Forum Post: Its not about paying fair taxes, its about having a system that doesn't crash
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 8, 2011, 8:29 p.m. EST by RogerDee
(411)
from Montclair, NJ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Please give me a break. Don't tell me the rich pay their fair share, because currently the system is broken and the share the rich have is getting bigger. The US economic system used to be stable, banks didn't fail and jobs were created for those wishing to work.
A system that destroys 20 million jobs for over 3 years is broken. A system that cant keep its banks afloat is broken. A political system on auction to the highest bidder is broken. A system that steals our future is broken. A system that destroys families is broken. A system that increases income and wealth disparity is broken. A system that economically oppresses people is broken.
Whats fair is an economic system thats stable. Whats fair is to take the big money out of politics. Whats fair is tax policy that creates a stable economy. Whats fair is regulations like Glass Steagal that creates a stable banking community.
Whats fair is not stealing our future.
There are a lot of improvements that need to be made. The list reforms people Americans want to see is long and varied depending on who you talk to. That said, I believe there is one reform that would provide the American people the best chances of seeing other meaningful reforms actually happen - that is REAL, loop-hope free CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM! I have seen others on this site calling this the "fulcrum" or pivotal issue. Right now the current legalized bribery, pay-to-play system of campaign donations and paid lobbyists has disenfranchised the American voter. Until this is fixed, any other reform the politicians may try to placate us with (be it a change to healthcare, clamping down predatory school loans, new financial regulations, etc.) will be about as effective as a farmer putting a new roof on his CHICKEN COOP, but still letting the FOX guard it.
We need to go back to the original political currency. Instead of the current system of who can collect the most money from corporations and special interests it should be who has the BEST IDEAS to EFFECTIVELY RUN THE COUNTRY (we don't need "Wealth Redistribution," what we need is "Political Influence Redistribution")!
For the sake our our children and future generations of Americans, we need to take back our democracy from the rich and powerful who are using their vast sums of money to "speak" as if they represent millions of Americans. This "Corporate Personhood" that has crept into our laws is allowing them to manipulating our policies in their favor at the expense of the average American (the recent "Citizens United" Supreme Court ruling is a miscarriage of justice and must be reversed. The $50 or $100 a normal American may give to a political campaign becomes meaningless when corporations or other special interests are handing our millions to buy political access to the decision making process.
For decades now the corporations and special interests have had our "representatives" bought and paid for (both on the right and the left). Concentrating our efforts on getting the money out of our politics is the best way we can create an environment in which further reforms can be realized. Until we end the current system of legalized bribery (campaign donations) and paid lobbying our politicians will continue to be the LAP DOGS of the corporations and special interests. What we need first and foremost is real, loop-hole free CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM!!!! If the corruption is not dealt with first, the chance of any other meaningful reforms becoming a reality is almost zero - the special interests will just use their money to buy votes and put forward bills that create loop-holes or otherwise twist the law in their favor. If we want our children to live in a country where there vote matters, we need to get the money out of our politics, otherwise they will increasingly become the 21st century version of the "landless peasant." Spread the word - End the LEGALIZED BRIBERY!!! CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM needs to be THE main goal of the protests!!!
Take the big money out of politics is obviously at the top of the list. Thank you.
And right after campaign finance reform comes media ownership conglomerates and the fairness doctrine.
once again, common sense trumps the fair-share-of-the-pie debate. nice post.
Thanks. It came from a rant, I usually write policy geeky boring detailed researched articles.
http://rdanafox.blogspot.com/
I like rants much better. and a good zinger is nice every now and again. geeky policy stuff.....well, I do have to stay informed.
Well thought out Topic, and the replies are educational too.
Thank you. I'm somewhat surprised its lasted for so many days.
Good post, RogerDee. I agree completely.
A system that is durable and isn't always operating in crisis mode.
I suggest that nature and the internet provide good examples of systems that meet this durability requirement.
Millions of cells die every day in my body, but millions replace them. If one of my kidneys fails, there is another that can sustain me.
