HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The Obscenely Rich Men Be...

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:33 AM

The Obscenely Rich Men Bent on Shredding the Safety Net

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/obscenely-rich-men-bent-shredding-safety-net



***SNIP

1. “Fix” means cut : When they say “fix” Social Security, they mean cut Social Security. Fixers want to convince the public that a well-managed, hugely popular program that does not add to the deficit (it’s self-funded) is somehow in crisis and requires intervention in the form of various cutting schemes. They seek this because many of the rich do not want to pay taxes for Social Security, and financiers want very much to move toward privitization of retirement accounts so they can collect fees on such accounts.

***SNIP


2. “Reform” means rob. When the say “reform” the tax code, they mean “make taxes even lower for the rich.” The wealthy do not pay their fair share of taxes in the United States, which is a major reason there is a large deficit in the first place. When the very wealthy pay lower tax rates than ordinary working people, the result is an increasing redistribution of income upward that puts the U.S. in the top 30 percent in income inequality out of 140 nations, according to the Central Intelligence Agency . We’re a shameful #42. Income inequality is not only unfair, it’s dangerous and makes society unstable.

3.“Bipartisan” means all of the rich. Fix the Debt is a pro-business ideological movement pretending to be a bipartisan group of concerned citizens. But the group is really just a coalition for the greedy, unpatriotic rich. There are plenty of financiers and other 1 percenters in the Democratic Party, and some of them have decided to join forces with their GOP counterparts to work toward a goal that means a great deal to all of them: Making the rich even richer.

4. “Concern” means covet. There was a time, a couple of generations ago, when business leaders would not dare to go public with their desire to increase income inequality and stick it to hard-working Americans. When Owen D. Young, CEO of General Electric in the '20s and '40s, spoke to an audience at Harvard Business School in 1927, he emphasized that the purpose of a corporation was to provide a good life not only to owners, but also to employees. Corporations, he said, were meant to serve the larger goals of the nation:

“Here in America, we have raised the standard of political equality. Shall we be able to add to that, full equality of economic opportunity? No man is wholly free unless he is both politically and economically free.”

16 replies, 2904 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 16 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Obscenely Rich Men Bent on Shredding the Safety Net (Original post)
xchrom Dec 2012 OP
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #1
onethatcares Dec 2012 #2
brush Dec 2012 #7
marions ghost Dec 2012 #15
Dark n Stormy Knight Dec 2012 #3
butterfly77 Dec 2012 #4
duhneece Dec 2012 #5
Hotler Dec 2012 #6
mountain grammy Dec 2012 #8
heaven05 Dec 2012 #10
Maineman Dec 2012 #11
ReRe Dec 2012 #9
rickyhall Dec 2012 #12
AllyCat Dec 2012 #13
plethoro Dec 2012 #14
Scurrilous Dec 2012 #16

Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:33 AM

1. + 1,000,000

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:06 AM

2. while they have more than most ever will

more money than they'll ever spend and no worry about them or
theirs needing healthcare, they turn their minds toward taking from
those that need it most.


there has to be a special level in hell for that kind of person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onethatcares (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:23 AM

7. And they will end up there

Last edited Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:26 AM - Edit history (1)

It's unconscionable that these people, like Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein for example who makes at least 16.2 million a year, is now even willing to be interviewed saying that SS needs to be cut because people are living longer now and expect to collect too much money from just a 25 year career. What a mean-spirited, greedy bastard. The average Social Security check is $1230 a month, and that's from having worked for much longer than any 25 years. Try 45, and for people who actual work on their feet all day or use muscle power, you feel everyone of those goddam 45 years at the end, if you get there that is before you die or before you get let go for being too old. His 16.2M pay package works out to $1,300,000 a month, minus the piddling little FICA deduction on the first $110,000 of course, (such a hardship for him, I guess). And then there's his bonus millions that's probably still coming out of the double dip billions Goldman Sachs got out of the Wall Street bail out money. Oh the horror he has to go through to earn a living. IMHO, someone needs to line up all these mean-spirited, greedy bastards against a wall and . . . well, lets all just use our imagination as to what should happen to them. I mean this sob should just make his money, keep his mouth shut and don't worry about someone's SS check who actually "worked hard for the money" (sorry, Donna Summer, R.I.P.).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:33 AM

15. Thugs and thieves

and they think they're such fine upstanding Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:28 AM

3. The more money they get the more power they buy and they use that power to

arrange the world so that they can get more money so that they can buy more power so that they can use that power to arrange the world so that they can get more money so that they can buy more power so that they can use that power to
arrange the world so that they can get more money so that they can buy more power so that they can use that power to arrange the world so that they can get more money so that they can buy more power so that they can use that power to
arrange the world so that they can get more money so that they can buy more power so that they can use that power to arrange the world so that they can get more money so that they can buy more power so that they can use that power to ...

and that's why it is never enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:40 AM

4. They could have built some housing...

and fed some people and created some jobs with that money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:51 AM

5. The obscenely rich WHITE men

No one seems to remember or know that "...Corporations, he said, were meant to serve the larger goals of the nation..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:03 AM

6. What are we going to do about it????????

Voting every 2-4 years isn't going to cut it. Nothing is going to start to change until tens of thousands of people in every state take to the streets. People need to get really pissed off and fighting mad. We can get 50-thousnad people to pack a football stadium on sunday and 100,000 at a NASCAR race, but we can't even get a few hundred in the streets to make a meaningful protest. The folks in the mid-east and europe really know how to protest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hotler (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:32 AM

8. To be fair, there are protests, but, if you don't see them on the "news"

they're not happening. The "news" barely gave a nod to the Madison protests and others taking place all over the country where thousands of people showed up. The Arab Spring got more coverage. The Teabag Party got way more coverage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hotler (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:03 AM

10. that's right

I would go there. It's the only thing that will get their attention. We need an 'american spring'? per grammy's observation, it's true. Yet we would have to make it large enough not to be ignored in MANY cities.. The Guardian would cover it. BBC would cover it. Rachel might. Ed might. Chris might. Martin might. O'Donnell might. anyone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hotler (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:04 AM

11. Yes. What to do about it?

I say voting, protests, and much more. Vote for the best possibilities, then give them hell until they do what is needed. Voting is over for awhile. Now is the give-them-hell phase.

What works? Crash their systems with massive calls and emails? Petitions? Old fashioned letters? Crowds? In-person events with lots of people? Probably all of the above. We just need some skilled people to say what and when. To me, this is what is missing although President Obama has been helpful by occasionally asking people to contact their representative, etc., regarding a specific issue. We need at least one creative person with common sense, a good feel for what people will feel comfortable doing, and when, and having some name recognition -- and the courage to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:38 AM

9. Something's happening here...

K&R

... and it is becoming excruciatingly clear. It's diabolical, isn't it? There's a war going on, alright, and it's not in Afghanistan. Personally, though, I think they are about to do themselves in. The 2012 election shook them to their core (if they have one).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:06 AM

12. It's all good...bad

Sachs gaming the system 90 years ago is why we have a safety net!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:15 AM

13. Bookmarking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:24 AM

14. It is now the time to start taking these men down. In my mind,

 

Lloyd Blankfein is Public Enemy No. 1, followed closely by the Koch Brothers and Karl Rove. Dick Durbin is up there also, playing the concerned all-knowing puppet. It is time to go after these people in earnest before life ceases in the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:41 PM

16. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread