Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ECONOMY: Socialism has failed state, nation

Letter by Ken Morse, Olympia on Dec. 2, 2010 at 11:50 am with 151 Comments »
December 2, 2010 1:02 pm

Socialism has failed. The bipartisan White House National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform titles its report “The moment of truth.” Frankly I am glad, but their “moment of truth” is four years overdue.

The Bush-Obama strategy has come due. Trouble was brewing when Bush told us in 2008, “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system,” which is like saying “I’ve abandoned my parachute to more thoroughly enjoy my sky-diving experience.”

Truth is, everyone but a political hack realizes we are facing national bankruptcy with all its bad, bad consequences. Socialism has failed. This is what brought 6,000 “tea partiers” (aka, citizens) to the state Capitol steps on Tax Day 2009 to defeat the proposed sales tax increase.

What Olympia didn’t get was the need to cut spending and fight institutionalized corruption. Olympian politicians are buying votes with failed socialist policies. They have bowed down at the altar of the unions.

Don’t get me wrong; like Ronald Reagan, I believe in the right to collective bargaining. But like Reagan, I also believe in fairness and balance. Remember, Reagan fired the air traffic controllers when they went on strike illegally. Gregoire is no Reagan.

Socialism doesn’t work because greedy special interest groups eventually figure out how to vote themselves a pay raise and get “free” things from the government – cash for clunkers, risky home loans, Wall Street bailouts, TARP, Obamacare, etc. – until the whole irresponsible, socialist experiment comes crashing down.

Leave a comment Comments → 151
  1. beerBoy says:

    Ken – you really should get a refund from that Political Science course you took. Clearly they didn’t explain to you what socialism is correctly.

  2. aislander says:

    You’re going to get a whole bunch of comments about how those things you describe don’t fit the strict definition of the word “socialism,” even though they are profoundly socialistic. It’s like saying a tadpole isn’t in the process of becoming a frog because it lacks all the physical characteristics of a frog…

  3. aislander says:

    beerBoy: You stole my thunder! I was in the process of composing my post above, when you put up your predictable objection…

  4. Incorrect use of words leads to more truthiness!

    Meaning of wordds should come right from the gut, not a silly old dictionary or encyclopedia

  5. aislander says:

    So…Gwil: As I understand your post, you are saying we can’t call the system that existed in this country “free-market capitalism” because it DEFINITELY has lacked all the characteristics of that system for a long, long, time…

  6. Publico says:

    Free-market capitalism caused the freefalling economy this past recession. Do you really want more?

  7. aislander says:

    Way to miss the point, Publico…

  8. aislander says:

    How can something that does not exist, and has not existed for over a hundred years cause ANYTHING, Pub?

  9. old_benjamin says:

    Socialism will never be seen to have failed because it will always be seen to have been improperly implemented.

    The problem lies in the concept, not the product.

    The only place it works is in heaven where they don’t need it and in hell where they already have it.

  10. 30 years of corporate welfare, deregulation, tax breaks for the rich, and shipping jobs and factories overseas is what has caused the problems America now faces. In short, laisser-faire capitalism not socialism is at the root of our problems.

  11. Roncella says:

    Ken, You are right, on alot of your points. However the Liberal/dems use the social programs to keep their control of their cities or states. They will not give up that power without a fight.

    Socialism has never worked where ever it has been tried. Communism has never worked, example, Cuba, Russia, North Korea.

    Mark Levin has written a great book about all this “Liberty & Tyranny. It is well researched and very informative about the different forms of Governments how they begin and eventually take over completely and where they have been successful and where they have failed.

  12. aislander says:

    xring: With all due respect: you are having a lefty fever-dream if you think we have had anything LIKE a laissez-faire, free-market economy any time in the last thirty years. Any “deregulation” has been only on the margins, and the government was and is deeply involved in the economy…

  13. Tummler says:

    Xring, 30 years of corporate welfare and tax breaks for the rich isn’t laissez-faire capitalism, it’s called corporatism or maybe even something else but certainly not laissez-faire.

  14. aislander says:

    Tummler: I agree with everything you just posted except for the “tax-breaks for the rich” mantra. Corporatism is a way for government to control business, and to be controlled BY business. It is a nasty system that is a hallmark of fascism. It is bad for both business and government, but worse for the people and for those businesses not included in the game. However, I do want people to keep as much of what they have earned as possible…

  15. Islander: It is time to put the horse back in front of the cart.

    Corporatism is a political system in which legislative power is given TO corporations.

    Thus Corporations control the government.

  16. beerBoy says:

    So…..free market capitalism hasn’t failed because free market capitalism has never been tried?

    btw Sweden is socialist.

  17. Tummier, deregulation is an attempt to return to laisser-faire capitalism.

    Islander, the main way the government has been involved in the economy has been as a means to funnel federal funds to the big corportations.

  18. beerBoy says:

    could someone explain how Derivatives fit with Marxism?

    Or how “forcing” banks to make sub-prime loans to encourage more private ownership of real estate is socialist?

  19. fatuous says:

    Our government is clearly becoming less of a republic of the people and very much a corporatocracy.

    At any rate, I am not willing to throw out many of the assistance programs. But they will be trimmed to a sustainable level and folks will have to adjust.

    I also think able body folks who are receiving assistance and not working at least 32 hours a week should be required to put in community service and return for the assistance.

  20. First_Lefty says:

    This is what brought 6,000 “tea partiers” (aka, citizens) to the state Capitol steps on Tax Day 2009 to defeat the proposed sales tax increase.

    The amazing thing about “Tea Parties” is that they always quote more of a turn out than how many really attended. I’m not sure why.

    So 6,000 people had something to say? Well that represents .001% of the population of the State of Washington.

    Bottom line? A small sales tax increase would have cure a lot of ills. Instead our ills got larger.

