PDA

View Full Version : Steve Wynn vs the Keystone Politicians



Franco
06-01-2010, 04:13 PM
Steve Wynn has it correct; our politicians are idiots and because of that we not longer have the stability we are use to.

The oil companies and other profitable companies will be right behind him in moving out of the USA.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37392344

Mr Wynn quotes Alexis de Tocqueville...

"The American system of Democracy will prevail until the politicians discover that they can bribe the electorate with thier own money"

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 04:54 PM
Steve Wynn has it correct; our politicians are idiots and because of that we not longer have the stability we are use to.

The oil companies and other profitable companies will be right behind him in moving out of the USA.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37392344

Mr Wynn quotes Alexis de Tocqueville...

"The American system of Democracy will prevail until the politicians discover that they can bribe the electorate with thier own money"
Another instance of mysterious attribution. Conservative sites routine include something close to this -- say "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." along with other pithy quotes such as "Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." These are regularly attributed to De Tocqueville's Democracy in America, presumably feeling safe that few people will ever check. Of course, both volumes are now readily downloadable on line (for example at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/815) tr9ugh things like the Guttenberg Project. A quick search of these documents reveals that nothing resembling these quotes appears anywhere in those documents.

road kill
06-01-2010, 04:58 PM
Another instance of mysterious attribution. Conservative sites routine include something close to this -- say "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." along with other pithy quotes such as "Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." These are regularly attributed to De Tocqueville's Democracy in America, presumably feeling safe that few people will ever check. Of course, both volumes are now readily downloadable on line (for example at http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/815) tr9ugh things like the Guttenberg Project. A quick search of these documents reveals that nothing resembling these quotes appears anywhere in those documents.
Dispute the origin, you can not dispute the content!!



rk

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 05:14 PM
Dispute the origin, you can not dispute the content!!



rk
Of course I can. The fabricated quotes were wrong from the day the Constitution was first adopted in the sense that one of the major reasons for adoption was to tax the public to finance public activities (i.e. bribes of the people using the people's own money.) As of now, we have survived over 220 years since Congress first recognized and exercised that power. With respect to Steve Wynn, what needs to be said. He is a man who has made his fortune selling illusion to the well-to-do -- going to extraordinary lengths to insulate them from any appearance of the economic problems that surround them and fostering the additional illusion that it is OK to bet everything in an environment that guarantees that only the house, and Steve Wynn, can come out ahead.

I agree that we are facing the potential for long term social and economic instability. However, I believe that the massive shift of wealth to a smaller and smaller portion of the population, and the virtual destruction of our middle class are the primary factors contributing to this trend. We may see increased capital flight to small, autocratic enclaves that cater to the wealthy. However, the piper must always be paid and safe havens are not necessarily that safe. Russia offers a perfect case study in that regard.

Franco
06-01-2010, 05:24 PM
Of course I can. The fabricated quotes were wrong from the day the Constitution was first adopted in the sense that one of the major reasons for adoption was to tax the public to finance public activities (i.e. bribes of the people using the people's own money.) As of now, we have survived over 220 years since Congress first recognized and exercised that power. With respect to Steve Wynn, what needs to be said. He is a man who has made his fortune selling illusion to the well-to-do -- going to extraordinary lengths to insulate them from any appearance of the economic problems that surround them and fostering the additional illusion that it is OK to bet everything in an environment that guarantees that only the house, and Steve Wynn, can come out ahead.

I agree that we are facing the potential for long term social and economic instability. However, I believe that the massive shift of wealth to a smaller and smaller portion of the population, and the virtual destruction of our middle class are the primary factors contributing to this trend. We may see increased capital flight to small, autocratic enclaves that cater to the wealthy. However, the piper must always be paid and safe havens are not necessarily that safe. Russia offers a perfect case study in that regard.

Virtual distruction of the middle class, long term social and economic instability. And, who's at fault here?

