Obama and Your Financial Aspirations (Stealth Socialism)

[rnen]

I could support subsidized college tuition to those that need the finicial help provided the aid is subject to qaulifying SAT’s and maintaining a minimum grade level. With out those conditions there will be no end to the abuse by the youth today who are being raised with a sense of entitlement thanks to the left of this country.

Socialism will never work. If you take away the ability of a person to improve themselves both financialy and socialy you strip them of all incentive to work hard. The far left nut jobs have to understand that people need something to aspire to and life comes with risk. My guess is that those who support the kind of crap laid out in the artical are afraid they will not make it in life and want someone to look after them.

If Obama is elected,(god help us!), he will be lucky to last one term.

Capitalism is not perfect and may need some regulating but it is a far better system than socialism.

[Arraya]

Unfortunately, the next president will be faced with massive unemployment and no engine for job growth. No amounts of free markets can help us now and undoubtedly huge socialization programs will take place. This is unavoidable or there will be civil unrest, I suppose prisons and security could be the next growth market. In a situation like this it would make sense to have somebody well studied in socialism, kind of like Bernake is an expert in the depression. Funny how things work out, huh?

With all the privacy invasions, expanded domestic police powers, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty over the past 8 years, why not complete the cycle to a dictatorship of the proletariat. IMO, that’s the end game here.

The only reasonable way to break the cycle is to step outside of the 2 party system. However, we are unable to do so and hence caught in a paralyzing echo chamber perpetuated by the main stream media. I mean we are all on this blog because they failed. Isn’t reasonable to assume they are failing in the same way with political matters as they have done with financial?

The more pertinent question is how did we get hear, to the perfect storm of statism as the author puts it?

In the past few years, whenever I’ve softly and purely hypothetically suggested that perhaps the Lords of the Manor are not trying to save the economy and the country, as is generally and unquestioningly assumed, but that in reality they’re deliberately gutting and liquidating the financial structures, people have always laughed. That, they feel with unrelenting conviction, can not be true.

Well, maybe it’s getting to be time to revisit that option once more, purely hypothetically. Every single step the Lords have taken in the last 25 years has made matters worse for the citizens. That is either an amazing string of failures or an unparalled success rate.

[Arraya]

Unfortunately, the next president will be faced with massive unemployment and no engine for job growth. No amounts of free markets can help us now and undoubtedly huge socialization programs will take place. This is unavoidable or there will be civil unrest, I suppose prisons and security could be the next growth market. In a situation like this it would make sense to have somebody well studied in socialism, kind of like Bernake is an expert in the depression. Funny how things work out, huh?

With all the privacy invasions, expanded domestic police powers, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty over the past 8 years, why not complete the cycle to a dictatorship of the proletariat. IMO, that’s the end game here.

The only reasonable way to break the cycle is to step outside of the 2 party system. However, we are unable to do so and hence caught in a paralyzing echo chamber perpetuated by the main stream media. I mean we are all on this blog because they failed. Isn’t reasonable to assume they are failing in the same way with political matters as they have done with financial?

The more pertinent question is how did we get hear, to the perfect storm of statism as the author puts it?

In the past few years, whenever I’ve softly and purely hypothetically suggested that perhaps the Lords of the Manor are not trying to save the economy and the country, as is generally and unquestioningly assumed, but that in reality they’re deliberately gutting and liquidating the financial structures, people have always laughed. That, they feel with unrelenting conviction, can not be true.

Well, maybe it’s getting to be time to revisit that option once more, purely hypothetically. Every single step the Lords have taken in the last 25 years has made matters worse for the citizens. That is either an amazing string of failures or an unparalled success rate.

[Arraya]

Unfortunately, the next president will be faced with massive unemployment and no engine for job growth. No amounts of free markets can help us now and undoubtedly huge socialization programs will take place. This is unavoidable or there will be civil unrest, I suppose prisons and security could be the next growth market. In a situation like this it would make sense to have somebody well studied in socialism, kind of like Bernake is an expert in the depression. Funny how things work out, huh?

With all the privacy invasions, expanded domestic police powers, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty over the past 8 years, why not complete the cycle to a dictatorship of the proletariat. IMO, that’s the end game here.

The only reasonable way to break the cycle is to step outside of the 2 party system. However, we are unable to do so and hence caught in a paralyzing echo chamber perpetuated by the main stream media. I mean we are all on this blog because they failed. Isn’t reasonable to assume they are failing in the same way with political matters as they have done with financial?

The more pertinent question is how did we get hear, to the perfect storm of statism as the author puts it?

