Where do you get that stuff, SAM? You know, if you were blogging in Spanish, you’ll have now a Chavez fan telling you how dissociated from the reality you are, you filthy right-wig conservative. You will be called “escuálido” (meaning: scrawny; emaciated), and you will be reminded that he is going to rule till 2021. How I envy you.1
Don’t your socialist friends know that socialism DOESN’T work?? Well, unless you consider Venezuela, China, DPRK and Cuba the country that you’re trying to model.
It’s almost as if some Egyptians never grew out of their Cold War mentality…
OOOOOH!!! Ahhhhhhh! Michael Angelo must be spinning in his grave!! LOL.
I saw a commercial narrated by Joe Kennedy the other day encouraging New Yorkers to apply for heating oil at 40% “from our good friends in Venuzuela”. Nice to know where the Kennedies stand.
Can we deoprt Joe to his “godd friend” Venuzeala? I wouldn’t want to stand in his way to pursue his socialist happines.
Now Chavez is going to wonder how you snuck into his presidential mansion, SM. Better watch your back or our Venezualan friend from threads past may come to get you for divulging state secrets.
Oh, crap. That’s not Marx…it’s Castro. Never can tell those two bearded whackos apart…
Shows how knowledgeable you are about Socialism when you can’t even tell the difference between the founder of the movement and someone else, yet you have the audacity to mock. Ehh…
YOU have socialist friends?? Why?
What’s wrong with having friends who care?
Don’t your socialist friends know that socialism DOESN’T work?? Well, unless you consider Venezuela, China, DPRK and Cuba the country that you’re trying to model.
Do you even know what Socialism is?
It’s almost as if some Egyptians never grew out of their Cold War mentality…
That’s the system where the believers bitch about American capitalism, except when trying to bail out their buddy Fidel in Cuba, right? Then the lack of American capitalism caused the Cuban economy to fail.
Socialism always leads to despotism and poverty. Only mixed economies have a chance. Nobody wants to work for someone else, or many others, and not see any benefit from their extra skill and effort. Determining need always enriches the people who get to decide. Ability varies according to the financial incentive to work.
Who really believes that NO government involvement really works (not including the Waltons aka Walmart) ? Anything more than nothing is a form of socialism. 😛
“I mean really, who believes this crap (Socialism) any more?”
Unfortunately there are still too many countries in this world where Socialism is possible as intermediary step from predominately poor uneducated society to Capitalism.
Going in reverse like for example from US Capitalism to Socialism is almost impossible.
Having looked at your great blog, now I feel bad for getting into a debate over socialism. I’ve been debating utopian socialists – all who grew up rich in our economy – for years.
Supply, markets, and delivery in highly-developed nations are too complex and time constraints so important that trying to micromanage an economy leads to disaster. Bureaucrats and cronies don’t stand a chance of doing a good job. But lots of people associate capitalism with anarchy, which it’s not. It requires rule of law, infrastructure, monetary policy, and lots of other things which necessarily involve government.
Jina #14, would you provide any argument beyond “you know nothing” and “Hahahaha”? Statement that socialism does not work, backed bye a list of crappy socialist states, can be easily debunked by pointing out a state, where socialism is going well, people are educated, rich, happy and do not envy, but laugh the stupid poor dumb capitalist americans. Just one, come on, take a world map and find just one.
Hehehehhe.. loved it!! though I think that in some parts of the world socialism gains territory. I don’t think that socialism/communism works 100%, but I do support a state that implements vigorous social policies!! I don’t think its normal to have 10% owning 85% of the world resources!!! And pls don’t tell me they worked for it!!!! few probably did, but the rest exploited the majority…
[sarcasm] How dear you! Mocking the symbols of our great religion! I call on all true Christians to burn the embassies of these Egyptian pigs! [/sarcasm]
By the way, last Monday there were 3 guys from the world social forum on world have your say (BBC world service). Their opponent in the discussion was someone called Julian Morris, from the International Policy Network. That IPN guy simply knew everything. You can still listen to it at rtsp://rmv8.bbc.net.uk:554/worldservice/world_hys_mon.ra (skip the first half. It’s the first item after the news)
“Statement that socialism does not work, backed bye a list of crappy socialist states, can be easily debunked by pointing out a state, where socialism is going well, people are educated, rich, happy and do not envy, but laugh the stupid poor dumb capitalist americans. Just one, come on, take a world map and find just one.”
