Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: GE, NBC, the Today Show, Oprah, Ellen, and Dr Phil are also to blame. Greed kills.

Posted 6 years ago on Oct. 18, 2011, 5:55 p.m. EST by Mcc (542)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

GE owns NBC. GE is the largest producer of medical testing equipment in the world. They also own Universal Studeos and several banks. This is why Oprah, Ellen, and Dr Phil were paid hundreds of millions to contantly plug Countrywide (sub-prime bank), Citibank, medical testing, and every over-paid celebrity pig on the planet. Greed has turned just about every TV show into a commercial for parent companies and corporate sponsors. Meanwhile, the TV personalities keep getting richer. It makes me sick.

We have been mislead by Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, and nearly every other public figure. Economic growth, job creation, and actual prosperity are not necessarily a package deal. In fact, the first two are horribly misunderstood. Economic growth/loss (GDP) is little more than a measure of wealth changing hands. A transfer of currency from one party to another. The rate at which it is traded. This was up until mid ’07′ however, has never been a measure of actual prosperity. Neither has job creation. The phrase itself has been thrown around so often, and in such a generic political manner, that it has come to mean nothing. Of course, we need to have certain things done for the benefit of society as a whole. We need farmers, builders, manufacturers, transporters, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, mechanics, sanitation workers, doctors, managers, and visionaries. Their work is vital. I’ll even go out on a limb and say that we need politicians, attorneys, bankers, investors, and entertainers. In order to keep them productive, we must provide reasonable incentives. We need to compensate each by a fair measure for their actual contributions to society. We need to provide a reasonable scale of income opportunity for every independent adult, every provider, and share responsibility for those who have a legitimate need for aid. In order to achieve and sustain this, we must also address the cost of living and the distribution of wealth. Here, we have failed miserably. The majority have already lost their home equity, their financial security, and their relative buying power. The middle class have actually lost much of their ability to make ends meet, re-pay loans, pay taxes, and support their own economy. The lower class have gone nearly bankrupt. In all, its a multi-trillion dollar loss taken over about 30 years. Millions are under the impression that we need to create more jobs simply to provide more opportunity. as if that would solve the problem. It won’t. Not by a longshot. Jobs don’t necessarily create wealth. In fact, they almost never do. For the mostpart, they only transfer wealth from one party to another. A gain here. A loss there. Appreciation in one community. Depreciation in another. In order to create net wealth, you must harvest a new resource or make more efficient use of one. Either way you must have a reliable and ethical system in place to distribute that newly created wealth in order to benefit society as a whole and prevent a lagging downside. The ‘free market’ just doesn’t cut it. Its a farce. Many of the jobs created are nothing but filler. The promises empty. Sure, unemployment reached an all-time low under Bush. GDP reached an all-time high. But those are both shallow and misleading indicators. In order to gauge actual prosperity, you must consider the economy in human terms. As of ’08′ the average American was working more hours than the previous generation with far less equity to show for it. Consumer debt, forclosure, and bankruptcy were also at all-time highs. As of ’08′, every major American city was riddled with depressed communities, neglected neighborhoods, failing infrastructures, lost revenue, and gang activity. All of this has coincided with massive economic growth and job creation. Meanwhile, the rich have been getting richer and richer and richer even after taxes. Our nation’s wealth has been concentrated. Again, this represents a multi-trillion dollar loss taken by the majority. Its an absolute deal breaker. Bottom line: With or without economic growth or job creation, you must have a system in place to prevent too much wealth from being concentrated at the top. Unfortunately, we don’t. Our economy has become nothing but a giant game of Monopoly. The richest one percent already own nearly 1/2 of all United States wealth. More than double their share before Reagan took office. Still, they want more. They absolutely will not stop. Now, our society as a whole is in serious jeapordy. Greed kills.

44 Comments

44 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by metapolitik (1110) 6 years ago

Excellent portrait of the graft and corruption fundamentally inherent to our economy, our media and our political system.

Great post.

[-] 1 points by Arachnofoil (104) from Charlotte, NC 6 years ago

Lame argument

[-] 1 points by MrMiller (128) from Sandy, UT 6 years ago

Sorry, I just can't stop myself from commenting here. Look, I would just have to say that I would love to see a world where we don't have the filler jobs, as you describe, like fast food, and where we don't go shopping for fun or when we're depressed. I have said it before, but we damn well better start learning how to shrink the economy, or our social ties are going to continue getting worse than they already are. And that's the good part about socialism - that it endorses the idea that work in and of itself should be fun. Say what you want about it, but it has it's redeeming qualities. Why don't we just call it syndicalism, as long as it helps to strengthen community ties? Same basic notion, broader view, (like that of corporate communities).