  21. aislander says:

    So…xring: Do you think that corporations merely do everything that the benevolent government TELLS them to do, or do they begin to try to influence the government?

  22. sumner402 says:

    You have to love how the fox talking points and the rights redefining ‘socialism’ has now become the norm. The usual brain dead fox bots are here, with their standard parroting.
    We really are wining the race to the bottom.

  23. Publico says:

    If Mr. Morse can say that socialism has failed (here) then I can say that it wasn’t socialism that failed, but rather that free-market capitalism is what has failed us. If you cannot see that we are and always have been closer to the latter then you need to take another junior college economics course.
    The wing nuts can only make their points by exaggerating the circumstances and ignoring definitions.

  24. denismenis says:

    Get a grip, people.
    Socialism has become a catch-word and talking point for the right, and to expound on it is like a tale being told by an idiot.

    Look back ten years – (1) two wars, both funded with debt and credit; (2) A Medicare enhancement / entitlement, likewise not funded; (3) deregulation of investment banking, resulting in risky and toxic investment instruments that fail; (4) collapse of an inflated housing market (5) favorable policies of globalization which inhibit creation of domestic goods and services to enable recovery.

    The remedy used, massive government intervention, has little to do with socialism per se – but it is the socializing of risk (vs. the privatization of profit) from decisions that government has made as well as protecting the plutocrats who created the crisis to begin with.

  25. aislander says:

    One more time, Pub. We have not been engaged in free-market capitalism for a VERY long time. Someone called what we have “corporatism,” and I think that is closer to fact where the relationship of large corporations to the federal government is concerned…

  26. papasan says:

    You people make my eyes bleed.
    Go get a hobby. Please, all of you, just STOP.

  27. Islander,
    Corporations do not want true free market laissez-faire capitalism. They want the government to protect them from competition and the big bad labor unions, and to be free from all taxes.

    READ MY LIPS! Under Corporatism the corporations ARE the government, currently the Republicans do what the Corporations / Big Business / the Rich tell them to do even if it hurts American and Americans who don’t make $250,000 or more a year.

    What the corporations

  28. bobcat1a says:

    It isn’t free-market capitalism, obviously. It is free-market capitalism with a huge boost from government. It is corporate tax rates of 30+% where enough exceptions have been written in to make the effective rate 0%. But it still lets the right claim we overtax business because of the nominal rate, not the actual rate. It’s free-market capitalism that encourages corporations like TransOcean to have it’s home office in Switzerland, even though it has no operations in Switzerland, and it’s REAL home office is in Houston.

  29. the3rdpigshouse says:

    Ken – thanks for the inciteful and honest summary of a historically accurate accounting of a failed concept – socialism!! Maybe the ignorant American electorate will awaken from its long dark slumber!

  30. the3rdpigshouse says:

    beerboy – warch my lips! – socialism is the redistribution of assets, ergo the socialist democrat Congress thru forced lending to inelligible borrowers is an attempt at redistribution of assets!! The problem is and always has been the inability to pay for forced redistribution!!!!!

  31. A321196 says:

    Several issues ago an article in Newsweek magazine had a chart indicating over the base period of a relatively short period worker productivity went up to 197 and wages went up to 119 with the base period of 100. Somehow those figures do not smack of so called “socialism”. The wealthy and corporation seem to have been successful in keeping their acquired profits and wealth. Just maybe, if workers’ wages and benefits at least kept pace with their productivity, the government would not be in debt. As corporations continue to stop funding defined pension plans and health insurance for semi-retirees, who picks up the tab? When wages do not keep up with cost of living, you picks up the tab? Uncle Sam. I’ve never heard a Republican complain about the earned income tax credit. When employers do not pay adequate wages and benefits from their sales of goods and services, Uncle Sam ends up with entitlements. When a person with a family makes minimum wage, taxpayers fork over $5,000 in the form of the earned income tax credit. That’s the subsidy for cheap hamburgers to cheap goods at a retailer.

  32. aislander says:

    xring: I think I can speak for the “right” in this instance. We small-government conservatives do not want corporate welfare, nor do we want control of government by corporations, but we also want government to stay out of the business of business. If a business commits fraud or injures someone, there are laws against that and, at that point, government has a legitimate role to play, but this micromanaging of business, this attempt to anticipate absolutely everything that can go wrong gives entree to the big corporations to do exactly what you say you DON’T WANT them to do, which is have an undue influence on governmental policies. You may not want to believe it, but once government starts regulating business, it puts itself in the position of being co-opted by business…

  33. Islander – so if the government didn’t regulate business, business would not co-op the government?

    If business were altruistic instead of greedy there would be no need for the government to pass and impose regulations.

  34. Is “government” greedy?

    Is government “altruistic”?

  35. aislander says:

    I don’t trust altruism, xring. I DO trust self interest, and I DO trust people to act as adults if they are treated as adults. Between an informed consumer and an established business, the outcome will almost always be good. Why do believe people in government are altruistic? Mostly I have found them to be indifferent at best, and obstructive at worst. There are exceptions, but I don’t want to depend on running into one to get my business taken care of…

  36. aislander says:

    If government had no interaction–no reward or punishment to offer–with business, there would be no need for co-opting. Look at Microsoft and Wal-Mart. They were completely indifferent to government–had few if any lobbyists in DC–until government started hunting their scalps. Now they both have a major presence on K Street…

  37. Socialism hasn’t been tried.

  38. sumner402 says:

    For those that want to know and understand just what is wrong with our country and our economy right now, ailander has outlined it and explained if quite well.
    If your wish is to take a one prosperous nation and turn it into a 3rd world nation with a caste system, do what aislander says and you will certainly have it.
    30 years of his type of governing and we are well on our way.

    Conservatives/republicans/tea whiners are what is wrong with this country.