There is absolutely no such thing as a socialist state that works and is doing well, and there never have been
And no, states like Sweden are not socialist states. Sweden is an essentially capitalist mixed economy. Just like the USA, just with slightly less capitalism and slightly more socialism in the mix. Real socialist states never work, and never have worked in the least.
Socialism is an ideaology, Capitalism the law of the jungle. Socialism is a false promise to the poor which insures that the middle class will share the misery with them. Never works never will but every few generations a few fools get together and think it sounds like a really good idea. If only a few of those silly kids wearing the Che T-shirts had really had a chance to know the guy .
Jina, what threw me was the T-shirt. Fidel is usually seen in crisp combat fatigues (with or without stogie clamped in his jaws), while fun-loving Karl is well-known for the invention of “casual Fridays” as a means of promoting proletarian solidarity. And yes, my dear, I do “mock” both Castro and Marx, but not out of ignorance. I hold an earned Ph.D in nineteenth century European history and am quite familiar with the writings of Marx. Some of his ideas are valid. Some of his ideas are complete foolishness. None of his ideas approach Holy Writ or sacrosanct status.
And exactly what spark of wisdom is Castro passing down to Chavez? When revolting against a corrupt goverment, make sure everyone misses the old dictators by becoming as crappy as the last one? Or do the butch thing and don’t accept a colostomy, even though it won’t be permanent, when you have major abdominal surgery?
Actually without knowing origins of the picture I interpret it in 2 ways.
First, as satire on Hugo.
Second, as cult of Hugo’s personality, which already started in Venezuela. I can easily imagine this picture as huge billboard put up on each and every major highway in the country.
And exactly what spark of wisdom is Castro passing down to Chavez?
Maybe Fidel is handing down his protege the “Divine Right” to rule Venezuela till eternity (or at least till the time the army gets tired of him and goes for a coupe!)
I don’t think its normal to have 10% owning 85% of the world resources!!!
You’re right. What’s normal is for .01% of the population to own everything, while everyone else lives in abject squalor. The “middle class” is a product of capitalism.
I’m a capitalist. Just thought I’d through that in. BTW, how did a freaky picture trigger a massive socialist vs. capitalist vs. everything else debate?
Middle class is a product of capitalism? Then why is the wealth in America slowly becoming owned by a shrinking percentage of the population? Surely your not implying that America has been secretly practicing ‘Socialism’?
Yes, it is. Check out the rise of the Merchant class in Europe (between the peasantry and the nobility) during the Middle Ages, and the Mandarins (civil servants who administered trade interests) in China, for details 🙂
Then why is the wealth in America slowly becoming owned by a shrinking percentage of the population?
For one thing, can you support that assertion? For another, you are speaking of the wealthy. The upper class. I am speaking of the middle class. The middle class is dong quite well in the US, rants about rich people notwithstanding. I’m pretty happy with my standard of living. So are most of the people I know.
Surely your not implying that America has been secretly practicing ‘Socialism’?
No, but you are. I didn’t say anything that could have gotten you from where I was to where you wanted to be, Jason. You want to make a case that the US has socialism, don’t use me an excuse. Just do it 🙂
The rise of the middle class was more than a result of capitalism. For results of unadulterated capitalism just watch a bunch of behaviourally challenged kids/teens play Monopoly to it’s conclusion. (Which I highly doubt will actually finish before an ‘uprising’ occurs) 😛
Prior to that, there was a protracted period when wealth inequality fell in this country, going back almost to 1929. So you have this fairly continuous downward trend from 1929, which of course was the peak of the stock market before it crashed, until just about the mid-1970s. Since then, things have really turned around, and the level of wealth inequality today is almost double what it was in the mid-1970s.
Income inequality has also risen. Most people date this rise to the early 1970s, but it hasn’t gone up nearly as dramatically as wealth inequality. ”
http://www.greenparty.org/ “Today in America the best paid one-fifth of the population receives about one half of all national income, while the bottom one-fifth receives less than 4 per cent. The distribution of wealth in America is even more unfair. Here, the top one-half per cent of all property owners control over 25% of all wealth; while the top 5% sit on nearly 70% of wealth and property. What chance does the average person have for exercising his or her democratic rights under these conditions!”
http://www.cipa-apex.org/toomuch/articlenew2006/April24a.html “Between 1989 and 2004, after adjusting for inflation, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 more than doubled, from $396.4 billion to just over a trillion. The average net worth of the 10 wealthiest households in the Forbes 400 more than quintupled over this same period, jumping from $4.5 billion in 1989 to $22.7 billion in 2004. Kennickell does not actually add the Forbes 400 data into the Survey of Consumer Finance data tables. But we can.