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

I'm not morally opposed to the concept of socialism. I actually think that it's a noble concept. But I don't want it and I won't support it. I would prefer a much more modest version of capitalism where the profits are more reasonable and the masses better off. A reasonable scale of opportunity, reasonable degree of freedom, and an absolute commitment by the majority to share responsibility for those in need. I know that's a pipe dream. I won't live to see it. But another generation just might. The survivors anyway.

[-] 1 points by frankchurch1 (839) from Jersey City, NJ 6 years ago

As long as you don't forget that Fox started this slog. I go to their website and sure to form O'Reilly is spouting off about alleged anti-semitism on the movements. One reason the mods need to watch the anti-Jewish stuff.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

I don't know which network is the worst but I do hate Fox with a passion. So many tricks and so much BS on TV. It's astonishing what people are willing to lap up when it's shoveled in their face by their favorite channel, show, host, ect. Amazing.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 6 years ago

Making an enemy out of GE or any part of GE is not a productive thing to do. Ultimately, we will need GE and other companies to create high paying careers, right here in the USA. Working with GE to generate ideas for high paying careers and new commercial enterprises, right here in the USA is a good thing to do. What if there are men and women, at GE or connected to GE willing to help all of us? Do you want them to feel that you are a threat to their future success and well being or do you want them to see you as a highly talented person, left out of the benefit of wealth creation, but full of potential; potential that GE can harness in a mutually beneficial way?

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

Big business in general creates fewer jobs dollar for dollar than small business. Regardless, there is no benefit for the lower majority if the wealth becomes concentrated at the top. And nothing excuses the non-stop barrage of mass market BS that GE, it's over-paid TV personalities, and the other major networks shovel in the faces of their ignorant fans. Words can not describe just how disgusted I am with all of it.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 6 years ago

I agree, after all, I am an MBA and I stand to benefit from robust growth in big business careers. I am not looking to work for a nickel and dime store. If big business refuses to work with us, then we lawfully screw them to the wall and lawfully screw the politicians to the wall. I am not asking that we kiss up to big business. Believe me, I have no intention of digging ditches for trust fund b-tches. I want equal access to a high paying business career, the same access the trust fund scum have. I am just not going out of my way to make an enemy of GE. If GE refuses to help us, then we lawfully create a significant financial consequence that puts their egos right where the Sun doesn't shine; while we smile, smile, smile. =)

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 6 years ago

Having GE pay a reasonable income tax will annoy the execs but not keep the company from producing careers.

We need moderate sized businesses even more, as they create most of the new jobs. What is great for GE isn't necessarily good for the companies that actually can be job creators.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 6 years ago

We need Corporate Ameirca to get on board and create high paying careers. If they refuse then we need to lawfully squeeze them and the politicians in their back pocket. There are many ways, lawful ways, we can make life miserable, so it makes sense to just play ball and get the process going. If it is a matter of ego, the rich and powerful need only look at Egypt and ask, "If these Socialist lunatics, guys like MJ Morrow warned us about, pull off an Arab Spring Revolution and a miltary Government comes in, just like in Egypt, would the security guys in charge of the US answer to Wall Street, answer to Corporate America, answer to billionaires or pull a Vlad Putin and seize everything for themselves?"

I don't think that the radicals have a chance in hell of taking control of the USA, but I also don't think that Globailists from Wall Street or Corporate Ameirca would run the show either. It would be a Putin type, no doubt in my mind. A member of the American olygarchy, but not necessarily friendly to all of the olygarchs. Just look at Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovsky. He was a rich wise ass, talking about take this or leave that. Now look at that loser. An Arab Spring revolution, in the USA ,would be a bad spot for everybody, except for the Putin miltary security types! lol

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 6 years ago

With the big corporations sitting on immense cash reserves, I wish I knew a way to get some of that money out and moving around the economy again. I'd like to see shareholders push for dividends (which would help middle class 401k's) for one thing. Getting the companies to hire in the US would be even better.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 6 years ago

High paying career creation is a win- win. Ultimately, any MBA wants to optimize wealth creation. To do that, off of activities in the USA, ultimately requires two things; an increase in the birtth rate and an increase in immigration. You can run as lean as you want, you can bs about competition, new normals, do more with less and all the other lunatic Globalist nonsense, but in the end, no one is moving to country to make no more money than they make where they are currently living. No one is moving to the USA to do more with less, to take sh-t from ego maniac MBAs, like me. (lol) In the end, the USA is losing high skilled immigrant labor, from countries, like Mexico, because these lost immigrants are better off in Mexican factories, than in US employment. We have work abroad students joining with our Unions to protest working conditions in Hershey Pennsylvania.

