Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: America loves the rich.

Posted 11 years ago on June 16, 2012, 1:49 p.m. EST by WatTyler (263)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

You may not. And I may not. But I believe this is an accurate generalization.

Perhaps a month ago, the NPR radio program, Marketplace, aired a brief but very interesting and I believe significant piece. Marketplace is a business program, but unusual in that it has a well-developed social conscience. They’ve been exploring wealth inequality in America. In this brief segment they interviewed a Gallop pollster concerning Americans’ view of the wealthy. And still, roughly 2/3 of Americans admire the rich! Perhaps even more significantly, a roughly equal number think they may become rich.

That the second belief is patently false does not affect its significance, but rather enhances it. This is the American dream! Though of course it is also the American delusion, and is statistically and historically provable as such. But facts don’t matter if people don’t know them, or if people don’t want to believe them. I learned long ago it is very easy to make people believe something they want to believe, but it is extremely difficult to get them to accept an unpleasant fact. Even if to do so will benefit them. Our masters use this.

“He who knows, and knows not that he knows, is asleep. Awaken him!”

102 Comments

102 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 11 years ago

Like someone once said : "The Average American worker does NOT see her or himself as a member of an oppressed proletariat, but as a temporarily embarrassed millionaire." !!!

Further consider just why are people so resistant to the term 'working class' ? Do they regard any such description as 'infra dig.' ? If so, why ? "Middle Class" is, I'd suggest - an affectation specifically designed to pander to such conceits and egos, so as to keep us all divided and conquered !!

Consider also that either we meekly and quietly accept "The Usurpation and Mutation Under Duress" of our 'Democracies' into 'demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy' and de facto Fascism ... OR we urgently reclaim our Dignity, Liberty, Prosperity and indeed Sanity .... as the one and only actual ''Class War'' is the one that's being waged by a Parasitic 0.01% (The 1% of The 1%), using the 1% against The 99% Working Class because IF WE Need to work to pay our bills - then that IS self-evidently what we are ipso facto !

multum in parvo ...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Who says you can't live in a fantasy. Fucking unbelievable. Plenty of those I suppose you can find at the dog/horse track or casino or buying lottery tickets.

Hows the saying go? There's a sucker born every minute.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

The thing is, DKA, that we need to get into their minds and figure out why. Why do they think this way? How can this be undone? Can it be undone?

Why do many Americans value their lives in material terms? Why do they admire the wealthy? Why do they want to be wealthy? What are they looking to fulfill? What is missing in their lives that they think money and stuff can satisfy?

If we can't figure this out, we'll never get through to these people about how unfairly this economic system is treating them. If they don't take off the blinders they will never see the truth and they will continue with the delusion that they, too, will someday be "rich."

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Truth - how do we awaken the sleep walking?

Each individual has a key. Many individuals share similar keys.

The Key is attention - what grabs an individuals attention - presentation - sure - but also - personal interest - that dream of prosperity/riches can be used as the key.

Give em a Tony Roberts presentation - the power of people in forming their own success by participation. Hook em - then - feed em.

Simple - Hey? Geez I know I know - gonna take at least a month or two to get em all on board - but ya gotta do what ya gotta do - patience is essential - I can deal for a couple months. {:-D

[-] 0 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

Please, Tony Roberts is an idiot.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

LOL. I was thinking more of a societal overhaul that would take much longer. If you can do it quicker, yaay!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

I have always believed in stinking positive - some days I can truly reek. {:-O

[-] -1 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

I honestly believe conspiracy theories constitute a major danger for intellectual thought and a near unsurmountable hurdle when it comes to our quest to build a better world. This is not a joke. The problem is that the thinking behind the ludicrous huge conspiracy theories like the lizard people trickle down all the way to the much more plausible ones. The problem is the method, not so much as the claims. Conspiracy theories ruin logical thought and make it impossible for us to know between reality and fiction. Most people nowadays get their news on Facebook or Twitter, but most of the stuff on their is badly research and only half true. If you read the postings on this site, you'll notice that most solutions offered are coming straight from conspiracy theory type thinking. We had the 12 year old explaining banking à la Zeitgeist conspiracy theory, then all the talk of resource based economy, numbered money, etc...

I also believe OWS is in danger of being co-opted by the democrats and that we should do something about it.

These are two very important issues. I don't just bring them up to waste time.


Americans are not more apathetic than people of other nations. Some of the biggest fights for human rights were fought on American soil. I'm thinking of Women's Liberation, the fight for equality of races, the LGTB movement, etc...

True, Americans generally lean more towards the right than most Canadians and Québecers generally lean more towards the left than both anglophone Canadians and Americans, but the reason the people in Montréal are protesting so harshly is mostly due to a series circumstances. It's like love, often timing and circumstances are more important than the raw chemistry between two people.

OWS started on Sept 17. By the time it got big, it was almost winter. Winter basically killed OWS. It's almost impossible for any protest to survive such a turning down of energy. During the winter months, people started thinking and started other projects.

Contrastingly, the Montréal protest started in the spring. If you've been to Canada, you know that people love to be outside during spring time because they've spent all winter inside. It was easy to get many people in the street because of this. Furthermore, the energy of the protest was able to keep growing like a crescendo because winter is nowhere in sight.

The other important factor is the political parties in power. In US, you have Obama who is a democrat and the most leftward President you could hope to have at this time. There won't be a President from the Green Party anytime soon. This is the reason so many want to co-opt OWS and work with the democrats. Had OWS started during the height of Bush hatred, it would have add more fuel.

In Canada, it's the complete opposite. On the federal level, Stephen Harper is the rightest Prime Minister we've ever had, and on the provincial level the Liberal Party of Québec is pretty much Québec's center/right party. Also, a lot of Québecers have a renewed interest in separation nowadays because of Harper's government. Many are protesting in the hope that the Liberal Party will fall and be replaced by one of the parties which prone's the sovereignty of Québec.