The Survey of Consumer Finance figures, without the Forbes data added in, show that America’s richest 1 percent held just over one-third of the nation’s wealth in 2004. Another 36.1 percent went to the next richest 9 percent of Americans.
The rest of the nation’s wealth — less than one-third — sat with America’s bottom 90 percent.
In 2004, in other words, America’s wealthiest 1 percent held more wealth than the entire bottom 90 percent combined, even without figuring into the mix the wealth of America’s 400 richest people.
With the Forbes 400 figured in, America’s richest 1 percent held not just more net wealth in 2004 than the nation’s bottom 90 percent, but over $2.5 trillion more.
In 1989, with that year’s Forbes 400 wealth factored in, the average family in America’s richest 1 percent held 106 times the average net worth of families in America’s bottom 90 percent. In 2004, with the Forbes numbers again taken into account, the average top 1 percent family held 176 times more wealth than the average bottom 90 percent family.
What do these multiples and percentages mean in actual dollars and cents?
If the bottom 90 percent of America’s families and the wealthiest 1 percent held the same share of the nation’s income in 2004 as they did in 1989, the average family in the bottom 90 percent would have had $12,208 more to its name and the average top 1 percent family $1.7 million less.”
“It means that if you are not living in one of the well-off areas, you are not going to have access to the same amenities — good schools and safe environment — that you could find 30 years ago,” he said.”
I could go on but this bores me.
“Surely your not implying that America has been secretly practicing ‘Socialism’?” was purely tongue and cheek. I am not IMPLYING America is/has practiced water-downed (much like it’s beer) socialism over the years. More accurately labeled economic liberalism which advocates minimal interference by government in the economy.
The rise of the middle class was more than a result of capitalism.
You forgot your proofs 😛
For results of unadulterated capitalism
How did “unrestrained capitalism” enter the discussion? Doesn’t exist, same as direct democracy doesn’t exist.
I skipped that interview transcript. Why use somebody’s opinions to back up your opinions, Jason? If you’ve got some stats, I’ll be happy to take a look. But you know what they say about opinions and assholes 🙂
Skipping the green party quotes too except this one:
What chance does the average person have for exercising his or her democratic rights under these conditions!!
The “average person” in the US, is solidly middle class. The green party would have us believe that “the average person” is actually a welfare recipient. It ain’t so.
Forbes:
Between 1989 and 2004, after adjusting for inflation, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 more than doubled, from $396.4 billion to just over a trillion.
I would have actually expected the companies to grow more, considering how much the US economy grew in the same period of time. That’s not a good performance, actually!
I’m skipping most of the rest of what you wrote, Jason. Your opinions just don’t match observable realities. I don’t know how old you are, but I recall times in the US when Americans were really struggling. The late 1970s for instance. We doing pretty good right now. But tahnks for the concern 🙂
Chip, no sorry as a direct decendant of Alexandar Hamilton you would expect me to follow someone else’s idea of what works in an economy? I stand by my statement. Socilism is an ideaology, Capitalism is the law of the jungle. A man will work for his own good, he won’t work for only the good of the masses when if he sits as his neighbor does he gets the same thing.
Between 1989 and 2004, after adjusting for inflation, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 more than doubled, from $396.4 billion to just over a trillion.
I’m not going to discuss economy here, because I must humbly admit that I’m pretty lame on that. I just want to ask some simple logic. Mile is always a mile, pound is always a pound, but dollar of 04 is something else than dollar of 89, isn’t it? So if value in dollars doubled and value of dollar halved then net worth remained the same, no?
“The “average person” in the US, is solidly middle class. The green party would have us believe that “the average person” is actually a welfare recipient. It ain’t so.”
Depends on how you define “average”. Do you use median? Do you ignore say top and bottom percentages? etc
“You forgot your proofs”
Right. If you like to think so. I got bored. Your undoubtable on the ‘right’ and there ain’t nothing that I could post/quote that you wouldn’t find a fault (aka excuse) with. So why would I bother researching this like you gave a damn eh? One day it’ll all come and bite America in the ass. Just don’t say you were never warned. 😛 That video was semi on-topic?