  39. beerBoy says:

    3PH – ummm….any wealth redistribution has gone from the middle class to the plutocrats – that neo-feudalism not socialism.

  40. sumner402 says:

    I wonder if a right wing lemming could provide an example of this ‘socialism’ they all seem to think is happening?

  41. During almost all of the post Civil-War times, the top 10% held about one-third of the wealth of the nation. Since the huge tax cuts for that group went into efect, the percentage of the wealth has steadily increased, and now they own over 50% of the wealth and the percentage of people in the poverty level has increased. So, someone is obviously laughing to the bank on whatever form of economic system we have right now, and it certainly isn’t the middle class.

    I think it is ironic how the most wealthy can sit back and let people who are losing ground to the failed economic theories of the far right be their champions. Unless I am wrong and aislander and 3rdpigshouse are really millionaires in disguise, they are the ones championing what has harmed the middle class – “More for the rich, more for the rich. Let’s let them have 75% of all the wealth, 85%, bleed us until we’re dry! More for the rich!

  42. sumner402 says:

    I have read that the top 5000 now hold more money than the bottom 120 million in this country.
    Why is that a good thing righties?
    You voted for it, you wanted it, you think it’s great enough to want even more of it, so why?

  43. aislander says:

    So…tuddo: If the poor are so poor, how do the rich BECOME rich by taking from THEM? I mean, do the math. If the rich are 10%, as you say, how could they possibly become rich even by taking 100% of the assets of the 20% at or below the poverty level?

    The actual dynamic is that the rich have created more wealth. As Froma Harrop quoted the other day: “But ‘the economy is not a national pie-eating contest,’ as Dartmouth economist Andrew Samwick smartly responded on the Capital Gains and Games website.’The phrase casts income as something that is consumed, not as something that is produced.’”

  44. it’s socialism unless THEY need services, long term care, medical assistance, etc. Then it is a good use of funds.

  45. Concernedfather says:

    Wow, someone is upset about being in the 120 million group!
    There must be a JD Whitworth school of politics down in the valley.
    “It’s THEIR money and YOU want it NOW!

  46. First_Lefty says:

    Roncella says:
    December 2, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    Ken, You are right, on alot of your points. However the Liberal/dems use the social programs to keep their control of their cities or states. They will not give up that power without a fight.

    Nice job of ignoring the letter’s points on corporate welfare – Wall Street Bailouts, etc.

  47. First_Lefty says:

    Henry Ford, one of the wealthiest Americans in history, brilliantly said “My employees have to be able to afford my cars”

    The current crop of billionaires, were usually born into wealth and can’t fathom that concept. They’ve always had money and think that it will always be there.

    When there is no consumer class left, watch the money crowd scrambling. It’s already happening in this state where the government revenues are dependent on sales.

    Oh…and “world market”???? America doesn’t manufacture anything to sell overseas, except weapons.

  48. Islander the poor are poor because the rich have taken from them.

  49. First_Lefty says:

    Just in case some of you may have forgotten, Ford was the son of a farmer, who walked 4 miles to church – not a member of the fortunate son club.

    Henry Ford (July 30, 1863 – April 7, 1947) was a prominent American industrialist, the founder of the Ford Motor Company, and sponsor of the development of the assembly line technique of mass production. His introduction of the Model T automobile revolutionized transportation and American industry. As owner of the Ford Motor Company, he became one of the richest and best-known people in the world. He is credited with “Fordism”, that is, mass production of inexpensive goods coupled with high wages for workers.

  50. First_Lefty says:


    There you go. Start picking out and naming the SELF MADE Billionaires.

    Don’t pick Bill Gates, Jr. Without his father’s wealth, he’d be just another kid playing with electronics

  51. beerBoy says:

    Fordism was popular not only with the capitalists. The fascist and communist parties both strove to emulate the approach created by Ford.

  52. gowenray says:

    Oh so right beerBoy, the downside of any governmentally controlled society will always be faulty decisions of greed by the elite and their power brokers.
    Trying to put blame on an individual, their political party, or religion (in some cases), is like backing into a buzz saw and trying to decide which tooth hit you in the butt first.

  53. aislander, I did not say that the rich became wealthy from taking from the poor. In many cases, the wealthy have created more wealth for the nation. However, the past 30 years while we have tried out the trickle down, deregulation theory of economics has not been that time compared sith other times in our history.

    My point, which has been proved over and over again during the past 30 years, is that tax cuts and deregulation do not create jobs and do not help the middle class that much. We have been in the lowest taxation rate since the industrial revolution. Social programs have proved to work to bring a huge number of people out of poverty and into the middle class. There have been excesses, for sure, but these dwindle compared to the cost to the nation of the loss of the middle class and the government aid to the most wealthy.

    I am a small business owner, with several businesses. People like my products and services. However, as people lost jobs and could not spend as much, I had to lay off people who then could not spend as much. Republicans block the one program that has shown to be the biggest creator of jobs in this nation, and that is unemployment insurance. People on unemployment spend almost all of it on necessities. In most of America, able-bodied couples without young children cannot receive any welfare. So, without unemployment insurance, they have no income at all. The cycle keeps going like that in these historic recession years unless there is intervention.

    Adding $700 billion to the deficit so the richest 1-2% can increase their share of the wealth should not be a government aid program. We have tried that route and it has been stamped “FAILED”.

  54. aislander says:

    Allowing people to keep their OWN money is NOT a “government aid program,” tuddo. Sheesh!