It's also important to note how the protest evolved. It started being about the tuition increase. The government went to the table twice with the student leaders, but both times it proposed a "tricked" offering. They were basically changing nothing except the way things were being calculated. This infuriated the students giving more energy to the protest. Then, the government wanting to stop the protests during the summer months when there are so many festivals in Montréal, passed Bill 78 in order to limit the protesting. This infuriated the students even more and this is when the protest became a generalized protest (not just about tuition fees). You'll note that OWS did not join in solidarity until this Bill was passed. In other words, OWS did not care about the fight against the raising of tuition fees as much as the fight against Bill 78 which is essentially a fight against the police.

Finally, I think the main reason the protest is doing so well is because the protesters see the light at the end of the tunnel. They see that their protest could change something. They have a clear immediate goal, something OWS does not have. They can win by stopping the increase in tuition, they can win big by making education free (very unlikely), and they can also win by making the Prime Minster step down to call new elections. All those things would signify a win for the protesters, and all those things could happen very soon.

With OWS it's completely different. The protest is going in a zillion direction and doesn't have clear immediate goals. It wants to change America from A to Z with direct democracy on each street corner. People don't have the energy to protest for 20 years. They want to fight for something they can smell right now. It was about Wall Street, then something else, this summer it's mostly about queers. We're wondering when animal rights are going to be part of the protest.

The fact of the matter is that OWS is no longer important. It served it's purpose in getting the idea to protest out to millions. What matters now are streamlined protests with clear and precise goals. That's why the Montréal protest picked up. OWS will never pick up again. What you can hope for are other protests coming up for whatever particular issue that is important in America. Streamlined protests, not umbrellas for everything.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Thrasymaque,

Thanks for getting back to me with all of that. It's good analysis and I'll have to think it over. Having lived in both Canada and the U.S. I'll say that I think it is more than the weather that makes the protests in Montreal/OWS different. I think the very ethos of the people is different. For instance, Quebecers are willing to protest out in the streets, (okay, they're happy to come out of the metro and underground tunnels, yes), but they're willing to protest tuition which is already pretty low, embarrassingly low when compared to U.S. tuition, and Americans do nothing about it. They expect more from their government and view the government as a protector not as an evil the way it is viewed in the U.S. Americans feel shameful about asking for health care and higher wages or anything for that matter. They believe in "each man for himself." There is less of sense of a community working together.

Anyway, I'll think some more about what you say. I disagree that OWS is no longer important. I think it has changed. I think it has started a dialog in the U.S. that has never existed before and I think the things that OWS is looking to change will take a very long time.

I also do think Americans are far more apathetic than other countries. This can be demonstrated by voter turnout which is very low here. Hubris leads to apathy because if you think you're the best then you've got nothing that needs fixing. That is a big problem.

Finally, with regard to conspiracy theories, I'll say that it is just as a big a problem as Americans thinking they will one day be wealthy and identifying with wealthy people and defending the interests of the wealthy. It all stems from the same crazy place.

[-] 1 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

Don't forget the protest in Montréal is a student protest. There are others who are protesting now, but the bulk of protesters are students. Students can easily find the time to march. OWS is an economic protest and those who profit the most from such a protest are the poor. They do not have time to march. They must make money! If the situation in US gets a lot worse, then you'll see a lot more people in the streets.

Another important factor is the fact that Québecers are a minority group. They feel cheated by because Harper is the Prime Minster of Canada. Most Québecers voted for the NDP in an attempt to dislodge the Harper majority, and they did this at the cost of losing their preferred party the Bloc Québecois. They feel cheated, and the Liberal Party of Jean Charest represents this Harper style of government for them. Minority groups always protest more than other groups. They are the underdogs. In America, those who protested big are also minority groups, i.e. the LGTB community, African Americans, etc...

Finally, with regard to conspiracy theories, I'll say that it is just as a big a problem as Americans thinking they will one day be wealthy and identifying with wealthy people and defending the interests of the wealthy. It all stems from the same crazy place.

It's the same problem, i.e. lose of reality. Conspiracy theories are dangerous because they make people lose touch with what is important and real. America is being killed by these conspiracy theories, and it's worse than ever now with social mediums like Facebook, Twitter, etc... People are willing to believe what their friends post even if it's unfounded and untrue, than they are willing to believe what is posted in the New-York Times. The vast majority of solutions on this website are based on ideas stemming from conspiracy theories. This is why OWS is not doing so well. For example, many in OWS believe in the Venus project and resource based economy. How can you expect a protest to be taken seriously when many of the ideas proposed are unrealistic.

How many Americans believe there are cures for cancer, but that they are hidden from us by big pharma? How many Americans still believe 911 was an inside job? How many Americans still believe we can solve the economic problem by getting ride of money altogether? These non-sensical ideas confuse everyone and make finding real solutions a lot harder. In the end, they have Americans standing still, powerless to affect any real change. Imagine if all those Americans were attacking the real problems instead of getting stuck with nonsense. You really can't build a better society unless you use proper research and science. Myths are not the way to the future. Americans have lost all logical thinking.

As an example, I just read a piece this morning about the leaked documents showing that Obama is preparing some new laws in regards to trading policies with asian pacific countries. Many American readers believe it's a hoax. They say it came out just before the elections and is meant to tarnish Obama. They say it came from the republicans. They say that the American government is all powerful and can hide anything it wants, i.e. it hide all proof that it was responsible for the 911 attacks. So, how can this government make a stupid mistake and let leak some documents about these trades when, for 11 years, it was able to hide its participation in 911. This idea is then circulated on Facebook and Twitter, and will most likely be talked about by the Obama apologists on this site. Do you see the problem? Everything is being confused because people do not take the time to do proper research.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

"The vast majority of solutions on this website are based on ideas stemming from conspiracy theories." Oh stop! Okay, conspiracy theories are bad, just as bad as poor Americans identifying with the wealthy, but come on, that is just not true. LOL!

And, if it is true that minority groups are those who normally protest, and I wouldn't disagree, where are the unemployed? Why aren't they out in the streets? They're not busy with work and there's millions of them. This has more to do with the shameful finger pointing of the ethos of the "rugged individual" if you ask me. More to do with "If you're poor or unemployed, blame yourself." A lot of Americans buy into that and feel true shame when they fail materially.