We have the government we deserve since we elected them. In my book, it doesn't say very much about our electorate!

road kill
06-01-2010, 05:31 PM
Of course I can. The fabricated quotes were wrong from the day the Constitution was first adopted in the sense that one of the major reasons for adoption was to tax the public to finance public activities (i.e. bribes of the people using the people's own money.) As of now, we have survived over 220 years since Congress first recognized and exercised that power. With respect to Steve Wynn, what needs to be said. He is a man who has made his fortune selling illusion to the well-to-do -- going to extraordinary lengths to insulate them from any appearance of the economic problems that surround them and fostering the additional illusion that it is OK to bet everything in an environment that guarantees that only the house, and Steve Wynn, can come out ahead.

I agree that we are facing the potential for long term social and economic instability. However, I believe that the massive shift of wealth to a smaller and smaller portion of the population, and the virtual destruction of our middle class are the primary factors contributing to this trend. We may see increased capital flight to small, autocratic enclaves that cater to the wealthy. However, the piper must always be paid and safe havens are not necessarily that safe. Russia offers a perfect case study in that regard.

Again, you dispute the origin but support the content.
Read what you wrote.
That is the gist of the quote.



rk

david gibson
06-01-2010, 06:06 PM
RK:

you will never win against these guys in thought - they always have a snappy comment - but we will always win in reality.

yardley and dnf are guys that:

would rather hang out with barbara striesand than charleton heston
or with sean penn who hugs hugo chavez and worships che and fidel over gary sinise who suppots our troops and works his ass off for the troops and iraqi kids
or with jimmy carter who was a coward facing adversity vs ronald reagan who took down the berlin wall

oh it could go on and on. but all i have to do is look at the people i respect vs the people they follow and i feel like a million bucks. think about it.

and where is all this change the "messiah" promised? its all politics as usual, but really worse with the Chicago factor.

and yet here they are steadfastly standing by president zerO like he really is something? a president that wants to take our guns away, and actually demeaned yardley and dnf with the "clinging to guns and religion" statement?

i'll take 'moses" heston over the "nose" barb ANYDAY

and i'll take Lt. Dan over Spicoli (funny - as a lifelong surfer i never even saw that movie, i despised the guy even back then) ANYDAY

and i'll take a man that brought down the soviet union with nary a shot fired over a coward who let our people languish in captivity for 444 days........ANYDAY

its really sad to see guys like them. they are like the rats that aren't allowed on the lifeboats as their ship goes down - and THAT is what makes me smile!!!

road kill
06-01-2010, 06:08 PM
I'm good hangin' with the "Nuge!!":cool:


stan b

david gibson
06-01-2010, 06:15 PM
I'm good hangin' with the "Nuge!!":cool:


stan b


i am remiss!

they would prefer to talk marxism with bono, but you and i would rather kick back with the nuge and talk turkey!

road kill
06-01-2010, 06:18 PM
i am remiss!

they would prefer to talk marxism with bono, but you and i would rather kick back with the nuge and talk turkey!
Yeah.....and one of those 2 is CLEAN !!!!;-)


rk

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 06:28 PM
Again, you dispute the origin but support the content.
Read what you wrote.
That is the gist of the quote.



rk
Actually, the "quotes" (manufactured to provide an aura of historical legitimacy in the absence of any actual reason) attribute the problem to over-taxation and efforts of the government to move wealth from the rich to the poor. The opposite is what has actually happened and I am ascribing impending social unrest to the government's complicity in the concentration of wealth through poor tax policy and its celebration and support of corporate irresponsibility.

Franco
06-01-2010, 09:52 PM
Actually, the "quotes" (manufactured to provide an aura of historical legitimacy in the absence of any actual reason) attribute the problem to over-taxation and efforts of the government to move wealth from the rich to the poor. The opposite is what has actually happened and I am ascribing impending social unrest to the government's complicity in the concentration of wealth through poor tax policy and its celebration and support of corporate irresponsibility.

That is a dubious generalization! Show me where the consideration of the millions of poor and uneducated foreigners from the middle east to Central and South America, Haiti and more than a dozen other poop-hole countries hasn't had the biggest impact on the growing poor class in America.