  55. aislander says:

    …and HOW is keeping the current tax rates going to “add $700 billion to the deficit?” Is this crowd counting on spending even MORE money they don’t have? It’s like the guy who spends his raise before he gets it–and then doesn’t get it. He has a spending problem, not an income problem…

  56. aislander, the tax cuts were temporary to see if they would stimulate the economy and create more jobs. The top tax payers were given an extra tax cut. The tax law expired, so the rates revert back to those that were in effect during the Clinton years, when we had a booming economy based on real jobs, not on financial fraud like in the Bush years. So,, yes, it is a government program to experimenbt with the tax rates to see if we could still pay for government and have the richest taxpayers get an extra break. It failed. The deficit grew larger and larger. The middle class shrunk and shrunk. We are out of the theory stage. We have actually tried your philosophy, and it failed. Big time!

  57. aislander says:

    Are taxes going to go up if the rates are not maintained, or aren’t they?

  58. Roncella says:

    Tuddo, Your thinking is the same old liberal bunk. The top 2% is where most jobs are created. Most Middleclass folks do not have hundreds or thousands of employee’s working for them.

    Having read many of your posts it seems you are still consumed with the Bush Hate Sickness. Your dislike of Bush seems to enter all your posts sooner or later, its Bushes fault.

    You own a few small businesses, you should have a clear understanding of what makes the private sector work and what it needs to add employee’s and give raises and expand.

    Your thinking does match Nancy Pelosi’s who said Un-employment checks are a boon to the economy.

  59. sumner402 says:

    If the rich are 10%, as you say, how could they possibly become rich even by taking 100% of the assets of the 20% at or below the poverty level?

    Another shining example of just how little the far right understands about the economy.

  60. redneckbuck says:

    This economy is not a result of the current tax plan. It was caused by the housing market. People either buying too much house or pulling too much cash out. Either way all the stimulus is doing is putting off the obvious…..unemployment will rise

  61. sumner402 says:

    The top 2% is where most jobs are created.

    Right wing talking points are always wrong.

  62. sumner402 says:

    the tax cuts were temporary to see if they would stimulate the economy and create more jobs.

    Partly true, they were ‘temporary’ because the only way to get them passed was to use reconciliation, you know that evil socialist thing the ‘libs’ use and when reconciliation is used on budgetary items they must, by law, be temporary.

    They did not create jobs, stimulate the economy in any way and in fact added over 1 trillion, and counting, to the deficit/debt.

  63. JudasEscargot says:

    “The top 2% is where most jobs are created”.

    Complete horse manure. Jobs are created when there is a demand for a product or services.

    If the top 2% can make their money overseas, and avoid taxation, guess what?

  64. sumner, a few, like aislander are good for an argument based on something, even if they use non-existent definitions and made up facts. 3rdpigshouse, well……

  65. “Taxes are the cost of a civil society.” Gigantic incomes are made possible by our form of government and the benefits our economic structure provides. It is completely reasonable to require those who profit most from these benefits to contribute the most back into their own society to maintain those benefits for everyone’s potential opportunity.

  66. Hoodsportwriter says:

    This letter is so ignorant of facts, history and political thought is an insult it was even printed.

    My Gawd are there no standards for anything in this so-called “news” paper?

  67. Red – were do mortgage backed securities fit in? Aren’t they the major cause of the Wall Street Meltdown?

  68. Roncella says:

    xring do the names Barney Frank or Chis Dodd ring a bell ?

  69. AI $700 billion lost revenue dueextending bush tax breaks for rich.

    Ronc, does A.I.G., Citigroup, and Bank of America ring a bell?

  70. aislander says:

    The Bush tax cuts resulted in 30 million jobs…

  71. aislander says:

    …make that 30 million ADDITIONAL jobs…

  72. aislander, what kind of phony fact is that. (A phoney fact is a euphamism for a falshood). Here is is from the WSJ: “The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton’s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.”

    If there were only 3 million jobs created after the tax cut, how in the world do you credit the tax cut for 30 milliion?

    We have been losing fewer jobs every month during Obama’s time in office than the steep decline we saw during the last few years of the Bush administration. The trend is positive, but slow to recover from Bush’s disasterous time in office.

  73. aislander says:

    I’m just using the Obama admin’s method of computing job creation. See, if it were not for the Bush tax cuts, we WOULD have lost about 27 million jobs, but the tax cut SAVED or CREATED 30 million. That’s how Obama saved or created those millions of jobs, but the unemployment rate continues to rise. It could be SO MUCH WORSE, if not for the messiah!

  74. aislander says:

    Oh…and xring: thanks for biting…

  75. beerBoy says:

    ai – stop lying with statistics

    His job-creation record won’t look much better. The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton’s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.
    he current President Bush, once taking account how long he’s been in office, shows the worst track record for job creation since the government began keeping records.

    There were 3 million jobs created during his tenure but that wasn’t enough to keep up with 22 million increase in population.

  76. beerBoy says:

    so ai – the W tax cuts resulted in 20 million less jobs created in the 8 years prior to tax “relief”. How exactly can you turn that around and claim that the cuts created jobs?

  77. beerBoy says:

    Oh….so ai is saying that the claim that the tax cuts will create jobs is a bogus claim……..welcome to the reality based universe.

  78. aislander says:

    Way to miss the point, beerBoy! How do you know that we wouldn’t have LOST 27 million jobs, but for the Bush tax cuts. If I’M “lying with statistics,” then so is the Obama administration…

  79. Islander
    – jobs created in China do not count.

    -always willing to help the right spew its nonsense so the world will know how wrong you are.

  80. aislander says:

    xring! You’ve managed to miss the point in two separate threads. One more and we’ll have new American record! Oh, wait–I think you have a LOT farther to go to match the feat of your fellow traveler…

  81. sumner402 says:

    More proof the far right has only lies and misinformation to stand on.
    Honesty just isn’t in their wheel house.

  82. JudasEscargot says:

    Islander gets tagged for a lie and then tries to joke its way out of the hole.

    Isn’t it cute how Islander tries to imply that everyone else just doesn’t get it?