[-] -3 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

Why do many Americans value their lives in material terms?

OWS itself is based around wealth.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Not looking to "be wealthy," but to have the wealth shared in a manner that is fair.

[-] -2 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

The idea of the 99% vs the 1% is a false problematic. It's a metaphor that confuses. It makes people angry at the rich, when the problem is not the rich. The problem is bad laws and some people using those loopholes to engage in corruption.

The only way to eliminate the rich is to have perfect wealth equality, which is essentially a perfect communism. Otherwise, you'll always have the 99% vs the 1%.

Wealth inequality is a false problematic. What's important is that everyone has enough to live decently and prosper, not that everyone has the same amount of money. The proof is that everyone is equally poor in some countries. In those places, wealth inequality does not really exist, but most people have a hard time finding something to eat.

Money is not static, it can be generated by harvesting resources. You don't need to take money from the rich to make the poor richer.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

I don't see the 99% vs. the 1% as a false problematic. From Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneywisewomen/2012/03/21/average-america-vs-the-one-percent/ "Altogether, the top 1 percent control 43 percent of the wealth in the nation; the next 4 percent control an additional 29 percent."

That needs fixing.

I agree everyone doesn't need to be equal, but that kind of wealth disparity is not fair when people are suffering. Everyone needs to have enough when there is clearly enough to go around.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Besides a more even distribution means a healthier economy - for all.

Hey - BW.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Exactly. And, from those stats it kind of looks like the 95% vs. the 5%, not that I want to go there. LOL.

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

LOL - no there are enough individuals with apparent problems with what we are already discussing.

[-] -1 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

The problems are the laws of capitalism which permit this, and not the people in the 1% who became rich under those laws. Some on this site, like renneye, have called for a list of names of the 1%. This is dangerous and useless.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Hmmm. I agree that not all rich people are bad. Gosh, of course not. But, your defense against naming the people responsible for the GFC, such as Renneye has called for, makes me wonder. Is this why you dislike Renneye so much? It’s not because of conspiracy theories, but because she seeks to out the criminals who have wrecked our economy?

Why do you worry so much about those names? Are you one of those people or do you work for one of them? Or, do you work for folks like them? Why do you defend the wealthy when there are millions of people suffering in this country because of their actions? Do you understand that, in the end, the laws that are so screwed up that you talk about were put in place by people who have bought our government, control our legislators and make sure only legislation that benefits them is put in place?

[-] -2 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

I don't like the idea of making hit lists without proof. We live in a modern society, not in one where we go around like a mob and identify those who we think are doing criminal activities and put them on a wanted poster. It's amoral to act that way. And, it's not a way towards a better world.

That's the problem with the idea of the 99% vs the 1%. It casts people under a bad light just because they are rich. It doesn't care about what they do or did. We should care about people doing corruption, not people being rich.

If someone has proof that some person did something illegal, then we bring that person to court. The court systems decides if the person is guilty. We don't plaster people on wanted posters just because they are rich.


Renneye is a complete nut job and she needs help. I hope she gets it one day.

[-] 4 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

So you continue to advocate on behalf of the 1%. We want a country that benefits the 99% not just the 1%. Members of that group have stolen our money, and destroyed the value of our homes! They need to be punished by repaying that lost money/value! They have rigged the laws and therefore courts to make their actions appear legal. We know better. You speak up against your own class. They ARE warring against the 99% We can non longer pretend they ain't. It is amoral to support the criminals among the 1% It is a betrayal of your own class, and treasonous against this great nation.

[-] -3 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

I don't advocate on behalf of the 1% you idiot. I don't think that 3,000,000 people (the so called 1%) are guilty of corruption and should be jailed just because Mr. David Graeber decided to call them the 1%.

I'm advocating for proper justice. You don't put people on wanted posters if you have no proof against them.

I don't believe in creating a society based on guilt by association.

[-] 4 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Maybe they are "wanted" for questioning. I think it's probably pretty easy to identify the 1% criminals. Start with the wealthy who worked in the bank/insur/hedge fund/mortgage/stock brokers/ratings agencies/pols who enriched themselves while voting for right wing policies that hurt the 99%. Whats so hard about that.? I think the evidence is fairly obvious. take their F%$kin' money and give to the working Americans whose house value was destroyed by the 1% crimes.

[-] 0 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

You had to show when and where they did something illegal. Being rich is not illegal.

[-] 4 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I didn't say being rich is illegal. You twist the issue because your still offering a defense for the criminals. Poor people didn't create our problems! It was wealthy criminals. Lets round 'em up. It's easy to see who profited from the crimes against the 99%. Don't be timid. If they're innocent we will see that. The truth will set them free. "She's a wich! Burn her!"

[-] -2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 11 years ago

can we suspense the right/left and specify the issue ?

[-] 5 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I wish we could suspenD the right/left reality that has ruled human interaction for all of history. I can't pretend it doesn't exist. I won't say it was left wing policies that have created this "great recession". It wasn't! Left wing policies will resolve this mess that was created by passing right wing policies (voted for by dems who betrayed their left wing principles, and repubs who proudly trumpet right wing principles). What is wrong with honestly illustrating the problem?. We must recognize the problem if we are to resolve it.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

So why isn't our government prosecuting any of these people? Whey aren't the bad laws being corrected? For instance, why isn't Glass-Steagall being reinstated? The reason for the focus on the wealthy is because they've been the beneficiaries, as well as the cause, of many of these laws that have rendered out economic system unsuitable for the majority of Americans.

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

You want to build a new world based on guilt by association? We don't need evidence anymore? If a person is in the 1%, and there are roughly 3,000,000 or those people, then that person is guilty.

I say we go against those that do corruption. That includes people in the 1%, and people lower than that in the upper-middle-class all the way down. We live in a capitalist society that allows one to get rich. If a person got rich by legitimate means, I don't think we should hang him or put him on a wanted poster.


