You are dead right, @kriley. Our leaders are themselves being led around by the nose. They are paid to put the rubber stamp on whatever Wall St and the investment bankers hand them. But the US is apathetic, uniformed, ill informed, and more concerned with the stats of the sports teams than their own economic future.
@dagosa social security and medicaid were supposed to be self funded, wtf happened? and now they are entitlement programs that should be cut to provide tax cuts for the rich? Get mad,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/U.S.Federal_Spending-_FY_2010.svg/800px-U.S.Federal_Spending-_FY_2010.svg.png
@barkydog
You get no disagreement from me !!, Their surplus pays the deficit down and by cutting benefits, they can take MORE money out.
If you have read any of my other posts on this matter, itâs a discrace we are even debating with the Reps. About it. That is a sure sign of plutocracy. Being sold out by both sidesâŠsomeone(s) will be a millionaire after they retire from politics. If you think it a sham, and you havenât done it alreadyâŠ,drop out of both parties .
Do we need another Teddy Roosevelt to breakup the megacorporations? The small business person and innovators are being stiffled.
What seems more obvious to me is that every generation, when it ages, thinks it sees the signs that life as we knew it is ending.
As we age, we naturally compare the world in which we grew up to the world in which we live, but we donât perceive the difference in our own perspective.
My paternal grandmother was sure the world as she knew it would end long before now, but from where I sit, itâs the same world with different technology.
@Barkydog, social security was never intended to be self-funded. The first generation to receive social security payments paid-in much less than they received. Every generation of retirees expects to rely on the younger generations of working Americans to fund their social security payments.
Iâve been paying social security taxes for almost 30 years, but if things stay the same, what I receive in payments will likely be more than what I paid-in.
So is this an effort to create another 1000+ post thread?
As to the topic, sure, there are problems in the US. So whoâs treating the populace better? Must be the EuropeansâŠoops, they have 50% MORE people out of work (and have had for YEARS):
@dagosa Sorry if a statistic I heard was wrong, a generous guess was that 2% of the welfare budget is due to fraud. Ind I guess that makes it 2 % of 12 percent of the budget. My first mistaken belief was 2% of the total budget is welfare fraud, so I correct myself that. So now we are looking at .24% of the federal budget goes to welfare fraud. Go after it great I support that and not giving welfare without drug tests, just meant to look at the other 88% of the budget. One ringer for me was Bachman rich of course, we cannot afford unemployment benifit extensions, yet they have over a million in farm and church grants per year.
A big boost to the economy, both of which will be opposed by businesses and their supporters, is an increase in minimum wage and a comprehensive immigration policy. Increased minimum wage provides more jobs that Americans would actually work at and an immigration policy increases SS contributions dramatically. We have so many undocumented workers paid under the table, we are loosing billions in taxes over the years. If businesses could only hire citizens or documented workers for a livable wage, the entire country benefits. But, with corporate profits going through the roof on the backs of third world labor here and abroad, some of us will have to secum to the idea of politicians actually working together.
@dagosa Yes, all those âundocumentedâ workers are sending home a lot of money. Without them paying taxes and SS contributions the US is losing a fortune. You might say that Western Union (who processes all these transfers) is the biggest âthiefâ of US dollars.
Spent some time in the Phillippines, which has the worldâs largest expatriate workforce; maids, nannies, construction workers, cab drivers, ship crews, ect. It is that countryâs biggest source of income!!! Without those workers the Phillipine economy would collapse.
@Docnick
Itâs kind of a âdahâ moment. It is so obvious as a solution yetâŠcorporations own the legislature. Even the Bush administration couldnât get it done. We will NEVER seal the borders completely and holding that up as a precurser is BS. It is physically impossible. But, making it an incentive to come a cross legally and making jobs only available to Americans and documented workers would shut off the flow. A big part of those corporate profits are going right to the congress. Like we are going to build a âgreat wall of Chinaâ or something.
@dagosa One final comment; yes, America need immigrants (the right kind) and a sane immigration and temporary worker policy would let many qualified applicants in, while keeping out undesirables. Border control is still essential for safety reasons as well. Events of 9-11 changed that forever.