Humble simpleton that’s why they adjust for inflation.
Depends on how you define “average”. Do you use median? Do you ignore say top and bottom percentages? etc
I use the word “average” the same way everyone else does. It’s a bell curve. The bulk of Americans are solidly middle class, with very few in either the “very rich” or the “very poor” category.
well the statistical absolute middle doesn’t come close to being near the median and the ‘bottom’ end of your bell curve is a lot more populated than your ‘top’ end
everything written here is unimportant… including your opinions 😛
Leo, thanks for the explanation, I was wondering how much substance there was to that video. I thought it was really well done. Kind of funny and very sad at the same time.
0 
0 
English
Where do you get that stuff, SAM? You know, if you were blogging in Spanish, you’ll have now a Chavez fan telling you how dissociated from the reality you are, you filthy right-wig conservative. You will be called “escuálido” (meaning: scrawny; emaciated), and you will be reminded that he is going to rule till 2021. How I envy you.1
YOU have socialist friends?? Why? 🙂
Don’t your socialist friends know that socialism DOESN’T work?? Well, unless you consider Venezuela, China, DPRK and Cuba the country that you’re trying to model.
It’s almost as if some Egyptians never grew out of their Cold War mentality…
That’s beautiful! Want to come paint it on my ceiling? (Sarcasm off)
Way cool, now why can’t I find that stuff….ciao
OOOOOH!!! Ahhhhhhh! Michael Angelo must be spinning in his grave!! LOL.
I saw a commercial narrated by Joe Kennedy the other day encouraging New Yorkers to apply for heating oil at 40% “from our good friends in Venuzuela”. Nice to know where the Kennedies stand.
Can we deoprt Joe to his “godd friend” Venuzeala? I wouldn’t want to stand in his way to pursue his socialist happines.
Now Chavez is going to wonder how you snuck into his presidential mansion, SM. Better watch your back or our Venezualan friend from threads past may come to get you for divulging state secrets.
Marx: Hey Hugo! Pull my finger!
SM
This….this……thing, I am speechless, completely speechless
*running to washroom to puke*
oh yeah! I so want to tap that socialist ass 🙂
Ok, Sam, I’m just going off to crawl under a rock or grain of sand or something…anything!
That is hilarious! Where did you find it???
Love the “budgie smugglers” on Chavez. (For non aussies , his swimming trunks.)
PS Guys , we all know Chavez is a dick, lighten up already 😉
Oh, crap. That’s not Marx…it’s Castro. Never can tell those two bearded whackos apart…
Shows how knowledgeable you are about Socialism when you can’t even tell the difference between the founder of the movement and someone else, yet you have the audacity to mock. Ehh…
What’s wrong with having friends who care?
Do you even know what Socialism is?
Hahahahahaha…
Chavez in speedos. Good think I don’t drink while cyberizing, or you would owe me a new keyboard.
Do you even know what Socialism is?
That’s the system where the believers bitch about American capitalism, except when trying to bail out their buddy Fidel in Cuba, right? Then the lack of American capitalism caused the Cuban economy to fail.
Socialism always leads to despotism and poverty. Only mixed economies have a chance. Nobody wants to work for someone else, or many others, and not see any benefit from their extra skill and effort. Determining need always enriches the people who get to decide. Ability varies according to the financial incentive to work.
I mean really, who believes this crap any more?
Who really believes that NO government involvement really works (not including the Waltons aka Walmart) ? Anything more than nothing is a form of socialism. 😛
Jina @ 14.
“Do you even know what Socialism is?”
Do you?
And I do not mean its beautiful non-working theory. I am talking practice.
Chip @ 17
“I mean really, who believes this crap (Socialism) any more?”
Unfortunately there are still too many countries in this world where Socialism is possible as intermediary step from predominately poor uneducated society to Capitalism.
Going in reverse like for example from US Capitalism to Socialism is almost impossible.
Jina,
Having looked at your great blog, now I feel bad for getting into a debate over socialism. I’ve been debating utopian socialists – all who grew up rich in our economy – for years.
Supply, markets, and delivery in highly-developed nations are too complex and time constraints so important that trying to micromanage an economy leads to disaster. Bureaucrats and cronies don’t stand a chance of doing a good job. But lots of people associate capitalism with anarchy, which it’s not. It requires rule of law, infrastructure, monetary policy, and lots of other things which necessarily involve government.