Entire massive trunks of the internet can fail, yet the internet as a whole does not fail. Perhaps a little slower for some, but still going strong.
I agree. Totally broken. We have an anointed class of technocrats concentrated at the top. Revolutions are occurring all over the world once people realize that regime change is pretty easy. Just aim all efforts at the capstone, and overwhelm with numbers.
I yearn for self-correcting, decentralized, redundant systems like those that exist around us everywhere, except in all the unnatural, man-made, fragile hierarchies that seem to exist in every corporation, government agency or group.
We seem to want to worship democracy, but then sell it out to the same old hierarchies.
Nice topic... Deserves a few more bumping Comments, Once you are made to THINK, you cant help but Listen better.
Thanks, appreciate it.
Hear!Hear!
And in addition to Glass Steagal - check out the proposals to create a 28th Amendment to the Constitution ending corporate personhood:
Sanders Proposal:
http://www.occupywallst.org/forum/sign-bernie-sanders-petition-in-support-of-his-fir/
Petition here:
http://sanders.senate.gov/petition/?uid=f1c2660f-54b9-4193-86a4-ec2c39342c6c
Full amendment PDF:
http://sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Saving-American-Democracy.pdf
This is the Senate counterpart to Rep. Deutch's amendment discussed here:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/rep-deutch-introduces-constitutional-amendment-to-/
I'm not a big petition guy, but we need to show a groundswell of support (despite flaws, as discussed in Rico's thread).
Also, a great piece today on the history of Corporate Personhood:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1112/S00053/the-real-history-of-corporate-personhood.htm
I like the old days, Corporations had 20 year charter, that had to be renewed every 20 years. Or not.
yeah- about that I don't know.
all I know is -
corporations do not have tongues.
When we started this country, a corporation could only exist for 20 yrs, then it would have to apply to have the charter renewed. Founding fathers were concerned about a corporations power, and so it it did no good to the Commonwealth the charter was not renewed. And assets were dissolved.
SO corporations have no tongues. Thats what it comes down to.
that is interesting
We've come a long way. Sigh.
"..Thank you. I'm somewhat surprised its lasted for so many days..." __ Roger.
You make me smile.
Well done Topic, Wonderful Comments..
Thanks :-)
You are more than welcome.
Why does the Sanders proposal not also do the same for PACs, unions and interest groups?
that I do not know, but as I recall it does give Congress the authority to regulate campaign finance, which in theory should cover it - provided Congress uses that authority wisely.
a stretch, I realize.
I bet you can contact his office via his website. I bet you could start a forum discussion on the merits of the Senator's proposal. It would be interesting to examine it from the perspective of its weaknesses, and see what can be done about addressing them.
Re Glass Steagall , A system where banks spend America's wealth lending each other money to gamble with is not a fair system. I like to think of bank deposits and fed funds as our money. wall street and the banks like to think of it as their bag of poker chips. Returning to a system that worked from 1933 to 1999 is the best idea. It's not a new world it's the same world that crashed the economy in 1929, wall street and the banks in bed together to much risk, to much leverage, to many worthless or dangerous wall street products in our banking system.
And I would add that the 2000 Commodities and futures Modernization Act created the financial instrument known as the credit default swap.
Yup ---------I understand them and agree ,but do you understand the currency swaps? the interest swaps? Or are they just more obscure time bombs lurking in our banking system that we'll find out about in the next taxpayer funded bank bailout?
definitely could be potential bombs. regulation required, risk management rules should limit exposure. or better yet, glass steagall.
yeah but glass steagall's repeal did not cause this depression,,, over-consumption financed by debt, mostly mortgage debt, did--that's a federal law that should be adopted: no person can acquire debt that would cost to service in excess of 30% of their income. people lived too high on the hog and now it's come home to roost. that said, i would be in favor of splitting up the banks into their constituent functions. the unique risks posed without glass steagall are the potential of banks to foist onto the FDIC losses from prop. trading and I-bank operations--still could happen... and needs to be brought back.
The Repeal of Glass Steagal II os widely considered the cause of the financial crisis.