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 09:57 PM
Actually, the "quotes" (manufactured to provide an aura of historical legitimacy in the absence of any actual reason) attribute the problem to over-taxation and efforts of the government to move wealth from the rich to the poor. The opposite is what has actually happened and I am ascribing impending social unrest to the government's complicity in the concentration of wealth through poor tax policy and its celebration and support of corporate irresponsibility.

That is a dubious generalization! Show me where the consideration of the millions of poor and uneducated foreigners from the middle east to Central and South America, Haiti and more than a dozen other poop-hole countries hasn't had the biggest impact on the growing poor class in America.
Sorry Frank,

I can't even understand your question (if there is one) and I don't know if it is because of what I'm drinking or what you are.;-)

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 10:00 PM
RK:

you will never win against these guys in thought - they always have a snappy comment - but we will always win in reality.

yardley and dnf are guys that:

would rather hang out with barbara striesand than charleton heston
or with sean penn who hugs hugo chavez and worships che and fidel over gary sinise who suppots our troops and works his ass off for the troops and iraqi kids
or with jimmy carter who was a coward facing adversity vs ronald reagan who took down the berlin wall

oh it could go on and on. but all i have to do is look at the people i respect vs the people they follow and i feel like a million bucks. think about it.

and where is all this change the "messiah" promised? its all politics as usual, but really worse with the Chicago factor.

and yet here they are steadfastly standing by president zerO like he really is something? a president that wants to take our guns away, and actually demeaned yardley and dnf with the "clinging to guns and religion" statement?

i'll take 'moses" heston over the "nose" barb ANYDAY

and i'll take Lt. Dan over Spicoli (funny - as a lifelong surfer i never even saw that movie, i despised the guy even back then) ANYDAY

and i'll take a man that brought down the soviet union with nary a shot fired over a coward who let our people languish in captivity for 444 days........ANYDAY

its really sad to see guys like them. they are like the rats that aren't allowed on the lifeboats as their ship goes down - and THAT is what makes me smile!!!
The easiest arguments to win are those you have with yourself. I don't see one thing that you have ascribed to me that is accurate.

Franco
06-01-2010, 10:02 PM
[quote=Franco;623545]
Sorry Frank,

I can't even understand your question (if there is one) and I don't know if it is because of what I'm drinking or what you are.;-)

I just opened, after dog training a pomegranate Mike's Hard Lemonade.

I really didn't ask a question. Just that you made the statement that "just the opposite is true". I was saying that you are not considering the millions of immigrents over the last 25 years. That has had the biggest impact of lowering average income.

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 10:28 PM
[quote=YardleyLabs;623549]

I just opened, after dog training a pomegranate Mike's Hard Lemonade.

I really didn't ask a question. Just that you made the statement that "just the opposite is true". I was saying that you are not considering the millions of immigrents over the last 25 years. That has had the biggest impact of lowering average income.
I won't try to pull out the data now, but I think that is at most a very minor factor. The estimates that I have seen suggest the total number of illegal immigrants at about 11 million. The percentage of our population that is immigrant may actually be lower than our historical average but I am not sure. While their incomes are lower than the median for all Americans, they are not that much lower and would not significantly depress the statistics for the population as a whole. More to the point, I think globalization has had a definite impact on US incomes. The greatest impact has been on the mobility of capital and the second greatest impact has been on the mobility of finished goods. The obility of captal makes it easy for investment money to flow where the greatest value exists in terms of effective wage rate per unit produced. Today, that value is found in Asia and Latin America, not in the US. Because of that, the investment dollars that might otherwise come here, go elsewhere. While political barriers to globalization have been relaxed, that has been less important than the plummeting cost of shipping finished goods. For all the negative effects of rising fuel costs, one of the benefits is that it would provide an additional window of protection for competitively overpriced US labor.

I do not believe that the effects of globalization can or should be reversed, but they will continue to be painful. The competitive advantage enjoyed by capital because of its easier mobility is behind the fact that return on wealth has grown dramatically while "return" on labor has declined. The fact that our tax policies give preferential treatment to return on wealth for tax purposes is ridiculous.

david gibson
06-01-2010, 10:30 PM
The easiest arguments to win are those you have with yourself. I don't see one thing that you have ascribed to me that is accurate.

so, in other words, you got nothing.

not surprised ;-)

YardleyLabs
06-01-2010, 10:39 PM
so, in other words, you got nothing.

not surprised ;-)
??????

