Maybe, if it's carefully managed, war as a business proposition is a rare possibility. President G.H.W. Bush managed it with the First Gulf War. The problem is that our military operations, if not our military itself, have become corrupted by the same viral cupidity that has corrupted the rest of the U.S. government. U.S. defense spending is probably the most corrupt area of government expenditures, so it's pouring precious resources down a bottomless well that will never again draw water or anything else for the American people.
Not really a good business plan.
Overall, we have to face the reality that war as the leading export of the U.S. cannot be considered a business plan with any real chance of success.
Unionists finally came to understand that the Green Critique had to be a part of their political stand and that 'the environmentalists' were not their enemy, when they all marched together in Seattle in late 1999 (protest at WTO Ministerial Conference). The protesters, including some members of Congress, were dispersed by pepper spray and other police crowd-control and protest-control methods.
But how was this covered by corporate media? And how is it remembered, if at all?
Asbestos profiteering and the global neo-mercantilist system ... any connection?
The American worker (although probably not the ILWU, at least not the union staffers) supports protectionism. But do we hear anything about that in Congress or in corporate media? No, we only hear that any such thing would be a disaster!
NAFTA and the rest were not enacted by Congress with the support of the people.
Conclusion? Working people of America are not so much passive in nature as silenced and unrepresented, by circumstance.
Yes, and somewhere (maybe here at Econ Pop) I have read that Chairman Ryan of the House, who is glorified by corporate media as though he were some kind of financial genius, has never worked in any business where he had to produce a budget or live by a budget, and he has never had to meet a payroll in his life!
He graduated from Miami University in 1995, and since then, was employed regularly as a congressional staffer and speech-writer for GOP office-holders, until his election to the House in 1998. Great business experience, in the business that goes by the initials RNC.
Now Ryan gets a lot of respect from corporate media, as though he represented working people or small businesses and entrepreneurs.
I can hardly wait to invest in the 'U.S. multinational' that will eventually hire him as CEO!
There are many good ideas around about how U.S. policy could improve the environment for small businesses and independent operators, but we don't hear much about any of those ideas - not from Congress nor from the apparatchiks of either party nor from corporate media.
Of course, the global neo-mercantilist system is sucking the life-blood out of America! Of course, that life-blood is measured in dollars $US. Of course, not one member of the so-called 'Tea Party' in Congress fails to line up in support of 'free trade' and 'fast track' and in opposition to protectionism that is desired by their constituency out there beyond the Beltway.
But, having read both the Baker and the Pearlstein sources, I can't really make Pearlstein in the line-up or rogue's gallery. Anyway, I can't make him as a major player or kingpin, just another minor bagman.
Pearlstein's article just reviews the same old history, like Bretton Woods and 'emerging markets', which anyone who might possibly read his column already knows about anyway.
Sure, Pearlstein fails to get to heart of any real issues, but do we expect anything else from mass media pundits in this day and age?
(BTW: somebody opined here at Econ Pop the other day that 'rank and file' journalists are paid about $30k to $50k per year: sadly, I suggest Pearlstein gets a lot more than that, especially with benefits figured in.)
Taking him literally, Pearlstein is just saying "Hey, there has to be some kind of budget deal in the Congress before long." Ya Sure Ya Betcha. That's so true it's a truism - a consequence of the Constitution and our expectation that when federal office-holders accept their office, they intend to honor it.
HERE'S SOMETHING TO PONDER: We are at war. Everybody says that. Everybody knows that. Nobody really objects, at least not as to the necessity of it, anywhere throughout mass media punditry.
BUT SINCE WHEN DOES CONGRESS, IN A TIME OF WAR, REFUSE TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING?
AND SINCE WHEN DOES CONGRESS, AS A MATTER OF 'PRINCIPLE', INSIST ON LOWERING TAXES ON HIGH INCOMES - IN A TIME OF WAR?
Cognitive dissonance, anyone?
Or is it just me, being old enough to remember a different country than we live in now? There was a time when people competed to show their willingness to make personal sacrifices in support of the nation at war.
If we can be scolded by S&P, I should be investing in Enron, and if I have any problems with the IRS, I should call in Arthur Andersen, LLP, to clean up my books. After that, I should be able to get a AAA from S&P.
Yes, legislate 'em, regulate 'em and litigate 'em. Seriously. Hound them until corporate media (including e.g., NPR News) can no longer announce any S&P rating story without the news agency looking ridiculous if they do not at least mention the tarnished image of what may at one time (long ago) have played a valid role in keeping markets sane and healthy.
(Damned If You Do Damned If You Don't), is all I have to say when it comes to people complaining about this and about that in life. There is no Utopia on Earth and there will never be an Utopia so shut the Hell up and stop your compaining. If you was given a golden spoon, you would most likely complain that someone else got a Platinum Spoon. You unthankful humans will never be happy no matter what you are given because you're too damn greedy for your ownselves.
but there crap sometimes makes that impossible, which is what just happened. But that's why we put the articles on facebook so those who use it can find them.
