We are now at the greatest disparity between the rich and poor since these kind of statistics have been recorded, and it has become evident that in times of great economic gain that the working class do not incur any significant gains whatsoever, and worse in times of economic upheaval the working class suffer the most.

Trickle down economics has been shown to absolutely not to work – well not work for the bottom 70%, rather the multiplier affect is the most prudent manner of economic gain. Economics starts at your base, not the top.

Just remember the greatest act of socialism that society has ever seen was just committed by a republican president with his almost trillion dollar bail out of fiscal institutions.

And do you honestly think that the waitress at the local diner carrying a tray with six plates, memorizing orders and putting up with surly assholes for eight hours straight for minimum wage plus a few bucks in tips isn’t working hard? I know people who work two or three jobs, and STILL can barely make ends meet. But… these are jobs that need to get done, so someone has to do them.

Wes: Your analogy doesn’t really make much sense… you’ve got a serious case of apples & oranges going on. Hell, more like apples & orangutans. Oranges are at least still fruit…

Wes and I agreeing politically.

There is something seriously wrong going on here. :)

As an analogy, think of getting excellent grades in EM school and then being told “Hey, Donna, you don’t need all your As. This guy over here does. We’re going to take away some of yours and give them to him.”

That kind-heartedness sounds good, but it doesn’t lead to improvement over time. It makes things worse for everyone because less knowledgeable people wind up administering emergency medicine.

On the other hand, bailing out the lenders is also obviously the WRONG way to go. It would actually be better to do nothing than that.

The very best solution is not one that can be quickly implemented: borrowers have to borrow more responsibly, based on an accurate comprehension of possible future threats to their income, and lenders have to lend in ways that acknowledge and mitigate business risks (such as borrowers filing bankruptcy).

But if you’re trying to get re-elected, well… *that* obviously doesn’t sound good as a stump speech…

2) Personally, I think that the country is a plutocracy. Those with the most money, win. The poor have no power, that’s why they get the shaft.

…why not pay off the PEOPLE? I mean, in the long run they’re the ones paying for it anyway…

Seriously, right now, do they actually think their system is really a free market? It never has been, or at least the closest it was right before the Depression.

Someone is always in control, whether it be the government or the corporations. They founded their country trying to find an anti-thesis to the land barons and now they’ve found all new ways to sell it right back to them.

Heh, I hadn’t intended to rant so much about it, but getting to the point. Recently someone stated (I forget whom, my apologies) that they already have a socialist system– it’s just social when the rich corporations are hurting, but back to free market when they’re eager to make profits.

Bail out the rich. Yeah, that’s totally a better idea than ever assisting the poor.