So why isn't our government prosecuting any of these people? Whey aren't the bad laws being corrected?

You're joking right? Because the government is corrupted to the core!

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Exactly my point. The government has been corrupted, by who, my friend? So, what are we to do? Stick our heads in the sand and let it continue? You criticize Renneye for trying to do what the government should be doing, but won't do.

No one is saying to hang anyone without evidence, of course not, but how can we even begin to get the evidence if no one begins digging?

[-] -3 points by shadzhairart (-357) 11 years ago

I guess you're right. We should do a list of everyone in the 1%, put them on a wanted poster, then seek for revenge. If they made that much money, they are automatically guilty. We shouldn't even have trials. Just put them in jail directly.

I know one guy who wanted to figure out exactly what happened and who the guilty ones were. That way he could punish the people who deserved to be punished and understand the loopholes in the law that permitted the problems in the first place. But, man, that's such a waste of time.

You're an American woman, so you're obviously right. Hang them all. All the 1%. No trial. Go now. With Renneye.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Who's the guy who wanted to figure out exactly what happened and who the guilty ones were? Huh? Who's that? What's the big secret? And, why hasn't anything happened? Because the same people who created the crisis are still running things. That's why.

You put an awful lot of words in my mouth, and Renneye's. LOL. Ridiculous!

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 11 years ago

I have a better idea, how about we simply restore Glass Steagall, how about we support legal organizations working to remedy the harm caused by Citizens United, how about we support those who support rational public policy (like a well designed stimulus to rebuild our decaying infrastructure, invest in education, alternative energy, scientific research, etc.), how about we support initiatives calculated to enhance citizen participation in our democracy, and how about we stop blaming the victim for their unfortunate circumstances (and stop buying into the economic mythology ponied by the right)?

I mean, the 1% (metaphorically speaking) declared war on the 99%, not the other way around. Sure, it may be a somewhat reactionary slogan, but it hit a nerve, it was effective, and people aren't as stupid as you apparently think they are (they understand that all wealthy people aren't evil, they understand the 99% slogan is a metaphorical dichotomy, not a literal declaration of war on anyone).

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Not all 1%'rs are guilty. There are many "millionares for the 99%". We only want to punish those that stole our money and destroyed the value of our homes. The gov doesn't prosecute because they have been bought off to pass laws that make the crimes of the 1% appear legal. Because they are bought off by the 1% to look tehe other way. Throw the bums out. Pressure all pols to repeal 1% right wing laws!

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

LOL! And, the working class used to be revered, considered the backbone of the nation. Look at art from the early part of the 20th century, much of it depicts "the worker." Today, if you're not an entrepreneurial millionaire you're nothing. What happened?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 11 years ago

Frankly - all sorts of shit "happened", mostly kept from you & I by The Wholly Corporate Owned MSM & obsequious sycophants posing as 'commentators and journalists'. Further, in keeping wth WT's post :

fiat justitia ...

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Thanks. Good links. :)

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 11 years ago

One more for your consideration :

  • "When the Rich Have 85 Percent of US Wealth, ‘Equality of Opportunity’ Can’t Exist - Democrats Are Not Progressives", by 'The Young Turks with Cenk Uygur & Economist and Nobel Prize winner Dr. Joseph Stiglitz --- “The United States is not only the country with the most inequality in outcomes, it’s the country with the least equality of opportunity,” Stiglitz says. “A kid’s life prospects are more dependent on the education and income of his parents than in any other advanced industrial countries.” : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31615.htm .

fiat lux ...

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

This is a good post, Wat. I think this is the kind of stuff we should be talking about. Why are Americans asleep? We can't begin to wake them up if we don't know why they are sleeping.

Identifying with the rich, either because of admiration or because they think they, themselves, will one day be rich, causes ill decision making, hence the "voting against themselves," lack of protest and general apathy about the state of the country. If these same Americans faced the real facts about their finances and their chances of becoming wealthy this might change.

And, just a minor question. Why do Americans admire the wealthy to the degree that they do in the first place? Why is being rich the end all be all?

[-] 2 points by WatTyler (263) 11 years ago
[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23769) 11 years ago

Nice! And, better late than never. These are the really important questions that get to the root of our problems.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

What is truly funny - these wannabe's(?) - their chances of becoming Rich would be better with a reformed/enforced system - unless of course they want to do a criminal routine - in that case they had better remember the Madoff makeover and understand that they are not in the "Powers That Be Club" and likely never will be - their chances of being an insider are worse than being a lottery multimillion winner.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 11 years ago

Bill Moyers : "How Big Banks Victimize Our Democracy" :

Moyers, Matt Taibbi and Yves Smith discuss the folly and corruption of both banks and government. Also, Peter Edelman on fighting U.S. poverty.

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon’s appearances in the last two weeks before Congressional committees — many members of which received campaign contributions from the megabank — beg the question : For how long and how many ways are average Americans going to pay the price for big bank hubris, with our own government acting as accomplice ?

Rolling Stone editor Matt Taibbi and Yves Smith, creator of the finance and economics blog "Naked Capitalism", join Bill to discuss the folly and corruption of both banks and government, and how that tag-team leaves deep wounds in our democracy. Taibbi’s latest piece is “The Scam Wall Street Learned from the Mafia.” Smith is the author of "ECONned : How Unenlightened Self Interest Undermined Democracy and Corrupted Capitalism."

Meanwhile, for anyone who wants to understand why, in one of the richest nations in the world, so many poor people are teetering on the edge, author and advocate Peter Edelman talks about continuing efforts to fight poverty, and what it will take to keep the needs of poor people on the American political agenda. A former aide to Robert F. Kennedy and faculty director of Georgetown University’s Center on Poverty, Inequality, and Public Policy, Edelman’s new book is "So Rich, So Poor : Why It’s So Hard to End Poverty in America".

fiat lux et fiat justitia ...