The other major change needed are limits on corporate political contributions. I believe in Canada companies are limited to only $2000!!! per company, and individuals to $1000 or so. And candidates are limted as to how much they can spend on electioneering, giving rich guys little advantage. As a result politicians are not controlled by any particular industry or labor union. The current US system allows industries (such as oil) to âbuyâ presidential candidates (G.W. Bush & dad) and whole parties. It also results in needlessly expensive elections. Most countries have legal limits on how much an organization or individual can contribute.
Interesting how the oil industry always get mentioned, while other industries contribute much more to both partiesâ candidates. Hereâs a good place for facts:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/index.php
And the myth that we went into Iraq for the US oil companies is just that. The majority of companies in Iraq are non-US companies
But I agree 100% - limit ALL entities to a small donation.
What are âthe right kindâ of immigrants? Are they the Chinese immigrants who built the railroads or the Mexican braceros who pulled our fat out of the fire during WWII by helping us with our labor shortage?
Until the late 19th century, the USA had no illegal immigrants because we let everyone in, and it was good for the economy. Our economy has always had a symbiotic relationship with immigrants. We need to exploit their cheap labor, and they need the opportunity to be upwardly mobile so their children can have better lives. They used to help us reach our goals, and we could help them reach their goals, if we were willing to do whatâs in our best interest and ignore the bigotry.
The only reason the U.S. instituted an immigration policy was bigotry against Chinese immigrants. Our immigration policy has since been bolstered by anti-Mexican bigotry, and the idea that these immigrants are somehow more of a threat to our country than its own citizens is a myth.
I firmly believe the recent recession, and the remaining lull in employment, are largely woulds weâve inflicted upon ourselves as a result of anti-immigrant fervor. Yes, deregulating the banks and the sub-prime mortgage scandal also contributed to the recession, but clamping down on undocumented immigrants has also contributed, and weâre cutting off our collective nose to spite our collective face.
Americans donât want jobs picking crops, and not having anyone else to pick them is hurting our economy. In addition, the cost of incarcerating undocumented immigrants is going to cost us more than conservatives are willing to pay in taxes, so unless youâre in favor of raising taxes to pay for your punitive immigration policy, youâre not really putting your money where your mouth is, and passing the tab for your immigration policy on to future generations is unethical.
Regarding 9-11, the terrorists entered this country legally, and simply out-stayed their visas. They didnât cross the border in dark of night, so any link between border security and 9-11 is nothing more than a political exploitation of our unfounded fears.
When Atlanta was preparing for the 1996 Olympics, they had a labor shortage, and the only way they were able to meet their construction goals was to being in undocumented immigrants. If it werenât for the labor of undocumented immigrants, Atlanta would likely have lost the 1996 Olympics.
The U.S.A.'s ugly secret is that we need lots if immigrants to continue on our previous trajectory of economic growth. Without all that cheap labor, we will need to get used to a new normal of high unemployment.
The stockholders, which, in some cases, include foreign governments. Your point?
There is a plethora of significant information that the right wing propaganda mill wishes to ignore, dismiss and demean. Oil is a global industry and the oil companies drill for crude wherever it can be discovered, locate their corporate headquarters where they are offered the greatest protection and the same people who own British Petroleum own Wal-Mart and Caterpillar.
And the truly wealthy have little concern for borders.
âthe same people who own British Petroleum own Wal-Mart and Caterpillar.â
Nonsense. Well, actually, this is true. ANYBODY WITH A RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTED IN THE STOCK MARKET fits your description. The thievesâŠ
I find it interesting and fairly two-faced that corporations are now considered âpeopleâ when it comes to political donations (they now can contribute), but are now exempt (in Kansas) from having to pay some taxes because they are not âpeopleâ.
And HORRORS - the biggest owner of Exxon stock is Vanguard:
http://stockzoa.com/ticker/xom/
The rest of the big owners are other investment firms, investing folks retirement funds.
The old adage about politicians; âHe may be a liar and a thief and a scoundrel, but heâs oursâ seems to transfer to corporations, @texases.