  83. aislander says:

    JE: I would have expected more from you–at least based on your own opinion of yourself. It was a set up the whole way and all the lefties bit. And apparently you’re STILL biting…

  84. redneckbuck says:

    We have to leave the two extremes behind to find our solution here. Not rightwing nor left,

  85. Mr.Boy didn’t MISS the point, he d.o.c.-d… as usual.

  86. Fatuous, the best way to trim assistance programs is to increase the available jobs in this country rather than sending them overseas. The same applies to the able bodied folks on assistance; the reason many of them are there is because there are not enough jobs available.

    Islander, the problem is that the 2percenters (aka the rich) are acting like spoiled brats demanding more and more at the expense of the Nation and the other 98% of the population.

    F_L, Henry Ford was sued by his stockholders who objected to him taking their dividends to increase his workers pay.

  87. aislander says:

    xring writes: “Islander, the problem is that the 2percenters (aka the rich) are acting like spoiled brats demanding more and more at the expense of the Nation and the other 98% of the population.”

    That comment would be hilarious, if it were not so sad. Think! Who is taking from whom? The rich pay a larger percentage of taxes now than they ever have, and that percentage rose while the Bush tax cuts were in force. And you want to take more. If you work for the government, the rich are paying your way. If you work in the private economy, the rich provide your employment. If you buy any product or service, somebody who is probably richer than you provided it. You shouldn’t be bashing the rich, you should hug the next rich person you meet, because he is doing far more for you than you are for him. I remember when the American dream was to BECOME rich, but people with attitudes such as yours are making that harder and harder to do…

    By the way, our tax system is already the most “progressive” of any major nation, so I don’t know how much farther we can go in the direction you want to take us before ALL the jobs are somewhere else. When that happens, and we can’t borrow any more money from the rest of the world, all the consumers will be somewhere else, and the value of our currency won’t be the ONLY thing we have in common with Zimbabwe…

  88. aislander says:

    One last word, xring: Examine your attitude toward the rich guy who still has a business in this area. Does it create a welcoming environment that would MAKE him want to stay here and continue to do business; or is it just one more indication that he really isn’t appreciated–isn’t wanted–here, and he could do better somewhere else, whether that be China, Mexico, or as sagaciousone says, Idaho…

    Sometime when it is earlier in the day, I would like to discuss with you the virtues of self interest versus those of altruism. I will just say that actions motivated by true altruism are rare indeed, and can’t be depended on, but those that result from self interest (and it’s really NOT a bad thing, as I will show) on the one hand, and the wish to avoid a bad outcome on the other, can be depended on time after time…

  89. aislander says:

    When dealing with lefties, it is hard to know what variety is in front of you, but I think xring and Polago both care about keeping jobs in the US and increasing employment here. I care about that, too.

    I know that your side is really a coalition of disparate interests that have very different priorities. Are you aware that one major component of your coalition is working against the goals that I mentioned above? There is a strong movement to “deindustrialize” America in the name of environmentalism, the goal being zero economic growth, or even shrinkage of the economy.

    Don’t take my word for it: do your own research. And then ask yourself: Is this the side that I want to be on?

  90. beerBoy says:

    Now I see that I have to respond to ai’s posts assuming that he is knowingly posting ideas that he doesn’t really believe…..

    It seems that one of the board moderators has been very actively erasing several of my posts. It seems that someone is flagging me with regularity.

  91. sumner402 says:

    Thats because the far right flags every single post that they don’t agree with and the moderators of this thing are…..republicans.

    Look at who insults and attacks but never gets banned, look at the insults, trolling posts and attacks that never get deleted, look at the out right lies that when questioned, they truth is what is removed and not the lies.

    The far right gangs up and flags everything they disagree with, they think if they don’t here/see/read it, then it isn’t there.

  92. sumner402 says:

    Don’t take my word for it: do your own research. And then ask yourself: Is this the side that I want to be on?

    We have done our research ma’am, thats why we are not on the same side as you.
    Your side and you, wouldn’t know the truth or a fact if it was right in front of you.
    Most of us Americans love our country more than a political party, why don’t you?

  93. sumner402 says:

    ai – stop lying with statistics

    It would easier to ask the sun to stop rising in the East.

  94. aislander, you say “There is a strong movement to “deindustrialize” America in the name of environmentalism, the goal being zero economic growth, or even shrinkage of the economy.”

    Would you care to back that up with some facts, or is that one of your Glen Beck paranoid rantings, or is that something you really don’t believe but want to thorow it out to see if anyone “bites”, or what? It sounds like some paranoid Fox cult rant to me.

    One thing many environmentalists would love to see is for the USA to start investing in developing green energy industries and infrastructure so we can be a leader instead of a follower. When Texas tried to buy local and buy USA made technoliogy for their wind farms (one of their state laws), they couldn’t, and they couldn’t find anyone to invest, because all of those “wealthy that create jobs in America” were too busy investing in the Chinese and Dutch technologies. So, they had to buy Chinese.

  95. Roncella says:

    Tuddo, Why not get off your superority soap box for a min. and try and understand a different point of view for a change ?

    I know how you libs/progressives hate Sarin Palin, But she was right on in my opinion, when she said Drill Baby Drill !!!

    President Obama just refused to allow drilling off our coasts for 7 more years.

    America needs cheaper gas prices and jobs, this was a chance to provide both, and Obama missed it.

    Sumner, waaaa, waaaa, stop your complaining. I have never flagged anyone since joining the conversation here.

  96. aislander says:

    The fact is, tuddo, that the Democrats are in bed with some REAL extremists, and not only in the environmental movement–just look at the list of groups that backed that rally on the mall a few weeks ago. The websites are out there, calling for things such as population reduction, deindustrialization, violent demonstrations (“if we can’t open their minds, then we’ll open their heads”)…

  97. sumner402 says:

    Roncella, Why not get off your superiority soap box for a min. and try and understand a different point of view for a change ?