[-] 1 points by doitagain (234) from Brooklyn, NY 11 years ago
[-] 1 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 11 years ago

People prefer false hope over reality.Hope a dope and all that.Buy the lotto.Dance with the stars..Most evan belive that employers are looking out for there best intrest.The list is endless.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Good post.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Don't know if you have seen this already but you should like it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ7LzE3u7Bw&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 11 years ago

We are all rich when you compare us to the bottom 3 billion people on the planet.

[-] -2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Liberals cry about income inequality, but then support mass immigration of drop-outs and unskilled people. Is it a mental disorder that prevents understanding cause and affect relationships, especially when brown people are involved?

Cries about inequality: right on schedule after 20 years of mass immigration of drop-outs. Turns out, feeling (because thinking isn't the right word) that domestic drop-outs are a problem, but imported drop-outs are consequence free (in fact, a positive) is pretty fucked up. Who knew?

[-] 5 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 11 years ago

Yeah conservatives whine about income redistribution then support Free Tade which is the biggest income redistribution scheme in history.

How much of our income and jobs have we given the Communist Chinese because of Faux Trade?

Fucking hypocrites.

You assholes claim you respect Freedom? Lets see how much of our sovereign authority we give away with this new Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement..... where foreign governments will be able to nullify our laws concerning the environment, and health&safety if they are determined to be obstructions to trade.

How much more of this country are you willing to sell out?

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

So, you're against free trade, but for mass immigration of drop-outs. Heh, if it makes sense to you, I guess that's all that matters.

[-] 5 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 11 years ago

America was built on the mass immigration of 'drop outs', social misfits, religious radicals, and other's of similar ilk. The state of Georgia was originally a prison colony.

Maybe you have forgotten the words on the Statue of Liberty, our symbol of Freedom to the World:

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Free Trade on the other hand just sells our country out to the highest bidder. It makes countries that bear us no good will like the Communist Chinese wealthy... it gives them our jobs, destroys our middle classs, and lowers the standard of living for all of us, except the very rich.

Which is more American?

[-] 4 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 11 years ago

Statue of Liberty line was great....

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 11 years ago

You've hit the nail on the head about "free trade". It's at the core of our jobs problem. Free trade stacks the cards against the US and our government embraces it because corporations 'buy' politicians votes.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Smarten up, Geo. Times change. Go figure, right? Who knew? You might not have noticed, but having an 8th grade education in 1990 was about normal, now it's a social problem. Let's play analogy. An 8th grade educated immigrant today compared to the rest of the country today is like what compared to the country in 1990? I'd go with retarded person and that we'd turn right the fuck around and stamp return to sender right there on Ellis Island in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty. Back then, we gave a shit about and looked after our national interest.

The Statue of Liberty isn't about national suicide. But have it your way. Let's continue to fire hose the country with drop-outs that'll remain hopelessly low income. But then how about a dose of SHUT THE FUCK UP and don't complain about OBVIOUS consequence like poverty and income skew.

If that's not convincing, let others help. Say this is front of someone and watch the look you get back: "The country's future is threatened because we have too FEW poor uneducated people." LOL.

[-] 4 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 11 years ago

Ok, lets take another tact... in 1986 Ronald Raygunz gave amnesty to 3 million illegal aliens. See in 1986 illegals weren't are real problem. So what changed?

Since NAFTA was signed into law, illegal immigration in the U.S. has increased to 12 million today from 3 million in Uncle Ronnys day. And there are quite a few reasons for this. One was the influx of very cheap corn grown by US aggro-corps. It undercut the the selling price of Mexican subsistence farmers by half. That put the Mexican farmers who were already poor out of business and out of a farm. Where were they going to go? It dosen't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Same thing happened with other products. An overall increase in illegal immigrant migration of 300% since NAFTA. Building walls won't stop the flow, neither will gun towers or the army posted on the border.

It's an economic problem that can only be solved economically. Want to end immigration by the unclean masses you despise? Repeal NAFTA.

Time you educate yourself in US history, economics and civics.... and shut the fuck up about how uneducated others are who are less fortunate than you.

The Statue of Liberty has no time limit on it. Bigots should remember that. Keep supporting conservative economic policies that shoot you in the foot.... hows that working out for ya?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Never forget the blood bath south of the border due to the drug war.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 11 years ago

It's one of the few ways in which poor people of little resources and education can make money. Again, who creates the demand for these drugs? We do.

It's an economics problem. Allow people across the border to make money in the traditional ways they did before NAFTA and a lot of the violence will go away. Take away the demand and all of it will go away. Legalizing cannabis goes a long ways to removing some of that demand.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Prohibition has never worked but to create criminal activity.

[-] -2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

He shouldn't have done that. It just set the stage for an even bigger problem now. Ted Kennedy also fucked us on the immigration front back in the 60's. It was the explosion of multi-culturalism and led to an important and damaging change. Immigration today is dominated by illegal immigration (mostly drop-outs) and chain immigration (about 2/3rds of all immigration). Chain immigration is simply being here dragging relatives behind them in succession.

The problem with chain immigration and illegal peasants is that they aren't in the national interest. We let immigrants decide who comes here and not our national interest like we used to. Even Canada isn't this stupid. Immigration should serve the national interest, now it doesn't. Thanks Ted!

Enforcement absolutely will stop the flow. Arizona's law along drove over 100k out of the state and the law isn't even in effect. The "it won't work" argument is just a self-serving bit of nonsense from the illegal apologists that are afraid we'll try. It's right up there with other stock arguments like "we're only hurting ourselves" and "you can't deport us all", as if the benefits would only come at the end.

Maybe everyone you know didn't get through 8th grade so that seems normal to you. But the national picture on education has changed tremendously in the last 100 years. New arrivals that made it through the 6th grade are massively behind the rest of the country (outside your circles). 6th grade educated people in 1900 weren't. Just a little history, dumbass. That has consequences.

Liberals can somehow grasp that having a dropout enter society from Chicago is bad, but then bizarrely celebrate dropouts that enter our society from Mexico. Excellent reasoning skills, champ.

