Comments by "marisafari" (@marisafari1806) on "Thom Hartmann Program"
channel.
-
6
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ōkami-san i think some sort of basic income would lessen the typical government bureaucratic inefficiences. maybe there's some truth to government being too big, but i think regardless of its size, We the People need to organize to make it work for US again- to be truly Representative- rather than it just representing the top (including in effect or real monopolies- whether they be transnational corporations or the government itself)
"Yes, the CEO's are paid too much - tax them all you like. It isn't going to change the fact of failing American schools. All that will happen is the money will be taken from relatively productive people and given to relatively unproductive people, wasted, and nothing to show for it."
i think you might be looking at the situation too narrowly. this is how i see it-
yes, taxing the tippy top 1 or .001 more wont miraculously help failing institutions. (the government is an inefficient bureacracy/monopoly. ok. I concede...maybekindasorta)
BUT it will help prevent the small group of elites/special interests from bribing politicians for more and more benefits which lead to more and more consolidation of wealth and power.
and without special interests being prioritized because they paid more, us lowly 99 percent's issues would get more attention-
studies show that the the average american has No effect over policy changes- that the only policies that change are the ones that the super rich want.
and how do you figure that just because a CEO makes 300 (often more) times what their average employee makes, that that makes them 300 times as productive?
the average american works over 40 hours a week, and it requires 40 to 80 hours of work a week on minimum wage to afford basic living- that isnt Unproductive, and i feel offended for all the poor people that work their asses off doing all of the PRODUCING but receiving next to nothing pay. :(
1
-
1
-
the pope is against authoritarian socialism and corporatism (pope calls this capitalism, but the right says he means corporatism).
these are the excuses the right uses to claim that the pope is NOT a socialist like bernie. yes, it is true that the pope is conservative on social issues, and if the right wants to claim the pope for their own on these issues, fair enough.
but we know that bernie identifies very strongly with the pope's economic stances.
so what this tells me is that there is an overwhelming amount of doublespeak/newspeak/propaganda being used to keep the right and left divided, and the right fighting against their own interests.
but some on the right seem to be coming around to bernie- https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/3djn72/im_a_tea_party_republican_considering_bernie/
"What I did not expect from this event was just how much a self-described democratic socialist could identify with somebody like me who detests the word socialism."
and therein lies the problem- many are quick to judge based on scary no no words like SOCIALISM, but that's the game- thats what MSM uses to keep the status quo cronyism/corporatism/oligopoly alive.
also, by calling obama a socialist- when in reality he is a corporate loving centrist- they make anyone to the left of him appear an extremist. but its all bullshit. obama has never really benefited the left except on a few social issues like gay marriage. meanwhile, incomes have stagnated and declined, and the middle class gets hollowed out while the top get 90 percent of the gains.
both sides have been fooled or are doing the fooling, except for the pope and bernie. :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1