  98. sumner402 says:

    America needs cheaper gas prices and jobs, this was a chance to provide both, and Obama missed it.

    After all the nonsense in the last few years you still don’t have a single clue how things work do you?
    For the last time,
    Oil is a commodity, there is no such thing as “our oil or their oil” it’s just ‘oil’.
    Domestic, imported, or what have you, makes no difference to the price, it’s just oil.
    Come on roncella you KNOW this, you have to by now.

  99. sumner402 says:

    The fact is, aislander that the republicans/conservatives/tea whiners are in bed with some REAL extremists, and not only in the anti environmental movement–just look at the list of groups that backed that rally on the mall a few weeks ago. The websites are out there, calling for things such as revolution, destruction, open gun battles in the streets, walling off the borders, murdering anyone that disagrees with the far right, stomping on heads, violent demonstrations (“if we can’t open their minds, then we’ll open their heads”)…

    Corrected for truth.

  100. aislander says:

    Communists, students, and unions have been rioting in Europe, and Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO was over there conferring with the principles of that movement. So, ACTUAL violence is being committed by the left RIGHT NOW, and major players with the Dems are encouraging it…

  101. Roncella, you think your views are superior to mine, I think mine are superior unless shown something better. I agree that Obama caved into Florida on the oil drilling bit. Florida Republicans did not want any drilling around their coast lines, and were totally against drilling in the southeastern Gulf. That is where the largest oil deposits are located.

    In Virginia, both the Dems and the Republicans were for it, so they should have allowed it there. Unfortunately any spill off the Virginia coast would probably end up in North Carolina, Delaware or further up the coast, not in Virginia, and those states were against the drilling. There is very little oil to be gained at great expense, that’s for sure, and the environmental aspects drilling in the stronger ocean currents than in the Gulf are difficult, but it would have been a good symbolic gesture to make to show how hypocritical Florida is. Drill, baby drill, but not in my backyard!

  102. Ok, aislander, I’ll bite. What “rally on the mall”? You mean Jon Stewarts gig? show me a website about the rally so I’ll have a clue. There are a lot of rallies on the mall.

  103. aislander says:

    The “official” rally AFTER the Stewart one…

  104. aislander, you are being very cryptic. I looked at two websites that list “official” rallies at the Washington Mall, and Stewart’s was the last one listed. So, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got yard work to do. I should have known you were throwing out nonsense again.

  105. aislander says:

    Here’s the website, tuddo. I don’t know if it’s been scrubbed (it hurts my eyes to look at it again), but it HAD a laundry list of radical organizations signed on to support it…


  106. Roncella says:

    Tuddo, I believe I read somewhere that Alaska has the largest oil reserves and you don’t have to drill 10,000 ft down in the ocean to get to the oil.

    Sumner, This ones easy, Take Geroge Soro’s as an example of a supporter of all things Lib/Progressive. He gives millions to NPR, Huffington Puff many other outlets. They all are extreme left or lean left.

    The left support the Dems. exclusively in every election, follow the money and you’ll be able to see who is pulling the strings.

  107. sumner402 says:

    What are you whining about roncella?
    Try to follow a conversation will you?
    Spouting off the talking points and pointing fingers of blame at your boogie man doesn’t mean much out here in the real world.

    You really do not understand anything about commodities, like oil, do you?

  108. aislander, please tell me which of the following organizations that sponsors “One Nation” supports “actual violence” , depopulation, deindustrialization, and the other things you claim? AFL-CIO; American Federation of Teachers; Center for Community Change; Communications Workers of America; Green for All; Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; NAACP; National Action Network; National Council of La Raza; PowerPAC; Rainbow PUSH Coalition; SEIU 1199; SEIU: Service Employees International Union; Sojourners; UAW, International Union; United States Students Association

    Even if you what you said was true about one organization, which it isn’t, the rally was not about any of those things. And your claim that Dems are overseas pushing for violence, uh that one is a paranoid fantasy, also.

  109. JudasEscargot says:

    “radical organizations”

    You mean like TEA Party members that shout down Congressional representatives so that they can’t hold town hall meetings with constituents?

  110. JudasEscargot says:

    sumner – what aislander is attempting to equate are the union protests in France, where they are trying to raise the retirement age 2 years, which will mean less jobs for the young people.

    It’s amazing what will happen when the working class takes on the elite. We’re about two years from that right now in the US – maybe less.

  111. JudasEscargot says:

    “He gives millions to NPR, Huffington Puff”

    NPR is a non-profit funded by many millionaires and corporations. Soros is but one.

    Huffpo is the 3rd most valuable website in the world. They don’t need donations.

    Roncella likes to make things up.

  112. JudasEscargot says:

    In contrast with commercial radio, NPR does not carry traditional commercials, but has advertising in the form of brief statements from major donors, such as Allstate, Merck, and Archer Daniels Midland. These statements are called underwriting spots, not commercials, and, unlike commercials, are governed by FCC restrictions; they cannot advocate a product or contain any “call to action”. In 2009, corporate sponsorship made up 26% of the NPR budget.[14]

    On November 6, 2003, NPR was given over US$225 million from the estate of the late Joan B. Kroc, the widow of Ray Kroc, founder of McDonald’s Corporation. This was a record—the largest monetary gift ever to a cultural institution.[17][18] For context, the 2003 annual budget of NPR was US$101 million. In 2004 that number increased by over 50% to US$153 million due to the Kroc gift. US$34 million of the money was deposited in its endowment.[19] The endowment fund before the gift totaled $35 million. NPR will use the interest from the bequest to expand its news staff and reduce some member stations’ fees. [17] The 2005 budget was about US$120 million.