There is no doubt, if we want an economy where I can, not only, eventually, have a high paying management career, but where I have the chance to live up to my duty, to optimize wealth for shareholders, off of activities in this country, in this US market, I can't have a Nation with the reputation for f-ing workers. I can't have a Nation where Americans can't afford to settle down and make babies. I can't have a Nation where workers make no more money than they would in China or India, since what would be the point of moving here, to starve in a tent city? It is that simple, although there are some big egos, making some bad decisions in Corporate America. Some of them still think they are going to be masters of a board-less economy, where they are going to tell Commies in China to suck I- Bank! =) I wish them luck! lol

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago

I said Oprah was a tool Friday and somebody called me out on it. Other than that I'd have to agree with you. But, dude, you need to stop cutting and pasting this all over the site. People are calling you one of the biggest trolls over here. If I keep seeing it, I'm going to have to wonder.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

I speak the truth. I don't see how it matters if I cut and paste. I want the truth heard and read. That's all.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago

That's understandable. Saturation. I've read some of your other comments over the last few days, I don't think you're a troll, just passionate. Some of the others though . . .

[-] 1 points by IndyGuy (81) 6 years ago

I think GE sold NBC.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

I remember hearing that rumor a while back but they never did. GE still owns NBC, Universal Studeos, a chunk of the banking industry, and several more entities. Their TV personalities are paid hundreds of millions to dumb down their own fans and plug everything that GE owns along with corporate sponsors. I hate what TV has become.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

Not what I was expecting. So GE was bailed out after a disaster they may have been responsible for? If that's true, then it's even worse than I thought. What a shady world we live in.

[-] 1 points by Quark (236) 6 years ago

Ge is the worst. They need to be cut up and divided!

[-] 1 points by Yepper (277) 6 years ago

Not surpirsed money has moved to the top producers. Under welfare rules the recipient must stay poor. That is how the laws are written. The entitlement programs demand a limit to what one can have in their checking and saving account and how much they can earn. This is how the politicians keep the poor on the plantaition. $14,000,000,000,000 (fourteen million million) plus $1,600,000,000,000 added each year. We currently can not pay the interest on this money with our tax revenue. Taking all of the money, not taxing all of the money, of those making over $250,000 per year does not fill the gap. The clear implication, taxes do not do the trick so "taxing the rich" is nothing but a Democratic buzz word to incite support. We must stop spending and that means some are going to suffer, some. If we do not control this insanity, we all will suffer, ALL. Are you aware that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of wealthy Americans making contingency plans to leave America if this thing blows up? No? It is true. Are you aware that millions of Americans are making plans to unite for mutual protection if this thing blows up? No? Well, it is true also. On the verge of collapse and the damned Democrats are still name calling, finger pointing, twisting words, lying and any thing else they can do to further a failing ideology. No? Read:

  • The ten poorest cities and percentage of population below the poverty level:
  • Detroit , MI 32.5%
  • Buffalo , NY 29.9%
  • Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
  • Cleveland , OH 27.0%
  • Miami , FL 26.9%
  • St. Louis , MO 26.8%
  • Chicago, Ill. 26.4%
  • Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
  • Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
  • Newark , NJ 24.2% U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 What are the common threads? Democrats and unions Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961. Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1954. Cincinnati , OH (3rd) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1984. Cleveland , OH (4th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1989. Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican mayor until now and he was recalled St. Louis , MO (6th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1949. Chicago, Ill (7th) has never had a Republican mayor. Milwaukee , WI (8th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1908. Philadelphia , PA (9th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1952. Newark , NJ (10th) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1907.
  • In the history of our federal government: 5 Representatives have been expelled. All 5 were Democrats. 14 Senators have been expelled. All 14 were Democrats. 21 Representatives censured. 16 Democrats, 5 Republicans. 7 Senators have been censured. 4 were Democrats, 3 were Republican. 2 Presidents have been impeached. Both were Democrats. The troubling facts: 80% Democrat offenders, 20% Republican A ten year old child can look at the facts above and see the common threads. The nation is next if this insanity is not stopped, now and forever
[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

You're leaving out a giant point. As more and more wealth accumulates at the top, the majority end up with a net loss in relative buying power. Also the cost of living is tied directly to profit margins. This results in more legitimate need for financial aid. When the rich get too rich, the poor get poorer.

