Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists
From: Les Cargill (lcargill_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 06/12/04
- Next message: Michael Vilkin: "Re: Money Supply, Credit Supply"
- Previous message: Matt Timmermans: "Re: Cheap oil forever!"
- In reply to: The Trucker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Next in thread: Robert J. Kolker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Reply: Robert J. Kolker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Reply: The Trucker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Reply: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 22:27:41 GMT
The Trucker wrote:
> Les Cargill wrote:
>
<snip>
>>I don't *care* about the top %0.01 ; they
>>are not as significant as the other %99.9 . And the
>>information on mobility is out there.
>
>
> Statistics on wealth not spun by Republicans indicate a much
> taller and thiner top to
> the pyramid and a much broader base. And the truly rich stay that
> way for the most part. Every now and then you see a Gates come
> along but it is extremely rare. The middle class of the USA was
> once quite prosperous and now is not. They have "mobilitied"
> downward.
>
>
Yet there is no, none, nada, zip empirical evidence to
support that hypothesis. All I see is an overheating
real estate market, a sure sign of increased purchasing
power. We see emplopyment finally jumping up, in the fastest
recovery since 1980 ( and even it felt slow ).
The booms of recent were financial crack pipe dreams, and
I was saying that in 1997. Getting washed out
on Enron is not the same thing as downward mobility.
*Right now*, you can get VC in a half a hearbeat - so long
as you have your ducks in a row. You just have to spend
considerable time in waterfowl alignment, and you won't keep as
much of it as ten years ago. WHat you'll have to do
will be technically shallower, but that's one of those
things.
<snip>
>>Yet examples of readily available "self cleaning toilets" abound.
>
>
> But the super rich don't want them. They want to have a servant
> do the job. Wealth is the power to forego or to command labor.
> Power is a form of wealth that IS zero sum. It is the enforced
> subservience of others that makes the Republican feel good, feel
> safe, feel powerful.
>
People say this, and I see no evidence of it. Nobody ( and I
do know a few relatively well-off people ) has servants.
Again, some people might hire a cleaning service periodically
to help if both parents have kids and work, but that is *not*
the same thing. Contracting with even a franchise cleaning
service is not domestic servant labor.
>
>>If the breakdown is that its cheaper to hire people to clean them,
>>then the self cleaning toilet makes no sense. I do not buy that
>>there are people actively desiring to have "slaves" out there. It's
>>too far from existing cultural norms. But there are a
>>lot of people who desire to create employment.
>
>
> You are simply WRONG. Today's Republicanism is a search for pure power.
Nonsense. It's populism. You think a rent-seeking class could swing
popular votes and would use footage of the president clearing
brush on his land?
> It is the search for an economy in which the leaders tell us all exactly
> what our morals should be, who we are to have sex with and how, what
> god(s) to worship and how, and to do this it is necessary to create
> a ruling class economically.
>
Oh good grief. Wipe the dang foam off your mouth and
*think* for a minute. Where is the evidence of an
emerging Mandarin class?
If there is a corporation which represents things now, it
is WalMart. They are extraordinarily good at what they
do. They are also very fiscally conservative.
AND THEY DO WHAT THE CUSTOMERS WANT THEM TO DO!
> http://GreaterVoice.org/econ/glossary/aristocracy.php
>
-- Les Cargill
- Next message: Michael Vilkin: "Re: Money Supply, Credit Supply"
- Previous message: Matt Timmermans: "Re: Cheap oil forever!"
- In reply to: The Trucker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Next in thread: Robert J. Kolker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Reply: Robert J. Kolker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Reply: The Trucker: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Reply: royls_at_telus.net: "Re: Lucas: Shame on the redistributionists"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|