• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

As Corporate Profits Soar, Workers are Making Less!

How does he differ from any author? Especially since he is the author of several important books?


Was that argument offered? I don't think so. i have listened to him frequently. I look forward to hearing his viewpoint. His perspective is similar to my own. This government, by contract, is a constitutionally-limited government. It is breaking the contract. We need to put in politicians who will return to the contract.

Good, ask him. Iron Yank is making some pretty strong accusations. Looks like he's got plenty to say. Thus far his rant isn't making much sense. Or should I say, IN MY OPINION, he doesn't offer any meaningful content.
 
Totally inaccurate. The effect on the market for jobs of lower taxes on corporations depends on the nature of the tax (i. e. lowering excise taxes vs. lowering income taxes).

Just lowering the income tax rates for businesses does not necessarily translate to more jobs. Businesses operating in their current state typically hire based on the point at which the marginal cost of an additional employee equals that employee's marginal revenue, and no more. The income tax rate doesn't change that point.

And any excess funds will be invested in areas that yield the greatest return, and that may not necessarily be in expansion in areas that hire more labor.

The notion of "trickle down" economics is just more propoganda for the dumbed down masses.

I was explaining how trickle down is suppose to work. I never said it did.

Goverment (Liberal) policy has more to do with the average worker not making more than corporations being greedy, Obama pissed away a Trillon dollar stimulous that created no jobs, the regulations his EPA & other goverment agencies are choking off & bankrupting business. I could go on & on but instead of addressing the issues you throw out an incoherant post accusing me of throwing out rhetoric, so whats the point of trying to explain it to you.

Environmental policy/protection is one of the few things the government should actually be involved with. Also, regulations in and of themselves aren't contrary to classical liberal principals of the free market. Maybe you need to re-read The Wealth of Nations, The Road to Serfdom, and Free to Choose? And if you haven't read these books, you need to or else you'll be sucker to those who would misappropriate their views for personal gain.

Where the hell have you been, living under a rock for the last few years? GE paid no taxes in 2010 and had a several billion dollar profit, King Obama has been handing out exemptions to Obamacare to his favorite constituents like candy at a parade, ect ect. this has all been in the news recently, apparently you havent been paying attention & I dont have all day here to post them all because there are so many.

As far as the regulations on small bussiness and such, I can give you one recent example. Go to Mark Levins website under audio & download his 6-13 program & listen to the callers that call in and explain some of the crap they are forcing painters to go thru. There is so much out there if you want to find it.

You do know the exemptions given out aren't exemptions for the entire Health Care law right? They only target the bridge from now until 2014. When 2014 hits, everyone will be affected equally, no exceptions. Faux News has been notoriously distorting this as well as Obama's "bump in the road" statement and it really is borderline propaganda.
 
Last edited:
Environmental policy/protection is one of the few things the government should actually be involved with.

true, but most americans would prefer the govt go about it intelligently

william daley is barack the slasher's most recent chief of staff

wapo today:

It was supposed to be the White House’s latest make-nice session with corporate America — a visit by Chief of Staff William M. Daley to a meeting with hundreds of manufacturing executives in town to press lawmakers for looser regulations.

But the outreach soon turned into a rare public dressing down of the president’s policies with his highest-ranking aide.

One by one, exasperated executives stood to air their grievances on environmental regulations and stalled free-trade deals. And Daley, the former banker tasked with building ties with industry, found himself looking for the right balance between empathy and defending his boss.

At one point, the room erupted in applause when Massachusetts manufacturing executive Doug Starrett, his voice shaking with emotion, accused the administration of blocking construction on one of his facilities to protect fish, saying government “throws sand into the gears of progress.”

Daley said he did not have many good answers, appearing to throw up his hands in frustration at what he called “bureaucratic stuff that’s hard to defend.”

“Sometimes you can’t defend the indefensible,” he said.

When a paper company executive said Environmental Protection Agency regulations might cost her $10 million to $15 million to upgrade a mill, Daley said the number of rules and regulations “that come out of agencies is overwhelming.”

Later, he added: “We’re trying to bring some rationality to it.”

White House's Daley seeks balance in outreach meeting with manufacturers - The Washington Post

spin, anyone?

Faux News has been notoriously distorting this

you really don't know what you're talking about, it's laughable

how could anyone be unaware of where a person like those you correspond with goes to get his or her links

it's certainly not fox

as well as Obama's "bump in the road" statement

One Nation, Overdrawn - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 06/08/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central
 
Good, neither did I concerning "Iron Yanks" rants. That was my point to him. That's why I asked him to provide sources for his claims.