...but it has become the predominant technology that people use to share information. If you want information to get out more effectively and exposed to more people, you use it.
The financial fat cats love to extol the virtues of entrepreneurship and self employment and they do everything they can to make sure it doesn't thrive. The lack of protections for earned income is one excellent point. Why shouldn't the law give the self employed the same rights as workers? The brutal cost of health insurance buying direct, as self employed are required, is a huge disincentive.
The self employed are a boon to the country from the self reliant contractor to the garage start ups in the computer industry. There are smart, risk taking people all over the country ready to rock. Why not make it at least doable?
Citizens are held liable for expenses, particularly small business. But S&P gets to help inflate/crash the economy on distorted information and nothing happens. The Connecticut suit is a model for other states. We'll see if they get on board.
The irony here is that S&P is part of McGraw Hill. They make about 40% of their money on text book and other educational sales. Their advice may end up costing them quite a bit of money (although they'll make it up on the financial publications end of the business). We're led by fools.
s&p originated as a resource for capitalists uneasy with risk. over time like a fungus spreading s&p found itself in a great business, popping up all over the globe with its "you pay me money, i'll give you my opinion" model.
a great way to clean up the hanky panky at s&p would be to require the company to pony up cash to reimburse losses.
Yes. SS is a Ponzi scheme. Look up the definition of Ponzi scheme and compare it to the social security system. Like all Ponzi schemes the people who got in early and didn;t pay jack into it made out like bandits. People like myself who have been robbed for most of my life paying into it are screwed. If Big Brother had allowed me to just keep that money and invest it, I'd be rich.
The article above is very well written about the budget.
Nice Bar chart to show the up's and down's of the market.
The Money Party is also very well explained.
Motorcycle personal injury lawyer
Maybe, if it's carefully managed, war as a business proposition is a rare possibility. President G.H.W. Bush managed it with the First Gulf War. The problem is that our military operations, if not our military itself, have become corrupted by the same viral cupidity that has corrupted the rest of the U.S. government. U.S. defense spending is probably the most corrupt area of government expenditures, so it's pouring precious resources down a bottomless well that will never again draw water or anything else for the American people.
Not really a good business plan.
Overall, we have to face the reality that war as the leading export of the U.S. cannot be considered a business plan with any real chance of success.
LOL, Robert (unverified)!
Unionists finally came to understand that the Green Critique had to be a part of their political stand and that 'the environmentalists' were not their enemy, when they all marched together in Seattle in late 1999 (protest at WTO Ministerial Conference). The protesters, including some members of Congress, were dispersed by pepper spray and other police crowd-control and protest-control methods.
But how was this covered by corporate media? And how is it remembered, if at all?
Asbestos profiteering and the global neo-mercantilist system ... any connection?
That was then, and this is now.
Then and now ... any connection?
The American worker (although probably not the ILWU, at least not the union staffers) supports protectionism. But do we hear anything about that in Congress or in corporate media? No, we only hear that any such thing would be a disaster!
NAFTA and the rest were not enacted by Congress with the support of the people.
Conclusion? Working people of America are not so much passive in nature as silenced and unrepresented, by circumstance.
Yes, and somewhere (maybe here at Econ Pop) I have read that Chairman Ryan of the House, who is glorified by corporate media as though he were some kind of financial genius, has never worked in any business where he had to produce a budget or live by a budget, and he has never had to meet a payroll in his life!
He graduated from Miami University in 1995, and since then, was employed regularly as a congressional staffer and speech-writer for GOP office-holders, until his election to the House in 1998. Great business experience, in the business that goes by the initials RNC.
Now Ryan gets a lot of respect from corporate media, as though he represented working people or small businesses and entrepreneurs.
I can hardly wait to invest in the 'U.S. multinational' that will eventually hire him as CEO!
There are many good ideas around about how U.S. policy could improve the environment for small businesses and independent operators, but we don't hear much about any of those ideas - not from Congress nor from the apparatchiks of either party nor from corporate media.
Another great article by Robert Oak.
Of course, the global neo-mercantilist system is sucking the life-blood out of America! Of course, that life-blood is measured in dollars $US. Of course, not one member of the so-called 'Tea Party' in Congress fails to line up in support of 'free trade' and 'fast track' and in opposition to protectionism that is desired by their constituency out there beyond the Beltway.
But, having read both the Baker and the Pearlstein sources, I can't really make Pearlstein in the line-up or rogue's gallery. Anyway, I can't make him as a major player or kingpin, just another minor bagman.
Pearlstein's article just reviews the same old history, like Bretton Woods and 'emerging markets', which anyone who might possibly read his column already knows about anyway.