[-] 1 points by Yepper (277) 6 years ago

you act as if the pie cannot grow? This is not true. When our government prints money willie nillie that causes inflation. Profit margins on the whole lowers costs.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

I never said that the pie doesn't grow. I said that we need some sort of ethical and reliable system to distribute the wealth within reasonable limits. Otherwise, too much ends up at the top and the lower majority get screwed. The bottom 90 percent are sharing less than 10 percent of our nations wealth. Meanwhile, the top one percent own nearly 1/2. That is just obscene.

[-] 1 points by Yepper (277) 6 years ago

of the bottom 90% --- 47% pay no taxes. Many have refused to work for generations and just suck off the Government teat! What about this problem? Trickle up poverty is real.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

One more point: When the income and bottom line wealth becomes more and more concentrated, the lower majority end up with a net loss in buying power. This means less ability to pay taxes. If the rich want the lower majority to pay more taxes, then they should stop concentrating so much wealth.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

WRONG. 47 percent pay no Federal Income taxes. But federal income tax represents less than 1/2 of government revenue. After you account for all state, local, and federal taxes and fees, the bottom 90 percent actually pay about the same rate overall as the top 10 percent. Trickle up poverty? Maybe you can explain why the world's richest 500 are now worth over $2,000,000,000,000. Maybe you can explain why we have a record number of multi-millionaires and multi-hundred millionaires. What's that you said about 'trickle up' poverty?

[-] 1 points by Yepper (277) 6 years ago

With both man and women working families today have dual incomes. Wasn't quite like that in the 50's and before. Some of the welathy have always been wealthy. Other have become wealthy (Mr. Jobs for example). The problem is we need even more wealthy. The problem is we don't have enough of them.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

More families rely on two providers primarily because wages for the lower majority have remained flat for 30 years while the cost of living has become so high. The direct result is a record high concentration of wealth. Now, the entire foundation of our economy is unstable. No redistribution. No recovery.

[-] 1 points by Yepper (277) 6 years ago

Well when women joined the work force middle class wages were rising-thus your arguement is not valid. What it did was cause barcket creep and inflation. Redistribution is stealing. Taking something one has earned and giving it to someone who did not earn it is stealing. Liberlaism always has the reverse effect.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

Before I respond to the comment about women, I wan't you to expand on it. In general, what time frame are you referring to? Are you blaming women in any way?

About redistribution: Give it some real thought. Are you ok with $4 for a gallon of gas? What about taxes? Do you want a flat tax? If so, what rate for individuals and what rate for business? What about charity? If I'm a landscaper and I need a new chainsaw, is it ok for me to set up a charity so others can donate the funds? What if I have a friend on city council? Is it ok for me to campaign for him in exchange for a new chainsaw funded by taxpayers?

Now, for a question that you won't have the guts to answer: Think about America for a minute. Who built it? Who organized the work? Think about every industry from air conditioning to zipper repair and everything in between. Think about all the benefits of work and all the problems associated with laziness. Think about the numbers of Americans who have been productive over the last 50 years and the numbers of Americans who have made no attempt. Think about all of it. Now, answer the question: What percentage of United States wealth do you feel the top 1/3 have earned? Middle 1/3? Bottom 1/3? Now show me that you've given this issue about wealth redistribution some real thought. Answer the question.

Then prepare yourself for one hell of a debate.

[-] 1 points by Yepper (277) 6 years ago

Women started their movement in the late 70's. Now they get to work added to income creep, take care of their children, do the housekeeping and laundry.
No I am not in favor of $4.00 gasoline. I don't rwhat Europe pays. Gasoline prices effect the poor and middle class. When people talk of the greedy Oil Companies that make 5 cents a gallaon and who explore drill and refine the oil they never seem to mention FEd and state taxes that are over 23cents per gallon and the Gov produces none of it but make 400% more profit from it. I like the idea of a flat tax. 10% might do it but that is subject to how it is done and state taxes need to be considered into the equation. As for business taxes maybe 5% of profit.. One must be careful on the business tax end as some small business's might spend 1 million dollars to make 100K profit.
Most landscapers get CASH and avoid a lot of taxes. They cheat. There is a large underground black market that does this. As for setting up a charity pay for it a landscaper can hardly manage the paperwork and filings to even start to become one. As for Gov buying the landscaper one the answer is of course NO. The building of America was collective. Business built it and the eople built it. Banks, industry and farmers basically. Who organized the work? Depends on the work. Farmers organized their own work. At one time 3 out of 4 people were farmers. Union do not organize work the employers do.
As for what percentage of wealth different levels should have. They all have earned it BUT the lower 1/3 who just suck off the government teat. Actually 47% of Americans pay no Income tax yet benefit from the working and rich. There are generations that refuse to work.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