Dude…I had to wash my eyes out with acid after that.
Jina – Thanks for repeating everything I said…cuz I missed it.
All of my questions to SM still stand 🙂
Jina #14, would you provide any argument beyond “you know nothing” and “Hahahaha”?
Statement that socialism does not work, backed bye a list of crappy socialist states, can be easily debunked by pointing out a state, where socialism is going well, people are educated, rich, happy and do not envy, but laugh the stupid poor dumb capitalist americans. Just one, come on, take a world map and find just one.
Hehehehhe.. loved it!! though I think that in some parts of the world socialism gains territory. I don’t think that socialism/communism works 100%, but I do support a state that implements vigorous social policies!! I don’t think its normal to have 10% owning 85% of the world resources!!! And pls don’t tell me they worked for it!!!! few probably did, but the rest exploited the majority…
[sarcasm] How dear you! Mocking the symbols of our great religion! I call on all true Christians to burn the embassies of these Egyptian pigs! [/sarcasm]
By the way, last Monday there were 3 guys from the world social forum on world have your say (BBC world service). Their opponent in the discussion was someone called Julian Morris, from the International Policy Network. That IPN guy simply knew everything. You can still listen to it at rtsp://rmv8.bbc.net.uk:554/worldservice/world_hys_mon.ra (skip the first half. It’s the first item after the news)
[…] Fonte: Rantings of a Sandmonkey, indicado por Gustibus […]
“Statement that socialism does not work, backed bye a list of crappy socialist states, can be easily debunked by pointing out a state, where socialism is going well, people are educated, rich, happy and do not envy, but laugh the stupid poor dumb capitalist americans. Just one, come on, take a world map and find just one.”
There is absolutely no such thing as a socialist state that works and is doing well, and there never have been
And no, states like Sweden are not socialist states. Sweden is an essentially capitalist mixed economy. Just like the USA, just with slightly less capitalism and slightly more socialism in the mix. Real socialist states never work, and never have worked in the least.
Ev(il)o Morales is in there, too, as you may have noticed, no doubt learning all he can from Papa Fidel before he kicks off.
Socialism is an ideaology, Capitalism the law of the jungle. Socialism is a false promise to the poor which insures that the middle class will share the misery with them. Never works never will but every few generations a few fools get together and think it sounds like a really good idea. If only a few of those silly kids wearing the Che T-shirts had really had a chance to know the guy .
Jina, what threw me was the T-shirt. Fidel is usually seen in crisp combat fatigues (with or without stogie clamped in his jaws), while fun-loving Karl is well-known for the invention of “casual Fridays” as a means of promoting proletarian solidarity. And yes, my dear, I do “mock” both Castro and Marx, but not out of ignorance. I hold an earned Ph.D in nineteenth century European history and am quite familiar with the writings of Marx. Some of his ideas are valid. Some of his ideas are complete foolishness. None of his ideas approach Holy Writ or sacrosanct status.
And exactly what spark of wisdom is Castro passing down to Chavez? When revolting against a corrupt goverment, make sure everyone misses the old dictators by becoming as crappy as the last one? Or do the butch thing and don’t accept a colostomy, even though it won’t be permanent, when you have major abdominal surgery?
Socialism’s real problem is with the idiots that impliment it.
Uchuck the Tuchuck @ 30
I prefer to think it is Marx and not Fidel.
To my opinion Marx ads more jest to it.
Actually without knowing origins of the picture I interpret it in 2 ways.
First, as satire on Hugo.
Second, as cult of Hugo’s personality, which already started in Venezuela.
I can easily imagine this picture as huge billboard put up on each and every major highway in the country.
annamouse
Capitalism the law of the jungle.
See? Some people have been fed a line of BS. They’ve never read Adam Smith, for instance.
Olive Picker Says:
January 27th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
And exactly what spark of wisdom is Castro passing down to Chavez?
Maybe Fidel is handing down his protege the “Divine Right” to rule Venezuela till eternity (or at least till the time the army gets tired of him and goes for a coupe!)
I don’t think its normal to have 10% owning 85% of the world resources!!!
You’re right. What’s normal is for .01% of the population to own everything, while everyone else lives in abject squalor. The “middle class” is a product of capitalism.