If you have a problem with his 'rants' then address that problem to him, not me.
I can't read his mind, and I'd bet you can't either. His argument was loaded full of raging opinions that he was posing to be as universal facts.

Again. express your concerns to him.


So your philosophy rules and has more value than all others?

Yes, unless I hear a convincing argument to the contrary.

B.S. Complete and total B.S. This country has never experienced totalitarianism under either political party. Corruption and Cronyism...oh hell yes. Both are totally guilty!

I didn't mention any country.
If you want to continue making that claim...then I invite you to prove it.

What claim would that be? Do you want to clarify that?



Once again...so-called pundit type broadcast personalities LOVE when people are either ignorant and can't discern the difference between opinion and fact. And they value fans who just won't care if their content is opinion or fact. But both types have one thing in common. They will believe opinions to be facts.

Perhaps you can be specific, distinguish between the two, and a debate can ensue. But as it is there is nothing to debate..

Do you believe everything you hear from Mark Levin...without question or reservation? And the same question applies to any other "political pundit" that you might adore.

Actually i'm not that familiar with him but I doubt I'd believe everything anyone says..
 
A fair days work for a fair days pay.

"fair" is determined by the market - the aggregate decision of every member of the involved industry, from producer to consumer.
 
Capitalism demands people/society to have a moral backbone. The evil maximum is pursing profit at the cost of everything else. That has become the most esteemed value in our society, and its lead to many of its ills. Go re-read The Wealth of Nations.

Interesting Libertarian perspective again
 
What are you talking about? Reread the graph. When unemployment goes up, labor share goes up. Only in the last two years has that changed.

brother, those are your graphs - and every single time they show labor share falling in a recession. which is what we should expect.

"High wages and high prices in an economic slump run contrary to everything we know about market forces in economic downturns," Ohanian said. "As we've seen in the past several years, salaries and prices fall when unemployment is high.
 
No, that is the way it actually works. Rich person gets more money sends/invest/gives workers higher wages, that spent/invested money increases demand, demand increase job, more jobs means more more demand of most goods, etc... This only works if the money flows down eventually, instead of circulating at the top. If the section with the most money don't do anything with it, trickle down ever happens. Right now, the section with most money is the top 10% and they aren't spending.

why aren't they spending? Because of the mixed signals they get from the current regime
 
why aren't they spending? Because of the mixed signals they get from the current regime

Actually, its their own role in their own self fulfilling prophecy. We used to have patriotic Americans even on the right... people who did what was best for America. Now the far right thinks only of itself and is more than willing to partake in economic treason as part of their own agenda of greed and self interest. Very sad indeed.
 
Actually, its their own role in their own self fulfilling prophecy. We used to have patriotic Americans even on the right... people who did what was best for America. Now the far right thinks only of itself and is more than willing to partake in economic treason as part of their own agenda of greed and self interest. Very sad indeed.



Socialist left speak--if you oppose the soak the rich scheme filthy rich dems use to buy wealth and power you are "treasonous"

in other words-Oppose massive tax hikes that only cause more and more out of control government you are "against America"

of course all those dem voters who are drags on the system and vote for more and more dependency and sloth-those slackers and parasites are PATRIOTS. Expanding the nanny state is their definition of how to make America Greater!!!
 
Socialist left speak--if you oppose the soak the rich scheme filthy rich dems use to buy wealth and power you are "treasonous"

in other words-Oppose massive tax hikes that only cause more and more out of control government you are "against America"

I have no idea how anyone with even one foot in the real world can talk irrationally about "massive tax hikes" at a time when taxes on the rich are at a lower point than every in modern American history. Its like the real world is here and some folks seem to inhabit their own artificial reality which has no place in the real USA.
 
Actually, its their own role in their own self fulfilling prophecy. We used to have patriotic Americans even on the right... people who did what was best for America. Now the far right thinks only of itself and is more than willing to partake in economic treason as part of their own agenda of greed and self interest. Very sad indeed.

People are more frugal with their money, in the middle of a depression, to avoid bankruptcy, because of overregulation by the government and they're committing treason?


:lamo
 
I have no idea how anyone with even one foot in the real world can talk irrationally about "massive tax hikes" at a time when taxes on the rich are at a lower point than every in modern American history. Its like the real world is here and some folks seem to inhabit their own artificial reality which has no place in the real USA.

What was yourt ax bill for 2010?
 
I maybe mistaken but it seemed the author of this thread was surprised with this information. I do not know why people still side with Capitalism after reading story after story of people getting screwed over by the people with more money. As I have stated in the past, Capitalism breeds people that are addicted to money and power, and they will stop at nothing to achieve their fix. Rules and regulations are a waste of money and time, because eventually the addict will go around the rules to get what they need.

