the SallyAnn Shop is in trouble, what does this portend for the stores in the mall? (Old Navy, in its infinite wisdom, is trying to sell 'shorts suits' to the vastly underserved 20 year old anorexic market - good luck with that!) No wonder Walmart is doing so well with its cheap basics.
The three point agenda you mention looks like the old shoes,a perfect fit.We can heave a sigh of releief knowing that there is now a changed world and a changing USA.Compared to 1930s the USA is looking more out and in recent years it is looking more out and poking its nose in the wrong places.with so much of liberal education and an increasing mix of nationalities in the Universities and work places the mind of politicians seem frozen and with agendas that obviiusly expose them pants down.Be it Foreign policy,Internal Security,Economic Agenda the whole approach is sorarity and fraternity oriented.Why is it that the focus on development of American business is currently driven by global defense spending concerns and not proactively engaging in technology to better lives.If more and more manufacturing and service gets outsoourced or outlocated then what is the extent of capabilities that can be enriched to make the ordinary American more competitive and less defensive.What about the growing and dangerous income desparities that might lead to frustrtion and kill initiatives.I think that some group of politicians have done their math in the event of glabal recession triggered by USA and how to benefit.Like taking what they can of value from a burning house
I started calling our economic situation the 2nd Gilded Age 4 yrs. ago primarily due to 30 yrs. of deregulation. Allowing foxes to guard hen houses begets our current situation. I didn't need an economics degree to figure this out -- I graduated from college 30 yrs. ago -- just the common sense the good Lord gave me. Continuing to worship the Milton Friedman philosophy is utter stupidity at this point, and that's exactly what John McCain says he'll do. We need stepped up federal regulation of the financial sector now, particularly in investment banking and hedge funds which are presently unregulated. Wake up American electorate and throw these bums out in November!
I was born in January, 1929, so was Martin Luther King Jr.
My father graduated from U.of Mich. Law School when I was
six months old. We lived in a number of small towns in
middle Michigan, including Mt. Pleasant and Hastings where
my dad set up law practices. My first memories in school
were from Stanton, Michigan. My dad said that you could
not find a job milking cows, but he worked for my grand
father as a farmer which he had been before going to France
in lst W.W. I was never hungry, but I know my folks said
that though a loaf of bread only cost a nickle; many
people did not have 5 cents. Michigan hired only unmarried
teachers so my mother was at one time working as a counselor
for a group of teenage girls, a new deal program. I have no patience with people who say the New Deal caused or furthered the depression. The New Deal gave hope to people even though W.P.A. and PWA were widely attacked. My high school in
Saginaw was built with PWA funds.
You know, I am the first to agree that our economy is in trouble, but I do get very nervous when I start hearing all this "eat the rich" hyperbole. One nice thing about it, though, is that it makes it easy for me to distinguish between those with a real understanding of economics and those without. The author of this article, it appears, is in the latter category.
"A record number of Americans are receiving food stamps," we are alarmingly told at the outset of the piece. But why is this the case? Did the rich cause these poor, wretched, souls to go on the dole by, according to Leonard, "gorge[ing] themselves on 20 percent of the pie?" The assumption made here, and made by all Marxist economists, is that there is a kind of finite amount of goodies in the world. If someone has a million dollars, that's a million less for the rest of us. Preposterous bullshit.
We get more incendiary language like, "allowing the rich to grab such a huge percentage of national wealth..." What the hell is "national wealth"? Do people get rich by "grabbing" it? Man! I've never "grabbed" any wealth that I'm aware of.
I'd like to see some detail on these stats. I'm willing to bet that, for the most part, this 1% consists of highly educated, hard-working, enterprising risk-takers. I don't thik that Sam Walton, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, or any other of those greedy bastards "grabbed" any "national wealth." (but they sure have created a lot)
Wealth isn't a pinata folks. We aren't all muscling each other aside to get the best piece of candy. We all create wealth when we supply a demand. I'll grant that there's a bit more to it than this, but you get the idea.
The banks and american consumers both made bad decisions and will pay for it. Nuff said.
Oil is getting too expensive? Invest in oil futures. Health care costs are getting out of control? De-regulate the industry and costs will decline--as they invariably do whenever the idiocracy calling itself the Government of the United States takes its hands off the wheel.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