"This repeal directly contributed to the severity of the Financial crisis of 2007–2011 by allowing Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors' money that was held in the commercial banks"
From wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass–Steagall_Act
thanks for the reply, however, the wiki post is completely incorrect and misinformed (although i do believe the act should be brought back)--i have worked professionally and extensively with the act. glass steagall was repealed, through lobbying efforts by Citibank, so it could acquire travelers insurance group circa 1997--which they later disposed of in 2003-2004 (idiots, succumbed to i-banks selling the deal). what harm did travelers cause Citi, or any other bank? none, in fact they were profitable units. what caused this depression is actually simpler. borrowers borrowed too much of their future income to permit a continued expansion of the economy, and instead, we get the reverse, a contraction--that's what finance does, it allows you to live better now, but you co-opt your future with the lender (unless you get raises in excess of the inflation rate, but wages have not risen since 1980 on an inflation adjusted basis).
let me quote from one of the most important economists of all time:
"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved." - Ludwig Mises
that's what happened, and it happened in housing. and we've obviously chosen the latter--because the government (EU and US) has clearly not chosen to abandon credit expansion--in fact the idiots are expanding it. my derivative trades are placed accordingly.
i know i know--weird to comment on my remark, but von mises statement is a result of observation and survey of several hundreds of years--yep folks this has happened numerous times past.
most important economists of all time:
Okey Dokey ......
But the over consumption was caused by the securitization of debt and the delusion that pooling risk would minimize risk. In other words all sorts of loans were pushed on people because wall street could chop them up into bonds have them rated AAA take a profit on each transaction and sell them off to pass the risk to someone else. --Yup lets split up the banks ! get wall street out of main street ---------main street can walk over there if they feel like it or not. At the moment main street has no choice and they make none of the profits.
replace "caused" with "facilitated" or "enabled"--still the problem lies with the people running wild with debt--no bank pointed a gun at a borrower and said "max out your debt limit"--same is true of congress. but then again, they're inept:):) completely and to the max.
Lets look at a couple of other numbers. There were 1.4 trillion dollars in subprime mortgages. There were 14 trillion (and I've even read 104trillion ) dollars in side bets put on those mortgages. Banks that used to be allowed 6 or 7 leverage didn't think that was enough so they asked for more and more and they were using 30X leverage at the time of the crash . This is how a 1.4 trillion dollar problem got turned into fed loans to banks of 7 trillion and massive taxpayer bailouts. It was deregulation in the banks and IMO this problem would not have happened without that. Wall street and banks got 3 or 4 thousand out of everyone they could con into buying an ARM or overpriced mortgage. When wall street gets the vacuum running and they can suck money out of the middle class they can make a really good bubble and crash exactly like they did in 1929.
Think about this a moment, presuming over consumption financed by debt was the 'cause' then IF Glass/Steagall had still been in place it would have been localized debt for the amounts of the mortgages only, NOT the increased debt created by selling bundled portions of mortgages off to the 'highest bidder' only to see them sold again.
So if we take out the banking 'circuitry' we once again end up with localized debt for the original amount of the mortgage balance.
I understand that you see the issues that are still inherent in the current system because of the vunerability of the FIDC. Hopefully simplification such as I have attempted here will bring others around to realization.
Amen.
Nice to see you. Any sign of theghostofthomassjefferson?
You as well. No, haven't seen him/her...
Part of the reason the tax system is a failure.
Because goverments set their own wages and have unfettered spending laws.
The more we give them the more they spend.
And they spend lavishly.
Did not Mr President Obama order pizza from St Louis. And have it flown to the Whitehouse.
It's not about fair share of taxes. Since they collect over 2 trillion annually. It's how they waste it. And pay high salaries. Any one doing business with the government makes a high high profit. Somehow we need to find a way to limit government spending. Collecting more tax will not help when they spend it like drunken sailors.
Cutting Government spending will contract the economy.
Not necessarily. I am not advocating spend less. I am just saying instead of paying one employee $200 000 per year, hire four employees at $50 000.
