New number ... 7.5 % !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK, I'll pose my question to a socialist, then -- where would you open a savings account in a completely government-guaranteed institution where you could get better than 1.15% on a one-year CD? I mean, if everything's so DAMNED wonderful, and the stock market is at record highs, the unemployment rate has plummeted downward, everybody's having a big socialistic orgasm, and "happy days are here again", then why the hell are interest rates about one millimeter above absolute-zero...? And, although I really don't care anymore, why is nearly half the country still on welfare of one kind or another..?!

 

From one perspective and in that alternative, our form of Capitalism favors those with wealth. To the extent we are waging "wars" on a "for profit basis" those with wealth will be able to better exploit any capital based opportunities as they arise, even if due to the socialism of public sector intervention in private sector markets, than those without access to as much wealth.

 

I don't know what "access" to wealth a citizen of the United States needs that they don't already have. Eschewing all the Socratic "table-talk" and getting straight to the point: if a person gets up off his/her ass, works effectively and consistently at something he/she is good at, then -- voilà -- wealth happens!

Those who are unable physically or mentally to work and support themselves (with real, verifiable disabilities) should be provided with welfare by the government -- everybody else should work or starve. "Whatever you tolerate, you will get MORE of", and if we continue to cultivate a growing society of parasites, they will eventually overrun us all and suck us dry....

Parenthetically, do YOU know where I can get better than 1.15% on a one-year CD in a federally-insured bank or credit union? "Happy Days Are Here Again" -- but not for people who actually work, pay taxes, and SAVE money instead of blowing it on every trinket and toy....

 

What does this have to do with your claim that Bernanke and Obama are deliberately messing up the economy?

Because, shoot, everyone knows having a messed up economy is the best way for the party in power to get re-elected.

People put money into the stock market to get better returns, but they don't put money in the stock market if they think the economy is going to tank.

 

How well did your line of reasoning work during the Great Depression? According to you, they were really just lazy and needed to get off their butts.

 

Their economy, the one controlled by the international banking system and wall street is doing fine, and the country's economy as a whole for the majority, isn't. It's amazing how you realize that the rich are getting richer but you cannot grasp they are not influencing the economic growth of the nation because it isn't in their best interest to do so.

 

I don't know any politician in office who will tell you thinks his chances for re-election is better if the economy is in the crapper.

Now, for those not holding office, it's a totally different picture.

 

I don't know any corporate sock puppet who is actually worried about getting reelected, since they are already on the gravy train retirement program, and if they are doing as their corporate masters want their future is already secured, while another sock puppet will take their place. That's how the best government corporate money can buy's revolving door works.

Honest to God, which politician do you know who actually accepts responsibility for anything , when they can just point at their sister party and their sheeple obediently jump on the band wagon?

 

They sure seem to be worried about getting re-elected to me. At least most of them.

"As I have said many times, I take responsibility."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57565373/hillary-clinton-on-benghazi-i-do-feel-responsible/

 

She took a hit for Obama so what? They never thought it would turn into a big deal, it has. Whoda thunk it? They are playing their role of an elected official, they have to make it look like the elections matter otherwise the gig would be up.

 

I didn't say so anything. You asked me which politicians takes responsibility for anything. Clinton was the first example that popped in my mind.

 

My bad I thought we were talking about the economy. When the economy hit the fan Bush blamed democrat who were not even in charge of committees, and congress who didn't have an absolute majority of anything, and democrats blamed Bush, since he signed anything and everything democrats sent him. They still blame Bush, even though he isn't one of the neocons responsible for what is going on"today". It doesn't matter or what actually caused it, one party will always blame the other when it comes to failure, when the truth is so simple. It's both their fault.

 

The Great Depression? Not sure what that has to do with anything going on now in the 21st-Century.... During the Great Recession (which, you will remember, ended in almost four years ago, in June 2009), there was already in place an elaborate smorgasbord of welfare offerings of all kinds that did not exist even under the great Socialist "god", Frankie Roosevelt!

The fact that said Great Recession ended almost four freaking years ago notwithstanding, we still have all the welfare programs in full-force, with millions and millions completely reliant on the government sugar-teat. In the Great Depression, people eagerly sought work everywhere they could find it, because in those days it Americans had too much integrity, honor, and pride to just lay around on their asses in their parents' living room, trading worthless nothings with their little loser friends on Facebook all day long. Back then, technology was virtually nonexistent. Today, pride in oneself is virtually nonexistent. But, we're better off today, right...?

Now, where the hell would you put your savings with the expectation of getting more than 1.15% on a year-long CD? Oh, I really no longer expect an answer from any of you. Most of the hyperlibs I've known don't have "a pot or a window", and sure as hell don't have any money in savings -- which is why so many of them are permanently affixed to their parents, the government, and anyone else they can attach themselves to, like leeches....

 

We have 6.8 million more people employed in private sector jobs than a little over three years ago. It would be 7.5 million but for the 730,000 jobs that have been cut in the Republican dominated states. Tell them to stop firing people and we'd have fewer dependent on welfare.

 

It has to do with your line of reasoning. Public sector intervention in the market for labor was one such public policy.