It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WASHINGTON DIARY: Socialism for the rich

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   

WASHINGTON DIARY: Socialism for the rich


www.dailytimes.com.pk

The fact of the matter is that the Reagan-Thatcher economic model, put in place during the early 1980s, was imposed or copied across the globe. The model was designed to destroy the state institutions that help the poor, and unleash a laissez-faire economic environment. It was meant to help high income groups, sometimes called the investing class, at the expense of the middle and lower classes. Consequently, wealth was accumulated by the top three to ten percent of populations everywhere. The speculative capital phenomenon, producing market bubbles, was inevitable. The Bush wars and their funding through printing money added to this trend.

Now, when the economic elite have completely ruined financial institutions, the American state has reversed its policy of so-called non-intervention of the state in markets. By pumping over a trillion dollars to save the elites, the US is practising ‘socialism for the rich’.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   
got to agree with the author , that it was the Reagan-Thatcher economic model that has led to the current situation of financial collapse in USA

you reap what you sow, USA destroyed several nations and murdered millions and now God/nature are paying the USA in the same coin

www.dailytimes.com.pk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:16 AM
link   
What else do you expect in a free capitalism market? It was made for the rich by the rich. They keep us in debt forever. Loan for this, loan for that and the interest is not being printed. Eventually there will be no more money left to pay all of our interest combined. The system was designed so in the end the rich have everything and we have nothing.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Well, yes. It's been that way for a long time. If ya think about it, it boils down to this: human capability for production of value and the material means of survival far outpaces human ability to increase in population. Except in a chaotic 'state of nature', lacking the productive multipliers of more complex social organization.

Humans are driven, in large part, by need. A true 'ownership society' would gradually eliminate that need, and the society would become unstable, decadent, and blow up horribly. I don't think anyone's solved that social problem. Marx tried to.

So, someone needs to 'eat the cake'. Yes, it makes for a society of 'indentured servitude', if you want to look at it that way. It is also a little scary that human history for the last few thousand years make a lot more sense if you assume that's the way it's been for quite a while.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Free capitalism market? From various discriminatory practices to welfare for the wealthy it hardly adds up to a market ruled by the market. It is a market with idealism in the mix.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Free capitalism market? From various discriminatory practices to welfare for the wealthy it hardly adds up to a market ruled by the market. It is a market with idealism in the mix.


agreed , its a form of fascist capitalism



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 02:16 PM
link   


Well, yes. It's been that way for a long time. If ya think about it, it boils down to this: human capability for production of value and the material means of survival far outpaces human ability to increase in population. Except in a chaotic 'state of nature', lacking the productive multipliers of more complex social organization.

Humans are driven, in large part, by need. A true 'ownership society' would gradually eliminate that need, and the society would become unstable, decadent, and blow up horribly. I don't think anyone's solved that social problem. Marx tried to.

So, someone needs to 'eat the cake'. Yes, it makes for a society of 'indentured servitude', if you want to look at it that way. It is also a little scary that human history for the last few thousand years make a lot more sense if you assume that's the way it's been for quite a while.


marxist societies do not necessarily become decadent and collapse , this was not the case of soviet union, soviet union collapsed due to falling oil prices and military expenditure

but yes, consumerist societies like USA become decadent,weak like Rome and will head for collapse




top topics



 
1

log in

join