I’m a capitalist. Just thought I’d through that in. BTW, how did a freaky picture trigger a massive socialist vs. capitalist vs. everything else debate?
Follow teh bread crumbs jack, teh bread crumbs.
Middle class is a product of capitalism? Then why is the wealth in America slowly becoming owned by a shrinking percentage of the population? Surely your not implying that America has been secretly practicing ‘Socialism’?
Jason,
Middle class is a product of capitalism?
Yes, it is. Check out the rise of the Merchant class in Europe (between the peasantry and the nobility) during the Middle Ages, and the Mandarins (civil servants who administered trade interests) in China, for details 🙂
Then why is the wealth in America slowly becoming owned by a shrinking percentage of the population?
For one thing, can you support that assertion? For another, you are speaking of the wealthy. The upper class. I am speaking of the middle class. The middle class is dong quite well in the US, rants about rich people notwithstanding. I’m pretty happy with my standard of living. So are most of the people I know.
Surely your not implying that America has been secretly practicing ‘Socialism’?
No, but you are. I didn’t say anything that could have gotten you from where I was to where you wanted to be, Jason. You want to make a case that the US has socialism, don’t use me an excuse. Just do it 🙂
The rise of the middle class was more than a result of capitalism. For results of unadulterated capitalism just watch a bunch of behaviourally challenged kids/teens play Monopoly to it’s conclusion. (Which I highly doubt will actually finish before an ‘uprising’ occurs) 😛
http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html
“MM: What have been the trends of wealth inequality over the last 25 years?
Wolff: We have had a fairly sharp increase in wealth inequality dating back to 1975 or 1976.
Prior to that, there was a protracted period when wealth inequality fell in this country, going back almost to 1929. So you have this fairly continuous downward trend from 1929, which of course was the peak of the stock market before it crashed, until just about the mid-1970s. Since then, things have really turned around, and the level of wealth inequality today is almost double what it was in the mid-1970s.
Income inequality has also risen. Most people date this rise to the early 1970s, but it hasn’t gone up nearly as dramatically as wealth inequality. ”
http://www.greenparty.org/
“Today in America the best paid one-fifth of the population receives about one half of all national income, while the bottom one-fifth receives less than 4 per cent. The distribution of wealth in America is even more unfair. Here, the top one-half per cent of all property owners control over 25% of all wealth; while the top 5% sit on nearly 70% of wealth and property. What chance does the average person have for exercising his or her democratic rights under these conditions!”
http://www.cipa-apex.org/toomuch/articlenew2006/April24a.html
“Between 1989 and 2004, after adjusting for inflation, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 more than doubled, from $396.4 billion to just over a trillion. The average net worth of the 10 wealthiest households in the Forbes 400 more than quintupled over this same period, jumping from $4.5 billion in 1989 to $22.7 billion in 2004.
Kennickell does not actually add the Forbes 400 data into the Survey of Consumer Finance data tables. But we can.
The Survey of Consumer Finance figures, without the Forbes data added in, show that America’s richest 1 percent held just over one-third of the nation’s wealth in 2004. Another 36.1 percent went to the next richest 9 percent of Americans.
The rest of the nation’s wealth — less than one-third — sat with America’s bottom 90 percent.
In 2004, in other words, America’s wealthiest 1 percent held more wealth than the entire bottom 90 percent combined, even without figuring into the mix the wealth of America’s 400 richest people.
With the Forbes 400 figured in, America’s richest 1 percent held not just more net wealth in 2004 than the nation’s bottom 90 percent, but over $2.5 trillion more.
In 1989, with that year’s Forbes 400 wealth factored in, the average family in America’s richest 1 percent held 106 times the average net worth of families in America’s bottom 90 percent. In 2004, with the Forbes numbers again taken into account, the average top 1 percent family held 176 times more wealth than the average bottom 90 percent family.
What do these multiples and percentages mean in actual dollars and cents?
If the bottom 90 percent of America’s families and the wealthiest 1 percent held the same share of the nation’s income in 2004 as they did in 1989, the average family in the bottom 90 percent would have had $12,208 more to its name and the average top 1 percent family $1.7 million less.”
http://www.chicagofed.org/economic_research_and_data/wp_abstract.cfm?pubsID=732
http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7055911
“The gap between rich and poor is bigger than in any other advanced country”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101735.html
“”No city in America has gotten more integrated by income in the last 30 years,” said Alan Berube, an urban demographer at Brookings who worked on the report.