And a little more history for you is that we used to look after our national interest pretty severely right under that Statue of Liberty you try to throw in my face. Smarten up about your history and you'll learn that the people running Ellis Island in 1900 wouldn't stand for how we handle it now. They knew better. Yes, let's preserve how they did things. You're right. Ted Kennedy put an expiration date on it; that was wrong.

[-] 3 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 11 years ago

All that writing and not a word about NAFTA's role? My..my ...my.

Lets deport all babies in the US...thats right all of them... its in our best national interest.... after all none of them have 8th grade educations yet.... we only want college educated babies being born in the US...babies are just a drain on our resources....doesn't matter if they have potential or the ability to learn.....new arrivals in this country must meet educational standards.....that about sums up your argument. You could have saved yourself a lot of typing and ranting. Don't you realize how stupid you sound for someone who claims to be educated?

[-] -1 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Your challenge is to use reasoning and to move away from simple emotionally driven nonsense.

It's no rant; it's simple and straightforward. A 6th grade educated immigrant today averages down the country. That wasn't true in 1900. We have no shortage of unskilled people, in fact, we have a large surplus. You can see it in wages and the unemployment rate. No-skill people earn little, so having done well in 5th grade math, I know that if you do a lot of that (and we have), you'll create noticeable problems with income skew and people in poverty.

NAFTA may have played a role in the immigration spike from Mexico. But that's complex. Mexico also had a baby boom such that by the mid-80s, around half the country was under 15 years old. When those people got old enough to become mobile, they did just that NAFTA or no-NAFTA. It also has its own internal governance problems, for example.

Wanna go back to how we did things with the Statue of Liberty in 1990? That would be wonderful. We had immigration that didn't average down the country's educational attainment and we very much considered OUR national interest and not simply that Abu wants to move the rest of his village in behind him. 2/3rds of immigration today is decided by the immigrant in chain immigration, not us and OUR national interest. Before Ted Kennedy, we knew better than to do something so destructive.

Really, smarten up. And like I said, if you want mass immigration of unskilled people, you only embarrass yourself to then turn around and bitch about income skew and poverty. At least accept it as an obvious consequence.

[-] 4 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

"brown"? what does color have to with it. I wish you would leave the racism out of the discussion.

[-] 0 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Nothing, that's the point. But bring up ending mass immigration of no-skill people because the country simply doesn't need any more drop-outs on its hands and "racist" is the first thing liberals screech.

[-] 4 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

You did say "brown". What does that matter. low skill is not color related is it? And we have absorbed lots of low skilled workers. from italy, ireland, eastern europe, everywhere. We can manage don't worry. Just get corps to stop squeezing every worker for every drop of profit. Why should a ceo get 500 times more than a worker. thats obscene. Thats why workers are paid nothing. And y'know we have trained many generations of immigrants. can't we do that still. Or is that not acceptable because you don't like their color.

[-] 2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

It doesn't matter, but to liberals it does. They're the ones that whip out the "racist" smear because, to them, the only reason possible for being against an open border is racism.

We absorbed a lot of basic labor, sure, ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO. Here's something that might have escaped your notice. One hundred years ago, coming here with an 8th grade education was about on par with the rest of the country. Now when people come here with an 8th grade education, it's a disaster because a normal educational level is one year post-high school. Sure, encourage something that moves the national average up and then encourage something that moves it right back down. Makes sense to liberals, I guess.

It's just funny how liberals look at it. Obama himself has set a national goal of reaching a certain percentage of the workforce with a college education. Why? Because education underpins our standard of living. But then he goes to El Paso, a place where a high school graduate hasn't crossed in probably 20 years, to mock those in favor of border enforcement.

Liberals kinda get it that high school graduates are a social problem and doomed to poverty. But then pivot and talk about imported drop-outs and they're giddy for more. So, it raises an interesting idea. Let's have would-be drop-outs in Chicago board planes for Mexico. They can drop out there, enter the US and then liberals will think the country is better off. A problem turns into a solution. LOL.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

You clearly are anti liberal I get it. And I agree liberals support immigration. I think they recognize it has always been part of the reason we have such innovation and growth. Obviously immigrants these days (from many places) frequently are not as educated as Americans. But there are many jobs that do not require a college education. Many of the construction trades can provide a living for this group. In addition the 8th grade educated immigrants of the past like today could start there own businesses. Push carts, house painting, restaraunt, many others I can't list. Finally here's the kicker. Liberals I think would push for education of these low skill workers. But I guess you wouldn't support that huh?

[-] 2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Lemme check the next 6th grade drop out I run into and ask them about their latest "innovations". LOL

Really, now the country has a shortage of drop-outs? LOL. Unemployment hockey-sticks as you move down in education. We need engineers and designers, not toilet cleaners. What economy do you think you live in?

Sure, liberals would. More taxes, more spending, more more more. They love having problems to resolve even if we have to create more of them on purpose for us to then fix. The sad thing too about what we're doing is how long we fuck ourselves with this. One of the leading markers for graduation is the graduation status of parents. These imported drop-outs disproportionately create children and grandchildren drop-outs. It's the fucking that just keep fucking.

Fine, cheer mass immigration of drop-outs. But at least then don't embarrass yourself by bedwetting over poverty and income skew and don't say foolish things like how this doesn't make the situation worse for no-skill Americans that get buried amid the over-supply.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Sounds like education for all would solve your problem. Well the low skill immigrant problem anyway. Your problem "of angry, selfish, I got mine you can't have anything 'cause your not good enough syndrome" is another thing entirely. therapy night be a good start.

[-] 1 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Education does help. But swamped boats are hard to bail. Liberals claim to want to resolve social problems, but then are hell bent on making them worse.

Like I wrote, fine, cheer it on, but then have the brains to know that what you favor makes what you bitch about worse. That's the difference between having a difference of opinion, to you simply being stupid.

I do have mine. But this is a discussion about those without. Loons think we can "living wage" ourselves to higher incomes for low-income people. I pointed out how foolish that is because wages are low due to a massive over-supply of people without skills. Wages will rise when the supply problem is resolved. We have two ways to reduce the supply: 1) education; 2) immigration. The two even feed each other. The more you refuse to deal with 2, the more overwhelmed the schools become making dealing with 1 more problematic.

