>> ^NetRunner:
In other words, your advice has already long since been taken.

And in taking his advice, you have lost my support.

>> ^chilaxe:

Has Nader taken responsibility yet for being such a negative influence on liberalism? A lot of people will have been affected by the Iraq war, justices Roberts and Alito for the next 30 years, and the worst oil spill in US history.


In other words, "shut up and do as you're told."

Laying the blame for those things at Nader's feet is a pretty loathsome act.

Nader represents a lot of leftists, like myself, who are continuously marginalized and belittled by those "sensible" mainstream liberals who are "just being realistic."

"Just being sensible" like almost all of the Democrats we have in office now, who still can't get anything done even with the sizable majority voters gave them two years ago.

You Democrats...you want my vote, you want my support, but then you want me to just shut up and go away.

I've had it.

>> ^rougy:

"Pushing down the rich?"
Yeah...they've had such a hard time of it lately.
Why, the top 5% only doubled their wealth in the last ten years.
Poor babies.
And just look at all of the prosperity they've brought us as a result!
Because everybody knows how much the rich love creating jobs....


I didn't mean the top 5%.

@NetRunner
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-Only-the-Super-Rich-Can-Save-Us
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/myriam-miedzian/is-ralph-nader-on-to-some_b_298483.html
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-interviewed-by-Sonali-Kolhatkar

http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-Things-Are-a-Lot-Worse-than-We-Thought
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-talks-about-Barack-Obama-and-Hillary-Clinton
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-is-Obama-a-corporatist-like-BushCheney
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-on-Fannie-Freddie-and-more
http://videosift.com/video/Ron-Paul-And-Ralph-Nader-together-on-The-Situation-Room
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-on-Real-Time-September-26-2008
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-makes-Tucker-look-silly-once-again
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-on-Education
http://videosift.com/video/Nader-On-War-Profiteering-Eisenhower-Would-be-Proud
http://videosift.com/video/NADER-vs-O-REILLY-Pulling-Out-Of-Afghanistan-Another-9-11
http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-on-Organizing-Districts-for-Change
http://videosift.com/video/Why-the-Democrats-wont-Impeach-Bush-and-Cheney

>> ^chilaxe:

Repeatedly give an opinion leader a national stage and giving him enthusiastic and unalloyed plaudits doesn't sound like humoring a non-leader alcoholic uncle.

Who's doing that?

the title should read "the super-rich MUST save us"

>> ^NetRunner:
I love it. You didn't watch the video, I'm guessing?

TL;DW

>> ^blankfist:

I love it! He's absolutely right! The only way to pull up the poor is by pushing down the rich. Wars, increased government spending, subsidized industry and manipulated interest rates have nothing to do with it. He should title it Atlas Sighed.


I love it. You didn't watch the video, I'm guessing?

Successfully processed your "amazon" invocation - view all Amazonized posts here

yah there are load sof people in the UK that just dont get it ,

they dont reolise that in the end whats required ( as is almost always the case) is a ballence of goverment regulatoin to stop supe rmonoalies and welth migratoin to the super rich. and allow for a open market that is still competative through all levels .

people who think that a "free unregulated " market is the best idea are just compleaty ignorent to the realities that not everyone is on a level playing faild to start with.

its like in motersport saying IT SHOULD BE TOTALY UNREGULATED and what you would get is the team that started with the most money winning all the time. which would result in a lack of competitoin and no real piont in taking part in the race.


>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

>> ^NordlichReiter:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
A tea bagger who trades his Joker mask for a Guy Fawkes mask is still a tea bagger.
Sorry to dash your free market fantasies, buddy, but you should know that the banking industry would whole-heartedly agree with your call for less 'state interference'. They made a lot of money through predatory lending due to deregulation and a lack of 'state interference'. The public was much better off when it had more oversight and control over the banking industry. The 'free' market capitalist thinking that has influenced our leaders since Reagan has made things worse, not better.
Downvoted for calling the other protesters fascists. Nazi Germany was a capitalist society.

Yep he's a tea bagger, being British and all.

Brits can't be free market fundies, too?