Women were the backbone of American production during WWII. The men were off to war. Taxes were raised primarily on the rich to pay for it. This resulted in a massive redistribution of wealth. Are you telling me that those men and women didn't earn their money? Taxes remained high on the rich until the early '80's. By the mid '70's the lower 90 percent held most of America's wealth. Are you telling me that all those workers didn't earn their money? The tables have been reversed since then. You ok with that? Women have every damn right to work. So do the elderly. Unfortunately, millions have no choice because of record high profits (this means record high charges) in the energy, healthcare, and finance industries. 1/2 of all dividends are paid to the richest one percent. This means the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This is true even after taxes. My guess is that you won't be willing to admit that. Where did you get that 400 percent crap?

Those tax rates you proposed are absurd. Not even remotely realistic. Are you aware of the Laffer Curve? Do you believe in it? Tell me. What does it indicate? Careful. I'm setting you up. So think hard before you answer.

The questions regarding the landscaper were set ups. Newsflash: The most profitable 3 industries in the world are all subsidized by tax funds and charity. The health care industry receives billions in charity funds and government subsidies. The oil industry receives billions in government subsidies. The finance industry was bailed out with nearly one trillion in government funds. And you say 'no' to a subsidy for a chainsaw. Of course, there are some people regardless of industry who cheat on their taxes. It's not right. Finally, something we can partially agree on.

You didn't answer the most important question: What percentages of America's bottom line wealth do you feel the 3 social classes have earned? An opinion here is fine. Just put the ball in the park. That's all I ask.

I'm going to give you a chance to correct that final statement about income taxes before I correct it for you. It's well documented. It's been reported many times. Just again last week. I'll give you one chance to correct that statement before I correct it for you.

[-] 1 points by MrMiller (128) from Sandy, UT 6 years ago

Yeah, it's a damn shame that housing has become a Ponzi scheme. Every time the housing market goes down, more rich people invest in real estate, renting the housing out to people, making money off their hard work. Of course, I've heard the media say, "It's all good! They have greater opportunity for work mobility to work in the job that fits them! Helps out the economy great!" I just hate, hate, hate, what the cost of living has become. The problem is, most of the problem comes from rent and mortgage obligations, a lot of which is highly preventable. We need to slowly dismantle people's control over too much land, so they can't extort so much money out of others. Hell, I watched in horror not too long ago as my sister payed her rent to her landowner over the course of probably almost a year, only to find out that the landowner wasn't making good on their end and ended up taking the money and running. Fuck the housing system.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

I've been looking for info on the distribution of land. Still haven't found it. I l know the top one percent own a giant chunk I just don't know how much. Have you seen any reference to this?

[-] 1 points by MrMiller (128) from Sandy, UT 6 years ago

I did. I just don't remember right now. Just know that it was obscene. But anyway, if we're talking about equaling out the forces of power in this country, you ABSOLUTELY have to include real estate. Wouldn't it be great if we could form coops that built housing as community endeavors and hence enabled units for free upon completion? We can build a house in a damn week!! (Watch Extreme Makeover Home Edition). Why do we enslave people for decades and into retirement for housing if it takes so little time? Housing is the real form of all slavery in this country. Just think about it for a while, and you'll come to the same conclusion I have. My real solution for quite some time has been to build communities based on different parameters of living, and also to build economies within the economy to provide a different means of living. I just don't think that we'll be able to put all the people foreclosed upon back into their housing without having real estate itself being the key driver, and we all know how that is doing. Doing it from outside sources of growth is a disaster waiting to happen and it depends on an obscene amount of arbitrary economic growth that does nothing productive for us. And the only way to stop the economy from bleeding would be to form a micro economy with an electronic banking system that allows for only American goods to be transacted to those without work that provides for external growth in the form of exports. We have the technology. It's kind of a no-brainer actually.

[-] 1 points by Mcc (542) 6 years ago

Great post. Great ideas. I despise Extreme Makeover. It's one of the most calculated brainwashing shows I've ever seen. Sorry. Thats how I feel about it. I do like your idea about housing coops. That's a good one.