But make your choice: Take credit for meaning well and fail or support actually accomplishing something and lessening poverty in our country.

You accuse me of being selfish. Just more liberal emotion standing in for thought and reason. I live in a very well off area, not directly affected by the slums we're importing. These workers come and go into my neighborhood to serve, but then leave. My area is tidy and perfect with the problems somewhere else. My kids go to great schools, unlike other Americans that can't afford to opt out of the problems we're creating.

I want low-wage jobs to pay better. I can easily afford it if they do and don't in the least want this servant class economy we're importing to continue. You're the one that supports that.

I see the damage. Friends I grew up with haven't been as successful and haven't been able to escape. Their kids now go to shit schools overwhelmed in ESL and parents that have NO experience with schools. I also saw a black guy in my neighborhood bid a friend $10 to cut his lawn. Why? Because the market is so swamped by illegals that $10 is market. Nice, huh? So, fuck you about being selfish and fuck you thinking you know what compassion is. Open your eyes to the people your ideas are hurting. Compassion isn't just another word for ignorance you know.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Your hostility, vulgar insults and offensive tone peg you for what you are. You got yours and don't care about others. You blame the oversupple of workers for low wages. That is just more suburban "blame the victim" mentality. I KNOW the low wage problem is because of greedy 1% corps who squeeze all workers in order to pay ceos 500 times more than average workers (that is unprecedented in history) to pay out huge executive golden parachutes regardless of performance and giving dividents to shareholders. It is obscene and it is at the root of our problems. Bring the jobs back!. Penalize offshoring. Reward onshoring

[-] 0 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

More emotion and, again, little thinking.

Take your first class in economics at a community college and you won't be so ignorant. They'll teach you neato stuff about supply and demand. Then perhaps you'll get it. Swamp the market for no-skill people (we have) and wages for no-skill work will fall. Reverse the process and they'll rise. Honest, it isn't that complicated.

[-] 1 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 11 years ago

Last time I checked, China employs about 99 million manufacturing workers. That doesn't include various other low wage nations that have been targeted for offshoring. This is where the "surplus" in labor is. It is far more significant than immigration.

[-] 2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

There is a global surplus of no-skill labor globally. But the surplus in no-skill people in the United States is being fueled by immigration. That glut is batting down wages in restaurants, for delivery services, for janitors, etc. right here. Valet parking is free (tips only) where I live because of the border.

Here's a sad story about ignorance. SEIU had a janitor strike outside my building. So, I went down a talked with a few of them. They too are full of contradictions and ignorance. One was mad because the building owner pays more in Chicago than here in Houston. Hmm, wages higher as you move away from the border? No way! I asked her for thoughts about why the owner would do that. She had no answer. I asked an organizer if he thought wages were low because there are simply too many unskilled people in the workforce. Of course not. It's greed, he said. Scary thing is that he claimed to have an economics major. He should get a refund. The chance of the union having any success is ZERO because of the labor glut due to the border.

Here's what would happen if they tripled wages for janitors: we'd reduce janitor hours. My building is awash in janitors because they're so cheap, no one really bothers much being careful about the hours. That would change if the price went up.

The sad part is that a lot of people in this country sit in ultra-low wage jobs like janitors in Houston. The union and the ignorant get credit for compassion, but accomplish nothing. Dry up the supply and it'll get better. But dealing in reality just gets one criticized.

[-] 2 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 11 years ago

Here's what your'e missing. Skilled, unskilled, highly skilled, no skilled- if they're working in the US they are spending in the US. More spending in the US economy creates more jobs. When jobs are outsourced, the spending by the workers, who have been paid indirectly by US dollars do not purchase goods and services (to speak of) in the US.

[-] 3 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

I don't disagree. I'm careful about origin on the things I buy. I don't import water either (which is especially crazy). I won't buy junk just because it's made here (read something made by the UAW).

But the point remains that importing drop-outs is bad for the country. Wanna stoke income skew and poverty? Keep going with an open border. Want an open border? Then don't embarrass yourself complaining about the consequences. The people you're complaining to might just understand that those consequences are OBVIOUS.

Startle a liberal friend the next time they bemoan low wages for no-skill people. Suggest creating shortages of no-skill labor. Tell them how you bet that if the line didn't run around the block for those jobs, that wages would be a bit higher. Then tell them how you're aware that the border is a big source of why those lines are so long. So, you bet that if you control immigration, you'll improve wages.

[-] -1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 11 years ago

exactly

which is why a suggest taxing the rich

and government jobs in healthcare, transportation, housing and energy

[-] -1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 11 years ago

almost all jobs are non-skilled labor

[-] -1 points by salta (-1104) 11 years ago

doctor, dentist, electrician, plumber, pilot, the person that cuts your hair, lab tech, computer tech, research scientist, nurse, tiler, lawyer, CPA, dry waller, mason, auto mechanic,carpenter, teacher,long haul truck driver ( you have to learn how to handle an 18 wheeler) ,optometrist, pharmacist etc.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

The problem is that we have allowed the 1% corps to move our jobs overseas. Penalize offshoring of jobs/assets/hq's, and reward onshoring. Tell any company who wants to sell to this greatest of middle class markets that they MUST manufacture here. If they refuse. Ban their sorry asses. They can sell to Belize, and Luxemburg. See how quick they get in line. Stop treating these 1% corp criminals like they are in charge. Think of it like institutionalized boycotts. Boycotts are very effective. Corps do listen when the sales go down. Hit 'em where it hurts. in the wallet. I got ya' supply and demand right 'ere.! Grow a pair. It's our world (99%) they are just a squirrel tryin' to get a nut.!

[-] 1 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

That's a weak argument for being in favor of mass immigration of drop-outs.

Really, take the community college class in economics. Two nights a week for 10 weeks and you'd be able to understand this stuff.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Childish insults betray your weak arguments.