In the past few years, whenever I’ve softly and purely hypothetically suggested that perhaps the Lords of the Manor are not trying to save the economy and the country, as is generally and unquestioningly assumed, but that in reality they’re deliberately gutting and liquidating the financial structures, people have always laughed. That, they feel with unrelenting conviction, can not be true.

Well, maybe it’s getting to be time to revisit that option once more, purely hypothetically. Every single step the Lords have taken in the last 25 years has made matters worse for the citizens. That is either an amazing string of failures or an unparalled success rate.

[Arraya]

Unfortunately, the next president will be faced with massive unemployment and no engine for job growth. No amounts of free markets can help us now and undoubtedly huge socialization programs will take place. This is unavoidable or there will be civil unrest, I suppose prisons and security could be the next growth market. In a situation like this it would make sense to have somebody well studied in socialism, kind of like Bernake is an expert in the depression. Funny how things work out, huh?

With all the privacy invasions, expanded domestic police powers, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty over the past 8 years, why not complete the cycle to a dictatorship of the proletariat. IMO, that’s the end game here.

The only reasonable way to break the cycle is to step outside of the 2 party system. However, we are unable to do so and hence caught in a paralyzing echo chamber perpetuated by the main stream media. I mean we are all on this blog because they failed. Isn’t reasonable to assume they are failing in the same way with political matters as they have done with financial?

The more pertinent question is how did we get hear, to the perfect storm of statism as the author puts it?

In the past few years, whenever I’ve softly and purely hypothetically suggested that perhaps the Lords of the Manor are not trying to save the economy and the country, as is generally and unquestioningly assumed, but that in reality they’re deliberately gutting and liquidating the financial structures, people have always laughed. That, they feel with unrelenting conviction, can not be true.

Well, maybe it’s getting to be time to revisit that option once more, purely hypothetically. Every single step the Lords have taken in the last 25 years has made matters worse for the citizens. That is either an amazing string of failures or an unparalled success rate.

[Arraya]

Unfortunately, the next president will be faced with massive unemployment and no engine for job growth. No amounts of free markets can help us now and undoubtedly huge socialization programs will take place. This is unavoidable or there will be civil unrest, I suppose prisons and security could be the next growth market. In a situation like this it would make sense to have somebody well studied in socialism, kind of like Bernake is an expert in the depression. Funny how things work out, huh?

With all the privacy invasions, expanded domestic police powers, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty over the past 8 years, why not complete the cycle to a dictatorship of the proletariat. IMO, that’s the end game here.

The only reasonable way to break the cycle is to step outside of the 2 party system. However, we are unable to do so and hence caught in a paralyzing echo chamber perpetuated by the main stream media. I mean we are all on this blog because they failed. Isn’t reasonable to assume they are failing in the same way with political matters as they have done with financial?

The more pertinent question is how did we get hear, to the perfect storm of statism as the author puts it?

In the past few years, whenever I’ve softly and purely hypothetically suggested that perhaps the Lords of the Manor are not trying to save the economy and the country, as is generally and unquestioningly assumed, but that in reality they’re deliberately gutting and liquidating the financial structures, people have always laughed. That, they feel with unrelenting conviction, can not be true.

Well, maybe it’s getting to be time to revisit that option once more, purely hypothetically. Every single step the Lords have taken in the last 25 years has made matters worse for the citizens. That is either an amazing string of failures or an unparalled success rate.

[michael]

Shadowfax:

“Gee, if Exxon has to pay more in taxes it will hinder innovation and hard work….bullshit. They will just game the system AGAIN to make MORE money and gauge the rest of us over prices.”

Exxon profit margins are 8%-9%. Why don’t we instead tax higher profit margin companies like Merck 29%. Microsoft 27%. Google 23%.

Higher corporate rates will only drive companies to ship more jobs and capital overseas. McCain’s got it right when he proposes lowering corporate tax rates.

Here’s a quick quote…

July 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. may now be in a “very long” recession that will drive the unemployment rate higher, with little that the Federal Reserve can do to help, said Harvard University Professor Martin Feldstein.

“I don’t see recovery” on the horizon, Feldstein, who headed the National Bureau of Economic Research until June and serves on the group’s recession-dating panel, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio.

Feldstein said the Fed has already lowered interest rates as much as it can to help growth, and that exports offer the only bright spot, while they aren’t strong enough to fuel a recovery. A former adviser to President Ronald Reagan, he also warned that policies proposed by Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, would prolong the downturn.

The next president “should not be raising taxes,” Feldstein said. He said he was “really surprised” that Obama “hasn’t backed off his proposals for a major tax increase.”

[michael]

Shadowfax:

“Gee, if Exxon has to pay more in taxes it will hinder innovation and hard work….bullshit. They will just game the system AGAIN to make MORE money and gauge the rest of us over prices.”

