@ #15 Rick Steve

Waiting on your Rove accusing Bush of having knowledge of the financial collapse.

At least mine had video proof that refutes the leftie/socialist meme.

The Common argument is that their parents brought them here it's not their fault. Don't punish the kids.

Yet if I commit a crime I would go to jail and my children would suffer while I was jailed..no one would claim that was unfair.

No matter how many people come here their will always be more need...better to help them change their own governments. Then the children that don't come here could have a better life too.

It’s Not Capitalism, It’s Corporatism

http://calebjonesblog.com/its-not-capitalism-its-corporatism/

Today, I’m going to describe what is perhaps the largest single lie of modern-day Societal Programming. So successful is this lie that I would guess that a billion people, yes, a billion people believe in it.

This lie has been building slowly since around the early 1990s. It reached critical mass around the mid 2000s and crescendoed just after the collapse of 2008. Today, it’s simply accepted “wisdom” and not even questioned. The lie is complete, entrenched into not just Western culture but world culture, and is here to stay, perhaps for the next 100 years.

The lie is this: Capitalism means big government assisting big banks and corporations in ripping off their customers, then bailing out said banks and corporations when they fail.

You’ve probably heard this statement a thousand times: “The 2008 crash was caused by too much capitalism.”

When government throws corporate welfare at big companies or bails out big banks, what do you see people screaming about? Capitalism.

The problem is none of this is capitalism. It’s corporatism, which is completely different.

more @ link above.

#9. You live in your own world Diane.

You speak for yourself Diane.

I once saw Karl Rove in an interview brag about how the Bush Administration new the crash was coming. What he did not do is brag about doing something about it.

The history of "democracy" in the United States and elsewhere around the world is not well understood. One has to read extensively and even take courses at a college or university to begin to see the grand picture. Of course, historians too often have their own bias when interpreting history.

For about a decade I have been teaching history in a program the members of which are retired persons seeking intellectual stimulation. So, as adults they have lived through the events of the last five, six or even seven decades. Some hold strong to conservative or progressive perspectives. I do my best to introduce them to the socio-political arrangements and institutions that drive our behavior and our history. The story is not easy to tell because of the underlying presence of vested interests and ideological bias.

In a chapter of a book I wrote titled "The Discovery of First Principles," I detail the European conquest -- not discovery -- of the Americas. Those who arrived from the Old World sought a number of things. They certainly sought an opportunity for a better life, even in the wilderness of the first century and longer. They also sought to acquire ownership of land as a primary source of wealth. The "first families" of the Americas understood the enormous economic and political power that came with owning enough land they could lease to others and collect rents so that they could devote themselves to the arts, the sciences and politics.

George Washington, for one, used all of the means at his disposal to amass an enormous landed estate to become the wealthiest person in the newly-formed United States. One of the reasons for his break with Great Britain was the order by the Royal Governor that some of Washington's land grants be cancelled. I tell Washington's story in detail in the classroom. Few of my "students" are aware of any of this.

Students of American history are almost always assigned to read Tocqueville's "Democracy in America," which paints a idealized picture of live in America by a Frenchman whose country was, by comparison, still a quasi-feudal state plagued by widespread poverty and aristocratic privilege. Tocqueville mistakenly believed the differences were differences of kind when they were really differences of degree.

The reality of "the American System" was detailed late in the 19th century by Henry George in his books, lectures, newspaper editorials and testimony before the U.S. Congress and other governmental commissions. Other historians and writers weighed in as well with balanced analyses. One was Frederick Jackson Turner with his analysis of how the existence of the frontier (and the potential for access to free land) influenced the behavior and attitudes of those of European heritage who populated the interior.

As Henry George detailed, already by the late 19th century, the land and natural resources and much of the industrial enterprise of the nation was in the hands of a powerful minority. In the early 20th century, the historian Charles Beard made the case in his book "An Economic Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution" that the game was rigged from the very beginning. Who were the White men who met in Philadelphia to frame a new government? They were its most powerful citizens, members of the rentier and financial class. Beard's analysis was then and is still attacked by those who want the "have nots" of this country to believe that with hard work and self-control that they can become "haves."