Sure, Pearlstein fails to get to heart of any real issues, but do we expect anything else from mass media pundits in this day and age?
(BTW: somebody opined here at Econ Pop the other day that 'rank and file' journalists are paid about $30k to $50k per year: sadly, I suggest Pearlstein gets a lot more than that, especially with benefits figured in.)
Taking him literally, Pearlstein is just saying "Hey, there has to be some kind of budget deal in the Congress before long." Ya Sure Ya Betcha. That's so true it's a truism - a consequence of the Constitution and our expectation that when federal office-holders accept their office, they intend to honor it.
HERE'S SOMETHING TO PONDER: We are at war. Everybody says that. Everybody knows that. Nobody really objects, at least not as to the necessity of it, anywhere throughout mass media punditry.
BUT SINCE WHEN DOES CONGRESS, IN A TIME OF WAR, REFUSE TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING?
AND SINCE WHEN DOES CONGRESS, AS A MATTER OF 'PRINCIPLE', INSIST ON LOWERING TAXES ON HIGH INCOMES - IN A TIME OF WAR?
Cognitive dissonance, anyone?
Or is it just me, being old enough to remember a different country than we live in now? There was a time when people competed to show their willingness to make personal sacrifices in support of the nation at war.
Robert Oak:
I think you intended $6 (per gallon) GASOLINE (at the pump) not $6 (per barrel) OIL.
Today we have the Koch Brothers, GE, Google, Facebook, BIG TIME Facebook, Goldman Sachs (who runs the world I think), JPMorgan Chase....
What if the world, every single person on the planet, all on one day, at the same time, places shorts and puts on these companies?
Now that....would be a political statement.
If we can be scolded by S&P, I should be investing in Enron, and if I have any problems with the IRS, I should call in Arthur Andersen, LLP, to clean up my books. After that, I should be able to get a AAA from S&P.
Yes, legislate 'em, regulate 'em and litigate 'em. Seriously. Hound them until corporate media (including e.g., NPR News) can no longer announce any S&P rating story without the news agency looking ridiculous if they do not at least mention the tarnished image of what may at one time (long ago) have played a valid role in keeping markets sane and healthy.
S&P is just another branch of the Money Party.
Another great piece from Michael Collins.
(Damned If You Do Damned If You Don't), is all I have to say when it comes to people complaining about this and about that in life. There is no Utopia on Earth and there will never be an Utopia so shut the Hell up and stop your compaining. If you was given a golden spoon, you would most likely complain that someone else got a Platinum Spoon. You unthankful humans will never be happy no matter what you are given because you're too damn greedy for your ownselves.
but there crap sometimes makes that impossible, which is what just happened. But that's why we put the articles on facebook so those who use it can find them.
...but it has become the predominant technology that people use to share information. If you want information to get out more effectively and exposed to more people, you use it.
Regards,
...just listed some of our major enemies of modern times.
The financial fat cats love to extol the virtues of entrepreneurship and self employment and they do everything they can to make sure it doesn't thrive. The lack of protections for earned income is one excellent point. Why shouldn't the law give the self employed the same rights as workers? The brutal cost of health insurance buying direct, as self employed are required, is a huge disincentive.
The self employed are a boon to the country from the self reliant contractor to the garage start ups in the computer industry. There are smart, risk taking people all over the country ready to rock. Why not make it at least doable?
Citizens are held liable for expenses, particularly small business. But S&P gets to help inflate/crash the economy on distorted information and nothing happens. The Connecticut suit is a model for other states. We'll see if they get on board.
The irony here is that S&P is part of McGraw Hill. They make about 40% of their money on text book and other educational sales. Their advice may end up costing them quite a bit of money (although they'll make it up on the financial publications end of the business). We're led by fools.
It's their downgrades on sovereign debt which create these pressures on PIGS, to sign up for "austerity". See S&P scolds the U.S..
But to me they have way too much power over sovereign states. Then again, I recall Goldman Sachs getting Greece into some sort of CDS game as well.
s&p originated as a resource for capitalists uneasy with risk. over time like a fungus spreading s&p found itself in a great business, popping up all over the globe with its "you pay me money, i'll give you my opinion" model.
a great way to clean up the hanky panky at s&p would be to require the company to pony up cash to reimburse losses.
Yes. SS is a Ponzi scheme. Look up the definition of Ponzi scheme and compare it to the social security system. Like all Ponzi schemes the people who got in early and didn;t pay jack into it made out like bandits. People like myself who have been robbed for most of my life paying into it are screwed. If Big Brother had allowed me to just keep that money and invest it, I'd be rich.
The article above is very well written about the budget.
Nice Bar chart to show the up's and down's of the market.
The Money Party is also very well explained.
Motorcycle personal injury lawyer
Pages