    In October 2010, NPR accepted a $1.8 million grant from the Open Society Foundations. The grant is meant to begin a project called Impact of Government that is intended to add at least 100 journalists at NPR member radio stations in all 50 states over the next three years.[20].

    That took 1 minute to find, copy and paste.

  113. JudasEscargot says:

    “Roncella says:
    December 4, 2010 at 11:51 am
    Tuddo, I believe I read somewhere that Alaska has the largest oil reserves and you don’t have to drill 10,000 ft down in the ocean to get to the oil.”

    Sarah Palin’s book isn’t a great reference source.

    If you ever followed the story of the pipeline, you’ll also find that the cost of doing business in Alaska is incredibly high.

    Sorry, there I go again with those historical facts.

  114. NPR is a non-profit funded by many millionaires and corporations, and American tax payer dollars.

  115. JudasEscargot says:

    “thewho says:
    December 4, 2010 at 4:58 pm
    NPR is a non-profit funded by many millionaires and corporations, and American tax payer dollars.”


    It was once called “Educational Radio”. What a concept, huh?

  116. JudasEscargot says:

    “In 2009, member stations derived 6% of their revenue from direct government funding, 10% of their revenue from federal funding in the form of CPB grants, and 14% of their revenue from universities.[14][15] NPR receives no direct funding from the federal government.[16] About 1.5% of NPR’s revenues come from Corporation for Public Broadcasting grants.

    WOW!!! a whole 6% of their funding is “taxpayer” and no direct funding from the federal government?????????

    (took 47 seconds to research, copy and paste)

  117. So, everyone on the ‘right’ are liars, but everyone the ‘left’ are not?


    I am detecting sexism too. It appears that if someone disagrees with a poster, then they are automatically assumed to be a female. Where are the feminists?

    You people really need to put some clothes on and get from behind your keyboard. There is a real world out there you know.

  118. Yep, re-education radio… bias and all at tax payer expense. Weird.

  119. JudasEscargot says:

    Who – cite a verbatim example of “bias” by public radio. Better yet, have you ever listened to KPLU (the public radio of Pierce County)? That jazz music is socialist, isn’t it?

    WAMTD – were you at the Tacoma Dome watching the State football championships today?

  120. JudasEscargot says:

    Oh….Who….don’t forget “Car Talk” with Click and Clack, the Tappet Brothers.

    There is subtle communist messaging going on during their program. If I had Glenn Beck’s chalk board I could show you how it works.

    You see, they are from Boston, which is in Massachusetts, where Ted Kennedy served the Senate, but now Scott Brown, who romanced the TEA Party until he got elected then threw them under the bus because he wants to get re-elected……..

    So….there you go.

  121. No, I was at home getting my house ready for Santa Clause.

    And speaking of football, it looks like the Cougs Couged it.

  122. JudasEscargot says:

    So, WAMTD, what you are saying is that you weren’t as active as I was today.

  123. er… as limited to possibility of being productive… as usual.

  124. beerBoy says:

    WAMTD – I’m sure you have noted the tendency of some posters on the Right who “automatically” question left leaning individuals’ sexuality too. Or the tendency to infantalize those who have contrasting views.

    Ah….but that wouldn’t fit your “all liberals sleazy because one or two do something sleazy so therefore all conservatives are good” metanarrative.

  125. There’s much about NPR that I have appreciated over the years. That said, you are willfully ignoring the obvious if you don’t recognize the liberal/progressive bias that wafts trhough NPR programming. It’s not bold, or loud (unlike some of the FOX programming) but that doesn’t mean it’s not present. Imagine a soft-spoken, well-dressed, highly educated individual in a discussion with a hot-headed Irish cop and you will get a hint of the difference between NPR and Conservative Radio/TV. And don’t forget, that snake in the Garden of Eden was soft-spoken AND no doubt quite beautiful.

  126. JudasEscargot says:


    As I said last night…..it’s all a communist conspiracy – jazz, Car Talk, etc.

    Put the tin foil over your head to ward off evil signals.

  127. JudasEscargot says:


    There it is. The news from KPLU’s website.

    Be vewwy vewwy carweful, they arwe wascally wabbits.

  128. sumner402 says:

    Why does the right fear and hate anything and anyone that doesn’t mach in lock step with their partisanship and propaganda?
    Total right wing bend? Thats OK, but an intelligent radio program and GASP! jazz is evil and must be stopped!

  129. aislander says:

    …not the ONLY thing the Nazis and Bolsheviks had in common, beerBoy!

  130. beerBoy says:

    aislander….and upstanding white Americans!

  131. aislander says:

    I didn’t miss your point, beerBoy: I just ignored it. Since it was not true about everyone at the time, it doesn’t serve your intended purpose of being a blanket condemnation…

  132. aislander says:

    tuddo: If you question the left’s propensity toward violence, I commend to you JudasEscargot’s post of 12/04 at 3:52 PM…

  133. JudasEscargot says:

    Judas’ “propensity toward violence”.,….

    JudasEscargot says:
    December 4, 2010 at 3:52 pm
    sumner – what aislander is attempting to equate are the union protests in France, where they are trying to raise the retirement age 2 years, which will mean less jobs for the young people.

    It’s amazing what will happen when the working class takes on the elite. We’re about two years from that right now in the US – maybe less.

    How about propensity for historical facts?

    If Aislander was more educated in labor history, he/she/it would recall that it was the right wing “bosses” that hired private security firms to bash heads during the labor organizing rallies in US history.

    It is sad how little these Conservatives know and how willing they are to keep it that way.

  134. aislander says:

    Yeah, right. THAT has a lot to do with what “we’re about two years from.” As if the union people were innocent waifs in the “labor history” you seem to fancy…

  135. beerBoy says:

    aislander continues to demonstrate that he longs for a time when the middle class didn’t exist.