[-] 1 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Child-like arguments reveal your need for something more than a GED.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

"imagine there's no country" Lennon. I bet you can't wait until we live in a world with one government. no borders. all free. Y'know the southwest has been populated by the peoples from mexico for centuries before the united states was formed. Don't be afraid. the fear you feel is called xenophobia. I think there pills for that.

[-] 0 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Now I'm a xenophobe because you're too ignorant of first semester topics in supply and demand? Just more of that "logic" you were touting? LOL. Don't be afraid to learn something. Just one class would do you a lot of good. One class; you can even go pass/fail if it takes the pressure off.

Keep wishing for higher wages while you support fire hosing the market with more supply. Maybe click your heels three times while you do it. Heh, you mean well, even if you are too stupid to know it doesn't work. And for liberals, that's all that counts.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

We can't just take college graduates because that would discriminatory. All people are welcome. "tired, poor, wretched refuse" y'know. And uneducated people are more expensive because they are more likely to require welfare, medicaid, and criminal prosecution/incarceration. they also contribute less in income tax to the general revenue. So lets take everyone we can, educate those who need it. And dismiss the selfish scared racists that this country is for the whole planet. All people deserve the fruits of this great nation.

[-] 0 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Huh, we can't because it's discriminatory? Who says? Sure we can. We can do anything we want. We're a sovereign nation with a right to an immigration policy. If we want to stop being run over, we simply change policy to something that better suits our national interest. Just like we did before in those "Statue of Liberty" days.

Of course, there you go with the racist stupidity. The reason challenged crowd always has to lob that one in there somewhere. Sure, and it's also because I'm just scared. Do you have any capacity for reason? Any? And you want to talk about logic. Good luck with that. You're not capable.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Please! your insults are meaningless. They simply betray your inability to argue logically. I understand just fine. immigrants come when there is work. Last year we had negative immigration from the "open" southern border. All people, immigrants or otherwise need education. Education benefits the entire country not just the inividual (no matter their color or where they were born)! Your arguments are ridiculous. You just don't want to educate people. Too expensive? Well uneducated ones are more expensive. So just educate them.

[-] 2 points by Growup5 (-84) 11 years ago

Argue logically? How many times do you need to hear it.

Interesting, please explain to me why uneducated people are expensive. LOL. You're right, but let's see if you can figure it out. Must be another reason to support mass immigration of drop-outs. LOL.

Here's a shocker for you. Someone immigrates with a college degree and skills as an architect. Someone else moves here that stopped school after 5th grade. They both need "education", so that means they're the same, right? LOL. You talk about logic, but then don't really do so well when you try.

[-] -1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 11 years ago

a system works better when people understand their contribution

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 11 years ago

The vast majority of immigrants who came to this country in years gone by were skilled. Todays immigrants have no skills along with the vast majority of people in this country. BTW - this country was built on skilled labour.

How many people do you know who can install a new shower, repair a faucet, fix a water heater, tile a floor, hang sheetrock, install siding, fix an electrical problem (not a computer), change a flat tire, change brakes on their car - I could go on, but I think you get the message.

And don't go saying that you can't work on new cars because there are certain things that an individual can do and save a $400.00 service cost.

This also applies to the above mentioned.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

All the construction skills you listed I know brown people can do. And can learn! I would submit that the same is true for cars and even computers. I don't think skin color matters. And Europeans were not more skilled than non europeans. That is certainly racist. All immigrants have taken the lowest skill jobs in this country. You don't know what your talkin about.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 11 years ago

Let me ask you - do you know the definition of "racists"? Apparently you don't so you had better look it up.

And as your comment about "construction skills I listed are being done by brown people" is absured.

I know lots of "white people" who have the capability to do any of those crafts listed. As a matter of fact I grew up in the trades and as of today there are quite a few jobs out there looking for people who are "willing to work with their hands and minds" instead of just working with their minds.

They do have jobs and can get another job if they get laid off -

Also, what is your definition of "low skill jobs"?

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Yes I know the definition of racist. It is not absurd the brown do construction jobs. They do! that doesn't white people do not. White people do. They both do. Low skill is someone with out many marketable skills.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 11 years ago

So tell me then where was the "racist" comment I made?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

The roots of opposition to southern border immigration IS racists. I won't pretend that it ain't just because people are careful with words. In your case you crearly incorrectlty believe that European immigrants over the last 150 years were more skilled than the central/south American immigrants. That is reidiculous! And I submit it reflects a fundamental bigotry/racism on your part. Support our southern fellow citizens of the earth. We all must share the planet and the resources. The US has created much poverty and misery in the southern hemisphere and we have responsibility to address those problems. Lets have compassion for ALL people.!

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 11 years ago

Again, you have interpreted what I posted in your mind as something different. I never said "European immigrants were more skilled then Central/South American immigrants.

What I did post was that "the vast majority of immigrants who came to this country were skilled".

Now tell me where in that statement do I compare European immigrants as being more skilled then Central/South American Immigrants.

And please explain to me how that statement is "racist".

If I am not degrading one "race" and making another race "superior" then nothing in the statement I made is "racists" as you so want to believe.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Oh please. I debate with your type frequently. I've given you all the explanation I'm gonna. If you ain't another anti mexican xenophobe I don't see it, and you should be clear.. The charade that you are against low skilled immigrants is thin. The vast majority of immigrants today are much more skilled than any time in the past.! To suggest otherwise is clearly in favor of previous races as compared to current races. Do you support The Pres. executive order helping immigranst brought here as children? Or not.?

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 11 years ago

You still didn't answer the question - where is there "racism" in my comments.

Just so you will understand what the word "racism" means I will post the definition to help you decide

rac·ism (rszm) n.

  1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
  2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race

Again, where have I "emphasizeda superior difference or differences in human character or ability" between the central/south American Citizens and the European immigrants based on the comment "The vast majority of immigrants who came to this country in years gone by were skilled

You my friend have a problem with race yourelf when you inject thoughts of racism where there was no racism intended.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Blah. Blah Blah! Support OWS! Vote out anti immigrant politicians