I got all your references. However, your "choices" are meaningless and my answer in almost every case would be "neither". Unfortunately, straw man arguments -- that is, arguments where you first attribute a position to an opponent that your opponent has never professed, and then proceed to argue against it as if it were real -- seem to have become a staple of conservative thought. Maybe it is simply a measure of how little thought is involved.

Franco
06-01-2010, 11:05 PM
[quote=Franco;623552]

I do not believe that the effects of globalization can or should be reversed, but they will continue to be painful. The competitive advantage enjoyed by capital because of its easier mobility is behind the fact that return on wealth has grown dramatically while "return" on labor has declined. The fact that our tax policies give preferential treatment to return on wealth for tax purposes is ridiculous.



Our population has grown by 100 million over the last 30 years. That's why return on labor in the USA is lower. Basic unchecked migration by legas and illegals to what was a greener pasture.

In all my years working, I never worked for a poor person. When the government understands the value of wealth, the general populace does better. But, that wealth can only go so far when our politicians have sold us out to legal and illegal migration.

Whe can't continue to be the world's dumping ground and maintain a high standard of living.

YardleyLabs
06-02-2010, 07:33 AM
[quote=YardleyLabs;623565]

Our population has grown by 100 million over the last 30 years. That's why return on labor in the USA is lower. Basic unchecked migration by legas and illegals to what was a greener pasture.

In all my years working, I never worked for a poor person. When the government understands the value of wealth, the general populace does better. But, that wealth can only go so far when our politicians have sold us out to legal and illegal migration.

Whe can't continue to be the world's dumping ground and maintain a high standard of living.
I don't think your argument holds up when measured against facts. For the last 40 years, our total population has grown at an average of less than 1% per year, which is a level that cannot sustain economic growth and contributes directly to an aging and less productive workforce. Almost all of our growth is attributable to immigration. Cutting off immigration altogether would accelerate the export of jobs. The reality is that we have been a next exporter of jobs for decades. The best measure of this is our trade deficit. As a top producing nation, we used to buy raw materials and sell manufactured goods. Now we buy raw materials and finished goods, and our primary exports are farm produce and arms. That is not the picture of a country holding its own in a global economy.

road kill
06-02-2010, 07:35 AM
[quote=Franco;623587]
I don't think your argument holds up when measured against facts. For the last 40 years, our total population has grown at an average of less than 1% per year, which is a level that cannot sustain economic growth and contributes directly to an aging and less productive workforce. Almost all of our growth is attributable to immigration. Cutting off immigration altogether would accelerate the export of jobs. Th reality is that we have been a next exporter of jobs for decades. The best measure of this is our trade deficit. As a top producing nation, we used to buy raw materials and sell manufactured goods. Now we buy raw materials and finished goods, and our primary exports are form produce and arms. That is not the picture of a country holding its own in a global economy.

Really???

People aren't having children any more??:rolleyes:






rk

YardleyLabs
06-02-2010, 07:43 AM
[quote=YardleyLabs;623638]

Really???

People aren't having children any more??:rolleyes:






rk
They are currently having children at the rate of 1.025 children per adult, which is barely replacement rate. The only segments of the population that are having children at replacement rate or higher are minority and/uneducated and lower income segments. The more educated and higher incomes population segments are having less than one child each, which means that these populations are shrinking in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the total population. A similar problem exists among all industrialized nations, raising some interesting sociological issues. The US is the only industrialized country tht is maintaining population and that is solely because of our historical accessibility to minorities and immigrants. Prior to the 1970's, our growth rate was closer to 1.3% per year.

Gerry Clinchy
06-02-2010, 07:47 AM
We can't continue to be the world's dumping ground and maintain a high standard of living.