  136. aislander says:

    Nice leap, beerBoy! Gotta create wealth before the middle class can share in it…

  137. aislander says:

    Actually, beerBoy, wealth has to be created before a middle class can even exist…

  138. sumner402 says:

    aislander continues to demonstrate that he longs for a time when the middle class didn’t exist.

    She longs for the caste system, and is working hard to get the nation to it.
    I just have to wonder why the tea whiners/conservatives think they will be allowed into the upper tier of that system they are working so hard to install?

  139. aislander, you say, “tuddo: If you question the left’s propensity toward violence, I commend to you JudasEscargot’s post of 12/04 at 3:52 PM”.

    Are we talking about France, here? We do have some violent tendencies in a lot of groups in all sides of the political extremes, in this country, too. In most cases they have been shown to be started by overzealous police who did not know how to control a tiny minority of anarchists and other extremists acting out or by right-wing militia groups intent upon destroying people with opposite views or different ethnic or racial backgrounds. We haven’t had a violent labor movement in quite some time if that is what you mean by “the left”.

    And, aislander, wealth is created by the middle class. Before giant corporations existed, small businesses, single entrepreneurs and others in the middle class were creating wealth, sharing it, hiring, etc. We were a nation of middle class until Reaganomics took over. Then the middle class started shrinking, the number of people in the poverty level grew and the incomes of the super rich skyrocketed.

  140. Tax debate has Missouri senators talking about ‘pitchforks’ and ‘demagoguery’

    By Robert Koenig, Beacon Wahington Correspondent
    Posted 5:06 pm, Fri., 12.3.10

    WASHINGTON – The congressional debate over the Bush-era tax cuts heated up Friday, with U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D.Mo., saying Americans might “take up pitchforks” against Republicans who want to extend tax cuts for millionaires.
    Huh, weird.

  141. aislander says:

    tuddo: You are incorrigible. We are NOT talking about France except as an example of what JudasEscargot says is coming to America in two years, in his estimation. That IS violence and it is being instigated by the left, not the police.

    The poverty rate through the 1950s was 22%, but was about half that in 2009…so I don’t know where you’re getting your information…

    And, finally, could a middle-class person working for a company produce ANY wealth if that company didn’t exist?

  142. aislander, here is your absurd statement that I was reacting to: wealth has to be created before a middle class can even exist. If you are talking about going back to the development of the middle class in Europe, especially England, why, yes, there was wealth before the middle class. However, I took it to mean that you did not think the middle class created wealth. Sorry, but the middle class created far more wealth in this nation than any other group. Small farmers, family businesses, small businesses of all stripes all created the wealth of this nation. Wealth is not created out of a vacuum. Let’s get rid of the 90% or so who are in the middle class and poor and see how much wealth the top 10% can create.

    I should have stated “after WWII, when talking about the modern economy. The bit about Reaganomics holds if you add that. Of course poverty rates went down in the 40’s and 50’s, because of all those “socialist” programs you hate so much, not because of the benevolence of the rich or because of any economic theories of the right.

  143. Uh-oh, apparently the trib censor thought I was mean when I posted a suggestion that JE grow up. I didn’t mean to hurt his feelings, I just wanted him to be mature enough to acknowledge that no one was talking about music when the cited NPR as a station with a liberal bias. Duh.

  144. aislander says:

    The employers need the employees, tuddo, and the employees need the employers. How does it help an employee if his employer has more taken from him, and then is insulted and demonized on top of it?

  145. aislander, we are not talking about employers here, unless you are changing the topic to talk about Obama’s proposed temporary reduction in SSA tax. We are talking about people who are making extremely high incomes who work for someone. The employers are generally the corporations or companies. Individuals pay income taxes.

    As many have ponted out, the problems with the economy right now is that there is no demand for goods and services. The wealthy are investing in areas where there is a lot of demand, and that is China. Wealth is being created there because they have an emerging and growing middle class that are buying goods and services left and right.

    Until Reaganomics, the middle class saw increases in both wages and buying power (wages adjusted for inflation) about proportional to the growth of the GDP. After Reaganomics, wages went flat and buying power went down for the middle class, even though productivity was increasing. The middle class just never saw the benefits of their harder work, increase in productivity. It all went to the top tier, which then was not put back into our economy. After the Bush tax cuts, the GDP grew for a while, but real wages declined steeply for the middle class and jumped by a huge amount for the top 10%.

  146. beerBoy says:

    Testing to see if the TNT has banned any quotations posted by me

    In Marxism, which defines social classes according to their relationship with the means of production, the “middle class” is said to be the class below the ruling class and above the proletariat in the Marxist social schema. Marxist writers have used the term in two distinct but related ways.

  147. aislander says:

    Of COURSE we’re talking about employers, and not ONLY subchapter S businesses…

  148. aislander says:

    …and tuddo: How does raising taxes on your employer help YOU? After all there’s less money available to keep you on the payroll. Unless you work for the government (which would not be a huge surprise)…

  149. sumner402 says:

    Aislander proves over and over again how little she understands about business and the economy.

  150. aislander, I am my own employer. The capital gains tax cuts as well as the lower SS taxes will lower my costs quite a bit. I have limited my comments to what I think is a gross disservice to the USA and its future, the unrequiting drumbeat of the right to give extra tax cuts to the most wealthy who have thrived during the time of austerity and who ahve thrived over the past 30 years in far excess of any reasonable expectation and far in excess of those 90% in the middle and lowest income groups. This, in spite of dire warnings by that same right that the deficit will be the undoing of our nation’s economy.

    My personal income tax affects my business not one iota. How much I make after income taxes does not really affect how many people I can hire, how many goods and services I produce, etc.

  151. aislander says:

    Are you a subchapter S corporation, tuddo?

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0