meloanyk wrote:

arkrud wrote:

meloanyk wrote:

arkrud wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

arkrud wrote:

holfresh wrote:

arkrud wrote:

holfresh wrote:So the rich win again...They managed to thrived after the economic down, near depression turn following the Bush administration.. The made tons of money in the stock market the last six years recovering to all time highs...They are the only ones benefiting from this economy...Now we elected a businessman in Trump who promises to cut their taxes and repatriate trillions of dollars that will go to stock buy backs and bonuses...Elimination of death tax will have the Trump kids salivating..The always manage to come up aces don't they...

We will watch as his supporters cheer this on...

When asked how will we know when America is great again?, Trump responded, I will tell you...

Objects fall down and earth circles around the sun.
Winners will win again and losers will lose again.

If you believe that only the few and elite should have power, and policy should cater the those few, why did you leave Russia?

Power should be with those who create wealth not with those who consume.

Why? How do these elites 'make wealth' single handedly? Do workers not create wealth?

To participate in wealth creation workers need place to work, materials, energy resources, etc.
All this needs initial investments to became available.
All this can be owned and organized by governments or by individuals.
First never worked for long reducing worker to lumpen.
Second is what we use and it works very well.
Worker selling his skills and time for his share in profits and does not need to invest anything more in wealth creation.
He participates in power by matter of democratic process.
Power participation is proportional to participation in wealth creation.
That's why the power of responsible elites is the only one which works.
To be responsible people have to have something to lose.
People who have nothing or little to lose have no motivation to preserve stability and progress.

Smackdog is expressing Marx's proletariat and the bourgeoisie class struggle.

Capitalism works but it has winners and losers . Ideally capitalism produces wealth with a sliding but fair distribution of surplus profits based on meritocracy but since the 70's there has been a expanding and unwarranted concentration of wealth at the top while wages for middle class have stagnated.

Im not proposing socialism, communism or any welfare state butcher widening in income inequality which has not occurred to the same degree in other western democracies . It's a U.S. issue that needs to be addressed . It won't be easy given advances in technology, global labor supply, demise of unions and prevailing emphasis on bottom line performance for shareholders.

As a whole, executive compensation in the U.S tends to be excessive and boardrooms should begin to reassess how compensation is dispersed but good luck with that given tie ins. Democracy not a plutocracy is the goal yet imbalances are obvious tilt and the dumbsss Supreme Court ruling on Super Pacs dont help

Anyway, I heard the influence of Bannon all over President Trump's inaugural speech. Many charge that Bannon is alt right and simply wants to restore a Judeo Christian white order but he is the one in that administration who bashes the faults of crony capitalism and his clear goal is for a wider distribution of income and wealth to the middle class.

President Obama's focus seemed to me to be on the lower income class, who fights for them remains to be seen. Think the focus will be to move away from any dependency by establishing better environments for upward mobility. Needless to say there will be gains and losses with that approach

The plague of communism breaded in the swamp of socialist ideology is always planted by intellectuals who called themselves humanitarians.
That why the liberal US academia is more dangerous that drugs, guns, and alcohol together for the health of American society.
The proportion of wealth owed by the so called rich invested in economy and productivity tools is infinitely greater that the portion used for personal consumption. Contrary the middle class has very marginal investment share and most of the population has non.
When wealth is extorted from rich the portion rich used for personal consumption is not big enough to go around. So wealth is taken from the economy and it inevitably collapsed. Replacement market economy with government plan economy making matters even worth because nobody is interested in producing and creating wealth but only in access to distribution. Corruption became the only possible way of life.
The inequality perception is mostly the "Disease of red eyes" as it called in Russia. The jealousy of those who did not make it to rich and successful.
This disease destroyed great countries and civilizations and left them in the garbage dump of the history.

I agree that the corporate, state, and federal bureaucrats in US and elsewhere have disproportional compensation comparing to other working population.
This is the unavoidable corruption associated with people who have a hand in distribution of resources but do not produce anything.
To reduce the enormous quantity and influence of this bureaucrats is very important but hard task.
They are sucking efficiency out of the economy and governance. In my view this is the biggest challenge of our society.

Understand the Trojan horse of socialist ideology. My focus is on the ridiculous compensation multiples of corporate officers that has emerged which is far out of whack with historical norms. You have replaceable CEOs and executives in place being granted ludicrous compensation while their workforces stagnate or are reduced due to their general incompetence.

Do we really think the Wells Fargo head of marketing should parachute with a $ 181 mil dollar package?

True talent should be recognized and rewarded but within the confines of reasonableness and relationship to value creation above and beyond replacement. The market at the top is very inefficient and not based on supply and demand but political networks. It is the risk taking entrepreneur that creates businesses and jobs for others who should reap any disportionatee rewards for implementing their visions not the white collar suit whose talent is compensated beyond reasonable multiples

It is quite shocking to hear a Trump supporter have this problem with the system as Trump and his cronies prepares to cut taxes for the rich, eliminate the death tax for the wealthy, reduce taxes for corporations to 15%, roll back Obamacare which is a tax cut for the rich, allow repatriation which will aid in stock buy backs and bonuses which helps who?????The freaking rich..He said this from day ONE!!!!!

Can you explain yourself??? Or is this just way over your head??

http://apps.frontline.org/divided-states-of-america-the-frontline-interviews/moments/the-opposition-strategy.html

NEWT GINGRICH
The point I made was that we had to be prepared in the tradition of Wooden at UCLA to run a full court press. And we had to see how Obama behaved. That if Obama governed from the center, that we’d have one set of realities. If he governed from the left, we’d have a different set. And that we had to see what evolved. And that we had to be responsive. You know, our job was to be the loyal opposition and to find ways to improve what was going on, and to offer an alternative to what he wanted to do.

JASON ZENGERLE
senior editor, The New Republic
Obama is a singularly threatening figure to them, in some ways, because of his offer of bipartisanship. His pledge to end polarization. I mean, he’s obviously liberal. He’s more liberal than Bill Clinton was. But at the same time, he has this sort of bipartisan demeanor and he’s come into office promising to end the polarization and the partisanship that has bottled up Washington. And they realize that if he were to do that … These bipartisan bills wouldn’t necessarily be viewed as Republican successes, they’d be viewed as Obama’s successes and his Democrats’ successes. And they decide that in order to stop Obama from succeeding, they have to deny him the mantel of bipartisanship. Because anything he does will accrue to him and will accrue to the Democrats. And they just decide on a strategy of just across the board opposition to deny him anything because they think that even if it is a policy that they ultimately supported or wanted, they won’t benefit politically from it.

https://youtu.be/VWTSJRGw5OA?t=6435

he just finishes his speech and they pan to the crowd. so why lie?

i mean if he's lying about something like this, then how can you trust him on anything else? and FOX is complicit with it. i mean it's right there in front of your eyes.

https://imgflip.com/memegenerator/90884524/Sean-Spicer-Liar

i'll keep it light :)

holfresh wrote:First presser by Sean Spicer laced with lies...

It's truly unbelievable that this is the first presser. And this is what trump was talking about in his speech to the CIA. He's so petty and thin-skinned and shallow that it's unbelievable. It's his first day in office and this is what he's doing with his time.

while briggs and guns are too busy whacking off to listen...she's talking about ALTERNATIVE FACTS LOLOLOL.

hey gotta admit - folks that voted for trump like powerful women - find them sexy...just not in the white house tho - that's off limits :)