I really think most people are clinically insane when it comes to this topic. They keep the same reasoning in their heads, expecting a different outcome each time. As long as there are financial incentives, people are going to continue to screw one another over, breeding the ideal that you have to look out for yourself.

What information do you have to see in order to change your mind? Or do you blindly pledge to an ideal that is responsible for the god awful state that we are in now?
 
"fair" is determined by the market - the aggregate decision of every member of the involved industry, from producer to consumer.

That's a nice simple statement, and I understand that. But the market isn't a formula. And it has nothing to do with fair. It often has to do with advantage. If business management hold the advantage, they can lower wages and have higher profit without anything being fair. This is why workers need a voice as much as business. Balance between the two is good for all. Imbalance means someone likely gets the raw end of any deal.
 
I do not know why people still side with Capitalism

vote obama, 2012!

capitalism breeds people that are addicted to money and power!

seeya at the polls, pals
 
economic treason:

The federal government's financial condition deteriorated rapidly last year, far beyond the $1.5 trillion in new debt taken on to finance the budget deficit, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

The government added $5.3 trillion in new financial obligations in 2010, largely for retirement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for.

Medicare alone took on $1.8 trillion in new liabilities, more than the record deficit prompting heated debate between Congress and the White House over lifting the debt ceiling.

Social Security added $1.4 trillion in obligations, partly reflecting longer life expectancies. Federal and military retirement programs added more to the financial hole, too.

The $61.6 trillion in unfunded obligations amounts to $528,000 per household. That's more than five times what Americans have borrowed for everything else — mortgages, car loans and other debt. It reflects the challenge as the number of retirees soars over the next 20 years and seniors try to collect on those spending promises.

U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com

781 days since the party in power in upper parliament passed a budget---in times like these

embarrassed yet?
 
That's a nice simple statement, and I understand that. But the market isn't a formula.

neither is anything else - "fair" is subjective. you could say a formula was "fair", but you would be pulling it out of the sky.

And it has nothing to do with fair. It often has to do with advantage.

actually price on the market has to do with the aggregate decision of all producers, sellers, and consumers. the price on the market represents what the people as a whole consider to be "fair".

If business management hold the advantage, they can lower wages and have higher profit without anything being fair.

if labor is not worth it's current wages, then that is the situation that isn't fair. if labor is worth more than it's current wages, then it can get those higher wages elsewhere, which is fair. if a business under pays it's employees, then its' competition will thus be able to destroy it as they will have all the quality people, and that, too, is fair.

This is why workers need a voice as much as business. Balance between the two is good for all. Imbalance means someone likely gets the raw end of any deal.

workers have just as much a voice as the business already. mutually beneficial trade requires at least two actors.
 
People are more frugal with their money, in the middle of a depression, to avoid bankruptcy, because of overregulation by the government and they're committing treason?


:lamo

You have to understand that to the socialist left, people exist to serve the state and your individual wealth exists only to the extent that the greater good is best served by allowing you to keep some of it. If you object to being fed upon by the fleas and ticks who vote for your enlightened socialist overlords you are not a patriot but rather a "reactionary running dog who is "counterproductive" and "unenlightened"

capiche Comrade?
 
I have no idea how anyone with even one foot in the real world can talk irrationally about "massive tax hikes" at a time when taxes on the rich are at a lower point than every in modern American history. Its like the real world is here and some folks seem to inhabit their own artificial reality which has no place in the real USA.

remind me what share of the income tax burden the top one percent pay now. everyone else has lower tax burden is even lower now than it was so what are you whining about?
 
I maybe mistaken but it seemed the author of this thread was surprised with this information. I do not know why people still side with Capitalism after reading story after story of people getting screwed over by the people with more money. As I have stated in the past, Capitalism breeds people that are addicted to money and power, and they will stop at nothing to achieve their fix. Rules and regulations are a waste of money and time, because eventually the addict will go around the rules to get what they need.

I really think most people are clinically insane when it comes to this topic. They keep the same reasoning in their heads, expecting a different outcome each time. As long as there are financial incentives, people are going to continue to screw one another over, breeding the ideal that you have to look out for yourself.

What information do you have to see in order to change your mind? Or do you blindly pledge to an ideal that is responsible for the god awful state that we are in now?

winners and those who plan on being winners like capitalism. Those who are losers or have no desire to win are those who support socialism. That or those who pander to people such as you.
 
Interesting Libertarian perspective again

You keep saying that, are you trying to be subtle and say you don't believe I'm a libertarian?

