Bloomberg's Role

ZNP said:

I am not for a purely socialist system any more than a purely capitalist system. I like the use of capital being freely available to anyone who can get a loan (I have worked for banks and brokerages). I think our rapid movement of capital to anyone who has a good idea is one of our great advantages over centralized control. However, I think capitalist society needs to have some socialist policies -- minimum wage, certain laws that protect the rights of workers, child labor laws, these kinds of laws prevent capitalism becoming the greedy monster that we saw 120 years ago and which was depicted in books like "The Jungle". I also think certain public services should be socialist in nature. Right now we have a police department, a fire department and a public school that serves everyone without charge. That is very important, not just to the poor but also to the rich. I also think we should have a certain amount of communism. Parks should be "common" to all. Beaches should be common to all. The air should be common to all.

Click to expand...

You have, I agree, put your finger on one of the problems that arise when Socialism is the topic of discussion. I am referring to the tendency of people to talk as though the existence of ANY government services qualifies the government as "Socialist."

Doing that makes it possible to argue that there is nothing out of the ordinary about "Socialism" and that people who are opposed to the central government taking over the economy and creating an unfree society is nothing to worry about.

That's what the people of Venezuela were led to think, and now there is neither democracy nor human rights nor the usual social services.

Albion said:

You have, I agree, put your finger on one of the problems that arise when Socialism is the topic of discussion. I am referring to the tendency of people to talk as though the existence of ANY government services qualifies the government as "Socialist."

Doing that makes it possible to argue that there is nothing out of the ordinary about "Socialism" and that people who are opposed to the central government taking over the economy and creating an unfree society is nothing to worry about.

That's what the people of Venezuela were led to think, and now there is neither democracy nor human rights nor the usual social services.

Click to expand...

The problem with centralized control is the potential for corruption is increased exponentially (we have corruption now, just not on the level they have in Russia or Venezuela). The second problem is like the difference between one CPU and distributive processing. It is why we very quickly went from mainframes to PC's. One of our biggest resources is our people, capitalism allows us to maximize that resource, centralized control short circuits that resource. But no one that I am aware of is arguing for centralized control. No one has an issue with free public school, why not extend that to college. That is not moving towards centralized control, only moving with the times. Also, no one has a problem with FDIC insurance. If it is OK for the government to insure your money why can't they insure your health with a minimum health care plan?

ZNP said:

Also, no one has a problem with FDIC insurance. If it is OK for the government to insure your money why can't they insure your health with a minimum health care plan?

Click to expand...

Well, although both are called insurance, they don't work at all the same way.

Albion said:

Well, although both are called insurance, they don't work at all the same way.

Click to expand...

Perhaps but the purpose would be the same. US government insures bank deposits so that people will use the banks and economy can roll along, and they can get the tax revenue. US govt insures basic healthcare for US citizens so they can work without going bankrupt, economy rolls along, and government collects tax revenue.

Watched a movie and the billionaire says to the politician..." I am going to pull all my assets out of the country and watch it crumble if this policy is not passed"...

As our structure is today and we now see we have gone from conventional warfare to economic do understand the FED is a private corporation. What we got is private vs public which used to be D vs R until "entity" was written into the constitution. Around the 1970's Civics was taken out of common core education to dummify the people in ignorance, which in time, creates our reality because we do not know of another. Civics was the peoples power but no one will look it up and see "WHO" backed taking civics out . Can ya say bipartisan, lol. This is where, in generational thinking (Private Corps thinking model , not, every day joes), a line and separation between public and private were drawn. As time passed new words were implemented in common lexicon like Entitlements . Try this experiment... Look at that word in a mind of business NOT in a political mind set... Entitlements... Now, lets assign the letter R to it. Now, go to policies and look at the D's that back cuts. If ya look at this real hard without adding politics to it we see the term derives from a mind of private not public. How to add human factor to a policy ... We as humans do not think like entity/Private . With that in mind, the lobbyist will back our campaign , immediate gain, to an ugly policy no matter the letter behind the policy maker that does not see the policy of 1970 in today's ignorance of cutting Civics because said person got a massive campaign infusion.

The above is just one of many.

In todays REAL structure (not D vs R but private vs public) did ya know.... Some private companies that get subsidies <--(your tax, for those that do not know) and it is put into a slush fund to back "Its" pick for positions of power. This means "you pay" for your opposition candidate campaign whether ya like it or not because there is no audit of foreign aid expenditures in the REAL world of electronic banking were the entity/private does its banking overseas, not the public. Entity has grown up to multi national using our money against us in a subsidy . So lets say they get caught , what do they do? Why put a letter behind it and point at it to blame it . If D or R did it , what is watching above our heads laughing in our ignorance of true structure of the body politic that does not think like entity/private because supply of funds is immediate to pay for campaign supplied by entity? No matter the letter behind the human that can not think in generational (50 to 109 and counting since 1912-13 when the treasury went private... the FED) landscape . This applies to the public too just trying to get a piece of the pie no matter the letter we represent.

Supply and demand to the public seems to be the conversation brewing here termed populism/public vs billionaire/private/made rich through entity/wherein entity is a person applied to the populist/public/peoples constitution (Are ya seeing the words dont matter in structure before this sentence as it all means the same in public vs entity).

In our structural reality applied, wherein we operate in truth of structure that is not D vs R as these use people in limited understanding while entity/money/multinational corps/policy writing firms , banks,lobbyist firms, Lawyer firms,LLC's, companies, 501 c's, Opposition firms... All these and a lot more not mentioned here are recognized as people in a, ORIGINAL, populist constitution before 1912. Now, these being people under the umbrella term entity one starts to see what language these people speak... Money. Money must grow and as it grew it noticed nobody checks foreign aid and this can be exploited to grow a corp using public taxation . Lets use newfound said funds to remove Civics from core curriculum by lobbyist that transfer your money to remove your power. Now, if ya aint getten it yet , ya dont want to get it, and want to use useless terms like R vs D and apply them to a Bernie or Bloomberg in a system that has been taken from the public (Federal level) .

The narrative: Bernie has good populist incentives. Counter narrative... How to pay for it under entity rule? Its what we are going to see on narrative corporations tv set . Remember this truth... 6 Multi National Corporations own all mainstream news (Narratives). So, the populist joe is going to watch Bernie bashing extreme, lol. Why? The answer is in remember this truth above.

Thanks for reading this diatribe laced with truth , as we all know we hobby here in the land of thought that derives from the human consciousness that is not present in what rules us... entity.

mark46 said:

Income disparity is NOT the problem. As long as people have what THEY need, the fact that there are the very rich is irrelevant. The issue is that the economy is indeed doing great, and the middle class is not participating. The gains are going almost entirely to the 1%, while social benefits are taken away from the middle class. If social spending were increased by 20%, including guaranteed affordable health care, folks wouldn't care that there are rich folks like Gates, Bezos and Bloomberg. In the US, middle class folk want TO BE rich. They want to be able to provide for their families. Taking from the rich is the Sanders/Warren solution.

We may get to see just how unpopular this position is in a general election.

Click to expand...

You stated income disparity is not a problem and then went on to suggest the middle class is not participating while social programs are taken away from the middle class (?)

ZNP said:

Perhaps but the purpose would be the same. .

Click to expand...

The stated purpose of Socialism is always to create a perfect society for everyone; but the reality of Socialism is always something else.