It's possible we cannot continue ... although this was exactly how the US became the wealthiest country in the world; the most productive; and offered the greatest opportunity to its immigrants.

The "wealth" of land and the "wealth" of natural resources provided the wealth that could give a generous return on labor invested.

Our situation today is that our "wealth" is now the ingenuity of those who would develop the technologies that will be our modern-day "natural resources".

It is still the "wealth" (though now of a different nature) that provides the value for investment of labor. The person who would provide the ingenuity for a perpetual motion engine would be the "wealth" that would make it viable for others to invest the labor in manufacturing such a machine. Labor alone, without a "market" for what it produces, results in no "return on investment".

American workers were often cited (at least in the past) of being among the most productive workforces. A workforce must have a product to produce. Devising the products that are needed and wanted is the key to making the workforce a valuable asset.

Steve Hester
06-03-2010, 10:45 AM
"socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude"

We're now well on the way. The servitude part will be long term taxes increased to the point that there will no longer be any monetary benefit for the working class to work.

YardleyLabs
06-03-2010, 11:13 AM
"socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude"

We're now well on the way. The servitude part will be long term taxes increased to the point that there will no longer be any monetary benefit for the working class to work.
"socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude" - another manufactured non-quote, usually attributed with no basis at all to De Tocqueville. If I actually accepted the definitions of socialism thrown around by the right, I would have to conclude that our country is the product of the socialist revolution of 1776 which sought to create a republic by the people, of the people and for the people while denying the King his just property rights. Not only that, but the government formed was given the power to levy taxes (i.e. steal from the people) to serve the common good. How much more socialist can you get? :D;-)

depittydawg
06-03-2010, 07:41 PM
"socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude" - another manufactured non-quote, usually attributed with no basis at all to De Tocqueville. If I actually accepted the definitions of socialism thrown around by the right, I would have to conclude that our country is the product of the socialist revolution of 1776 which sought to create a republic by the people, of the people and for the people while denying the King his just property rights. Not only that, but the government formed was given the power to levy taxes (i.e. steal from the people) to serve the common good. How much more socialist can you get? :D;-)

The revolution of 1776 was, in fact, a rebellion against the multi-national corporations of its day. The policies of the East India Trading Company, the business arm of the British monarchy was at the root of the rebellion in the eyes of the colonists.

YardleyLabs
06-03-2010, 09:36 PM
The revolution of 1776 was, in fact, a rebellion against the multi-national corporations of its day. The policies of the East India Trading Company, the business arm of the British monarchy was at the root of the rebellion in the eyes of the colonists.
So, you're saying it was Communist, not just Socialist.:D

Franco
06-03-2010, 09:42 PM
They are currently having children at the rate of 1.025 children per adult, which is barely replacement rate. The only segments of the population that are having children at replacement rate or higher are minority and/uneducated and lower income segments. The more educated and higher incomes population segments are having less than one child each,



Does anyone think we are better off as a nation now with 325 mil than we were when we were a nation of 200mil. ? I don't!

Sure the additional population allowed for the economy to grow but, where has that gotten us?

I think many of our problems are cause by there being too many people to take care of and we keep letting more of the uneducated poor in our country.

Any Immigration Reform should call for strict guidelines as to who can become US Citizens.

dnf777
06-03-2010, 10:05 PM
Does anyone think we are better off as a nation now with 325 mil than we were when we were a nation of 200mil. ? I don't!

Sure the additional population allowed for the economy to grow but, where has that gotten us?

I think many of our problems are cause by there being too many people to take care of and we keep letting more of the uneducated poor in our country.

Any Immigration Reform should call for strict guidelines as to who can become US Citizens.

I agree with you 100% on this. Comparing immigration policy today (or what people want it to be) with their ancestors who came here generations ago is total bunk! Look around folks---WE'RE FULL! There are no more open ranges left to be settled....no more untapped resources to be expoited.
We're already suffering from urban sprawl, habitat destruction, not to mention energy extraction. How many of you now shop or fill up your tank where you used to hunt as a kid? Or see apartments or condos where farms used to work? We gotta slow down the growth. We're big enough.