Exxon profit margins are 8%-9%. Why don’t we instead tax higher profit margin companies like Merck 29%. Microsoft 27%. Google 23%.

Higher corporate rates will only drive companies to ship more jobs and capital overseas. McCain’s got it right when he proposes lowering corporate tax rates.

Here’s a quick quote…

July 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. may now be in a “very long” recession that will drive the unemployment rate higher, with little that the Federal Reserve can do to help, said Harvard University Professor Martin Feldstein.

“I don’t see recovery” on the horizon, Feldstein, who headed the National Bureau of Economic Research until June and serves on the group’s recession-dating panel, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio.

Feldstein said the Fed has already lowered interest rates as much as it can to help growth, and that exports offer the only bright spot, while they aren’t strong enough to fuel a recovery. A former adviser to President Ronald Reagan, he also warned that policies proposed by Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, would prolong the downturn.

The next president “should not be raising taxes,” Feldstein said. He said he was “really surprised” that Obama “hasn’t backed off his proposals for a major tax increase.”

[michael]

Shadowfax:

“Gee, if Exxon has to pay more in taxes it will hinder innovation and hard work….bullshit. They will just game the system AGAIN to make MORE money and gauge the rest of us over prices.”

Exxon profit margins are 8%-9%. Why don’t we instead tax higher profit margin companies like Merck 29%. Microsoft 27%. Google 23%.

Higher corporate rates will only drive companies to ship more jobs and capital overseas. McCain’s got it right when he proposes lowering corporate tax rates.

Here’s a quick quote…

July 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. may now be in a “very long” recession that will drive the unemployment rate higher, with little that the Federal Reserve can do to help, said Harvard University Professor Martin Feldstein.

“I don’t see recovery” on the horizon, Feldstein, who headed the National Bureau of Economic Research until June and serves on the group’s recession-dating panel, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio.

Feldstein said the Fed has already lowered interest rates as much as it can to help growth, and that exports offer the only bright spot, while they aren’t strong enough to fuel a recovery. A former adviser to President Ronald Reagan, he also warned that policies proposed by Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, would prolong the downturn.

The next president “should not be raising taxes,” Feldstein said. He said he was “really surprised” that Obama “hasn’t backed off his proposals for a major tax increase.”

[michael]

Shadowfax:

“Gee, if Exxon has to pay more in taxes it will hinder innovation and hard work….bullshit. They will just game the system AGAIN to make MORE money and gauge the rest of us over prices.”

Exxon profit margins are 8%-9%. Why don’t we instead tax higher profit margin companies like Merck 29%. Microsoft 27%. Google 23%.

Higher corporate rates will only drive companies to ship more jobs and capital overseas. McCain’s got it right when he proposes lowering corporate tax rates.

Here’s a quick quote…

July 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. may now be in a “very long” recession that will drive the unemployment rate higher, with little that the Federal Reserve can do to help, said Harvard University Professor Martin Feldstein.

“I don’t see recovery” on the horizon, Feldstein, who headed the National Bureau of Economic Research until June and serves on the group’s recession-dating panel, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio.

Feldstein said the Fed has already lowered interest rates as much as it can to help growth, and that exports offer the only bright spot, while they aren’t strong enough to fuel a recovery. A former adviser to President Ronald Reagan, he also warned that policies proposed by Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, would prolong the downturn.

The next president “should not be raising taxes,” Feldstein said. He said he was “really surprised” that Obama “hasn’t backed off his proposals for a major tax increase.”

[michael]

Shadowfax:

“Gee, if Exxon has to pay more in taxes it will hinder innovation and hard work….bullshit. They will just game the system AGAIN to make MORE money and gauge the rest of us over prices.”

Exxon profit margins are 8%-9%. Why don’t we instead tax higher profit margin companies like Merck 29%. Microsoft 27%. Google 23%.

Higher corporate rates will only drive companies to ship more jobs and capital overseas. McCain’s got it right when he proposes lowering corporate tax rates.

Here’s a quick quote…

July 31 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. may now be in a “very long” recession that will drive the unemployment rate higher, with little that the Federal Reserve can do to help, said Harvard University Professor Martin Feldstein.

“I don’t see recovery” on the horizon, Feldstein, who headed the National Bureau of Economic Research until June and serves on the group’s recession-dating panel, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio.

Feldstein said the Fed has already lowered interest rates as much as it can to help growth, and that exports offer the only bright spot, while they aren’t strong enough to fuel a recovery. A former adviser to President Ronald Reagan, he also warned that policies proposed by Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, would prolong the downturn.

The next president “should not be raising taxes,” Feldstein said. He said he was “really surprised” that Obama “hasn’t backed off his proposals for a major tax increase.”

[Author]

Posts