*promote for the liars and super rich people

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
End result of captured regulators and centralized planning you mean. I walk into my kitchen or my bathroom and I am FILLED with industries that never really strike me as evil or corrupt by your, what I would consider, hasty generalization of capitalism. I look at my CD-rs, my desk, my toilet paper, my bathmat. I get a good price at the exact quality I want of them. The big problems, the ones where we see the most corruption and unfairness are those industries usually associated with heavy government regulation or finite resources.
The more a government gets involved with the mode and means of production the more bad laws get passed to benefit few at the cost of everyone. Looking back, I think everyone would agree that the legal monopolies that exist on phone and cable TV held us back technologically and culturally. As a result of these controls people pay higher prices to these companies. As the government gets more involved the need for companies to both protect and influence government officials for their unfair advantage. The government monopolies on things aren't any better, like the postal system, but that is really a topic for a different conversation.
So the idea that you point out of "Unless you spend a great deal of constant effort on monitoring it, your government -will- be corrupted by the ultra-rich who can offer benefits far beyond those available from any other source." is absolutely correct. The solution then, isn't MORE government regulations and oversight on the private economy.
The solution in my opinion is my like a recent sci-fi concept my friend told me about for his film school project. The best cure for a villain, is another villain. The villain in this case would be businesses. Being that the most effective person to fight large power corruption is people after that same power. Given the same resources and lack of meaningful unfair advantages, over time they mill each other out to an even level. At certain times people might get a little less for their money when companies use their established reputation to sell one over on people (I'm looking at you Toyota), but the public out lash when this is brought to light is swifter than any type of technocratic bumbling you would get from non-industry people on capital hill.
Capitalism isn't pretty. The evils of capitalism are all to clear. Someone can risk it all, and loose it all. A man could work all his life an perhaps never get ahead. Such is the risk. But the truth of the matter is capitalism is a driving force for great wealth for a great deal man more people than any type of managed economy.
The real and hardest questions I think stem from intellectual and property rights limits and restraints as it is hard to find a purely rational limit on what those should be. But ultimately, the principles of libertarianism are based in reason and not emotion or personal value. When making a system, you have to bench notions of good and bad, those are personal values of which there are 7 billion flavors. You have to start with reasonable, or unreasonable...a completely opinion-free, logical arrangement or arguments free from notions of morality or religion.


unregulated capitalism is retarded.

The fact is the more money you have the easier it gets to make more money so the ritch get richer and the pore get poorer.

Because of the way capitalism works for the rich to get richer they esentualy have to grab the wealth from the less wealthy.Because its easier for rich to make money than for the pore to make money u end up with 2% of a population being super rich and the rest with pore to average wages.


If you want a democratic safe clean caring society you will need to regulate capitalism , Tax the super ritch and do projects that help educate the pore or those with less money , esentualy redistabute the welth.

alternatively you would have to fundamentally change capitalism which ultimately would be regulation again.

Pure capitalism could only ever work if everyone started from a blank slate and a equal footing and in reality that would never happen.

It must be nice being super rich.

Surly super rich people must feel guilty for having so much money and comfort at command , relative to pore people .

56% of WHO? Who was asked, and what were they asked? Who conducted the polling? Fox News?

If I asked people who don't have health insurance, whether getting affordable or free health coverage would be good, I'd get 100%. If I asked old, super-rich, republicans if, poor, uneducated, democrats should get health coverage, 0% would say 'its needed'. So right off the bat, Winstonfield, is arguing not facts, but an arguement he cant prove correct.

The health care bill, does NOT go against the spirit NOR the letter of the prescribed powers of goverment. Maybe Winstonfield could expand on this subject, beyond the one word fear sentence, and provide a few FACTS.

The purpose of the health care bill is multi-level depth and penetration (think metaphorically of a box with an X x Y x Z dimensions to it). ONE, of the many things within the bill, explains how a goverment run health coverage would operated. The costs AND the benefits would go live on day 1. Its all there, for the public to see. And its not a 'top-down, goverment run wealth redistrubtion scheme', as Winstonfield, fearfully thinks. But then, as a republican, Winstonfield (like all other republicans it seems), holds a greater intolerance to fear, then most Americans who are level headed. If you told a republican that the Obama Administration had a plan to outlaw the 2nd Amendment, and then provided flimzy evidence to support it; they would be running to the nearest gun shop, and maxing out their credit and taking a 2nd mortage on their house. No, that's really not an exaggeration. I wish it was, and I was merely talking in jest.

I think Mr. Franken did an excellent job, in presenting the questions and arguements. And that this Mr. Thule should READ and UNDERSTAND the health care bill before opening his mouth.

There will be hundreds if not thousands of people who are as deserving if not as ruthless as Richard branson who will not have become rich sue to multiple factors outside of there control. In fact if you look at super ritch people ( bill gates, Steve jobs, google founders ,) Most of them are super ritch not because they are particualy good auntrapanours but because they were lucky on one thing that gave them a substantial boost finacaily , granted they cnt be dence and they need to have a reasonable idea of things and some vision , but there are litraly hundreds of thousands of people like that , its just not all of them are in the right place at the right time , sure by doing things a certain way you can increase your ods but for the people that do become super ritch its not a skill bassed thing.

so I wouldn't look at him and just because he is rich think oh he is a genouse in ritchards case his parents and there suport will have given him a fundamental boost that manny people with the same ablity would not have had.


also Wealth is not the best gauge of a person , In lots of cases to make large amounts of money you have to forget ethics and be a cunt , pissing on and exploiting many people.


I don't know him as a person , im just saying that Making "Alot" of mony is is chance based. I think if your not stupid , through hard work and skill could earn 150K year after 15 years of trying im specificly talking about the super rich that have 10 milloin +