"fair" is determined by the market - the aggregate decision of every member of the involved industry, from producer to consumer.

And Friedman, Hayke, and Smith all agree that no employer should willing offer a wage that can not sustain a man nor should any worker willing take said wage. This is where morality comes into play.

why aren't they spending? Because of the mixed signals they get from the current regime

You are too focused on one aspect instead of the entire picture. Its not mixed singles from the white house, its mixed singles caused by conflict between the white house and most dems and most republicans and some (a very small minority now) democrats. Its the uncertainty that CongressCare will be upheld in court, the uncertainty of the European Debt Crisis, on going unrest in the middle east, disruptions in supply chains, etc.

To entirely blame 1 person for the woes of the WORLD is disingenuous, just like attributing the success of the world on 1 person is laughable.

I maybe mistaken but it seemed the author of this thread was surprised with this information. I do not know why people still side with Capitalism after reading story after story of people getting screwed over by the people with more money.

The problem is not Capitalism as it was "designed" but with how its been misconstrued by those with power. I'm of the belief that the system in which we live is naturally caused by capitalism meld with large pockets of power. However, capitalism is, by its vary nature, incompatible with large pockets of power and thus we haven't had a capitalistic society since at least the mid to late 1800s.

winners and those who plan on being winners like capitalism. Those who are losers or have no desire to win are those who support socialism. That or those who pander to people such as you.

You are wrong. The problem is that socialism, in its pure Marxist form, is a direct result of the failure, an inevitability I may add given human nature, of Capitalism to remain pure. Re-read the statement so your head doesn't explode.

Power will use any system that is popular in order to further its own cause. During the mid to late 1800s, Capitalism was abused to create monopolies, sometimes with the backing or head-nod of the state (Railroads), other times caused by the failures of intellect of the competition (Western Union for instance), and sometimes out of pure necessity (privately operated and controlled Utilities, harbors, etc). Capitalism, while also fostering an unprecedented growth, innovation, and increase of the standard of living, the disparities between the "haves and have nots" was show in even more stark contrast. Our western sensibilities could not handle the contrast, and our inability to wait lead to the rise of socialism during this time, mainly in Germany. Those with power clung to socialism because it gave them greater control of affairs with justification. It wasn't until the end of WWII that the pendulum swung back to capitalism, albeit in a weaker form because those with power would not relinquish their gains (pre 1850ish). The Cold War solidified the public's aversion to socialism (and rightfully so) and lead to socialism's evolution to Welfareism. Welfarism has been used by the powerful to finally cast aside most of the chains of morality, this true. Had it been for crisis of the 70s and 80s, probably would have succeeded in using welfare to justify all sorts of private evils. The programs aim's weren't the cause of this, but the programs did tend to foster apathy and disengagement.

But what should be clear to any observer of history, is that power, while being amoral (good nor evil), is readily used by the selfish to no longer need to be moral. Capitalism demands morality, with it Capitalism cannot exist, and won't be allowed to exist.
 
Last edited:
winners and those who plan on being winners like capitalism. Those who are losers or have no desire to win are those who support socialism. That or those who pander to people such as you.

"This shows me you are unaware of the world around you. For it is this false perception that fuels the current system. People want to cling onto the ideal that people have more ability if they are making the most money. They cling onto this for a multitude of reasons, but the primary one is because they want to have the possibility of being the uber rich themselves. This is exactly what the ultra rich and ruling class want you to think. That way, the system does not change, and the people with all the wealth and power remain where they are.

I think everyone who shares this false perception, probably understand financial incentives. There is no financial incentive for these people to give up their stance. Meaning, there is no way you will become the ultra rich. None. It doesn't matter if you have the most intellectual ability ever to grace the human race. If you were to come up with an original idea, they would probably just buy it off of you.

Keep thinking the way you think, and everything will stay as it is. People are going to constantly starve, people are going to constantly be used for the profit of the few. I would advise to take the wisdom of Rage Against the Machine and just Wake Up."
 
Capitalism is intrinsically flawed. It promotes individualism at all costs, which in turn forces people in the society to think this way to survive. As a result, no matter the rules of the game you put in, there will be the ones that will get more no matter the cost. No matter what form of Capitalism you produce, there will be atrocities for profit. Period.

It is time to Wake Up people, and see that we need an alternative. It doesn't have to be Communism, it doesn't have to be Socialism either, as there is an ideal out there that uses "The Scientific Method for social concern." That to me, is what makes the most sense. It is called The Resource Based Economy, and it is being developed by The Venus Project.
 
Back
Top Bottom