Democracy in America has always been more myth than reality. The philosopher Mortimer J. Adler wrote that we may not be able to define the just society but we can see its effects where they exist. If all of the citizens in a society have access to adequare food, clothing, shelter, education, medical care, the time to participate in civic affairs, and leisure time to pursue interests and talents, then one can safely conclude that the laws of that society are just. By this measure, the United States is becoming less and less just every day. The rentier interests are winning. The conquences will be severe for the majority of us as the social fabric is ripped apart.

Values and beliefs drive behaviours. Sadly the Iraq war and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein replaced a dictatorship with democracy and the country was destroyed by "democratic countries" some of whom perpetrated unpunished war crimes. It was a demonstration of the devious and corrupt undemocratic politcal system in both the US and UK. What it illustrated that when you scratched below the surface that Saddam kept a very diverse country under control. With Greece and our slide to Brexit, was an illustration that the "democratic" EU was actually far from democratic and our well known British sense of fair play was affronted, and hence the rise of UKIP particularly overturning the Labour Party of Blair/Brown to the point where Marxists run an apparently centre Left party (itching for a return to authoritarianism. In the US the populist rise of Trump's authoritarianism seems to be strongly affected by Democrats appalled by the thought of voting for Hillary. Trump's approach has to be unconventional but that lays him open to an onslaught from the Deep State who must be scared to death of a revolutionary change in US politics hence the focus on whipping up anti Russia feeling again replacing Islam and ISIS as the US enemy in the relentless search for an enemy to fight and justify the Pentagon's wartime budget. I wonder whether we are seeing the stupid ignorant bigoted Trump to get the US popular mindset in such a state to force all Americans to think more deeply about America and its place in the world, so that a fundamental commitment to all Americans getting some"skin in the game" to make America different (Kennedy - ask Not what America can do for you speech). Finally I am reminded of the metaphor about how to deal with a baby with a sharp knife, you distract them with something else, take the knife off them, keeping them happy and preventing them from crying. Is Trump distratcting everybody across the world, and doing other things by changing other things quietly? I thought last year that filling the 520 top jobs was the administration being totally inept, by April he had filled 50+. If you were 'draining the swamp" would you fight conventional warfare with the the establshment / Deep State/ MIC with no hope of winning or fight a guerilla war to beat a much stronger opponent? There again I have always been an optimist hence giving Donald far too much credit - back to the meds.....

I agree with the above posts...we're on the verge of a historic crash. The buy back bubble has inflated to beyond 1929 territory and hardly a red flag anywhere. With a fraud friendly government the current market inflation is just as much a fascist political statement as it is fools gold. Yes, Crooked Donny filled his cabinet swamp with Goldman Sachs sidewinders, but they'll be the first to bale....don't expect answers from them.

Why would anybody believe earnings reports issued in the Trump era anyway? I've also seen recent adjustments made to employment stats after the fact....over reporting of new hires. No watch dogs anymore!

How curious to hear nonchalant corpse news market reports everyday.....as if this extreme climb is something that has always been the norm, nothing to question or be alarmed about here...LOL

Not to mention Crooked Donny just replaced Yellen with a guy who has no degree in economics. I'm afraid ole Jerome Powell is about to go down in history in a most painful light.

Isn't unregulated capitalism just another term for feudalism? Hasn't that already been tried?

I'd like to hear from one of our Koch/Libertarian trolls.....explain to me how Democratic Socialism would have a negative impact on your life.

Well said Dude! However, (and unfortunately) we have been saddled with those who cannot think or reason for themselves. Really is scary times here.......... Amazing that they comprise 25/30 % of the electorate too! That's what concerns me Big Time since even after all this they are still there. And, they do flipping vote!!!!

Thom, Isuggest reviewing mythfighter.com for validity of its topics.