“It means that if you are not living in one of the well-off areas, you are not going to have access to the same amenities — good schools and safe environment — that you could find 30 years ago,” he said.”
I could go on but this bores me.
“Surely your not implying that America has been secretly practicing ‘Socialism’?” was purely tongue and cheek.
I am not IMPLYING America is/has practiced water-downed (much like it’s beer) socialism over the years. More accurately labeled economic liberalism which advocates minimal interference by government in the economy.
Jason,
The rise of the middle class was more than a result of capitalism.
You forgot your proofs 😛
For results of unadulterated capitalism
How did “unrestrained capitalism” enter the discussion? Doesn’t exist, same as direct democracy doesn’t exist.
I skipped that interview transcript. Why use somebody’s opinions to back up your opinions, Jason? If you’ve got some stats, I’ll be happy to take a look. But you know what they say about opinions and assholes 🙂
Skipping the green party quotes too except this one:
What chance does the average person have for exercising his or her democratic rights under these conditions!!
The “average person” in the US, is solidly middle class. The green party would have us believe that “the average person” is actually a welfare recipient. It ain’t so.
Forbes:
Between 1989 and 2004, after adjusting for inflation, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 more than doubled, from $396.4 billion to just over a trillion.
I would have actually expected the companies to grow more, considering how much the US economy grew in the same period of time. That’s not a good performance, actually!
I’m skipping most of the rest of what you wrote, Jason. Your opinions just don’t match observable realities. I don’t know how old you are, but I recall times in the US when Americans were really struggling. The late 1970s for instance. We doing pretty good right now. But tahnks for the concern 🙂
Chip, no sorry as a direct decendant of Alexandar Hamilton you would expect me to follow someone else’s idea of what works in an economy? I stand by my statement. Socilism is an ideaology, Capitalism is the law of the jungle. A man will work for his own good, he won’t work for only the good of the masses when if he sits as his neighbor does he gets the same thing.
Semi on-topic video here:
Who Wants To Be An Amerikan
Between 1989 and 2004, after adjusting for inflation, the total net worth of the Forbes 400 more than doubled, from $396.4 billion to just over a trillion.
I’m not going to discuss economy here, because I must humbly admit that I’m pretty lame on that. I just want to ask some simple logic. Mile is always a mile, pound is always a pound, but dollar of 04 is something else than dollar of 89, isn’t it? So if value in dollars doubled and value of dollar halved then net worth remained the same, no?
“The “average person” in the US, is solidly middle class. The green party would have us believe that “the average person” is actually a welfare recipient. It ain’t so.”
Depends on how you define “average”. Do you use median? Do you ignore say top and bottom percentages? etc
“You forgot your proofs”
Right. If you like to think so. I got bored. Your undoubtable on the ‘right’ and there ain’t nothing that I could post/quote that you wouldn’t find a fault (aka excuse) with. So why would I bother researching this like you gave a damn eh? One day it’ll all come and bite America in the ass. Just don’t say you were never warned. 😛
That video was semi on-topic?
Humble simpleton that’s why they adjust for inflation.
Jason,
Depends on how you define “average”. Do you use median? Do you ignore say top and bottom percentages? etc
I use the word “average” the same way everyone else does. It’s a bell curve. The bulk of Americans are solidly middle class, with very few in either the “very rich” or the “very poor” category.
Your last paragraph was… unimportant.
Craig @ 43
In regard to movie
In reality no Soviet citizen would be stupid enough to participate in such game.
However, let say it is possible, odds of out come will be as follows (for all participants and not just a winner):
Imprisonment or Siberia – 70%
Insane asylum – 29%
Deportation – 0.5%
Death – 0.5%
All in all I must admit I awakened a lot of good memories.
well the statistical absolute middle doesn’t come close to being near the median and the ‘bottom’ end of your bell curve is a lot more populated than your ‘top’ end
everything written here is unimportant… including your opinions 😛
Leo, thanks for the explanation, I was wondering how much substance there was to that video. I thought it was really well done. Kind of funny and very sad at the same time.
Craig @ 49
Yes, kind of “nostalgic”.
Jason…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:American_Income.png
If you want to go into more detailed economics, by all means, Jason. For some strange and obscure reason, that per-household income looks fine to me.