And when they spend on other projects place a cap on certain types of spending. Just to spread the money out more.
It should actually be the opposite. Cut 4 jobs which are superfluous to pay a 200,000$ salary. Government benefits are posh and they make more than the average american worker, however for highly technical or specialized workers the private sector benefits packages or salaries dwarfs a government paycheck.
Correct.
If there are 2 jobs available, the same type of jobs and one paid 50k and the other one paid 200k, which one would you want?
Right, the Government wouldn't be able to attract qualified applicants.
Next.
Well that's very quick for you to answer.
Let me be more specific. Long ago some research was done on a government funded project. A freeway rest stop was being built. And turned out the contractor charged the government an extremely high amount for the commode. It was like? $20 000 ! When you add all these over expenditures. Not a lot is getting dine with your tax dollar. If there was a little more scrupulous behavior our tax dollar would be sufficient.
But obviously the idea disturbs you
Long ago in a far away galaxy, someone posted a fantastic story with zero supporting evidence, like a link that proves what you wrote.
Pffft.
Are you referring to the toilet in the B-1 Bomber? Its not like they could buy one at the Home Depot that would fit specs.
Taxation is theft. There is no such thing as paying a fair share to a thief.
"Whats fair is regulations like Glass Steagal that creates a stable banking community."
I like this post :) and I'd like to add a simple solution, Quit voting for Crooked ass Dumb shit Politicians like Bill Clinton (DEMOCRAT) who signed the stupid bill to repeal Glass Steagal.
AND, as Much hype as I read here about re-instating Glass Steagal or the like I am Totally Confused at the same level of anti-republicans mentioning it when it was the republicans Begging to regulate and PREVENT the crash while democrats who had been PAID campaign contributions by Fannie Mae and Freddy mac voted NOT to do Anything.
hey Let's watch some Actual footage shall we? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ohyu7-b7F8
nooo that wasn't on FOX so save the "Lies! Lies!" crap.
oh Wait! Obama, Barack Senator IL Dumbshitacrat $105,849 from Fannie Mae .(2008 cycle totals based on data downloaded from the Federal Election Commission on June 30, 2008)
YES your Hero took the 3rd Largest Bribe. (Hillary Rotten Clinton was the 4th)
just tell me. how can a liberal democrat Now want regulations, was it your elected criminals betrayed you? were too stupid to see what was coming? or Both?
either way, isn't that enough reason to Stop voting for Democrats?
beyond all logic
It was liberal Democrats that wrote, voted for, and signed Glass-Steagal (Glass and Steagal both Dems) and other New Deal era regulations. Bill Clinton is a neoliberal, like every president since Reagan - a consensus that crosses party lines. DLC "New Democrats" are GOP-lite neoliberals. Obama is barely to the left of that crowd. Friedman, free markets and free trade have been in vogue since the late 70s.
That said, Gramm-Leach-Bliley was the act that repealed Glass-Steagal. Gramm, Leach, and Bliley are all Republicans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act
There are maybe 20-30 truly liberal Democrats (not neoliberal types) in both houses of congress. When Democrats started competing with Republicans for corporate cash, they stopped being liberals.
Of course, none of this has anything to do with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, which had almost nothing to do with the crisis - they don't underwrite subprime loans. Further, you seem to also be confusing deregulation with the 1977 CRA - modifed in 1995 - that provided incentives for depository institutions to make loans to minorities. But less than 20% of subprime loans were provided by depository institutions.
Excellent fact filled comment.
Thanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg
http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/
http://blog.thezeitgeistmovement.com/
http://www.thevenusproject.com/
Yawn. Got nothing to say?
Its the business cycle and the intervention of the government.
It's purely the result of Greenspan's fed and all the laws that were changed in 1999. If you think it's not that you haven't done your homework ----------your just talking.
The trolls are very young and not very bright tonight. And generally ignorant.
No silly me. I thought it stemmed from when things started to get changed. Silly me.
You are pretty silly ------------there's a lot of books out there. I'd recommend "it takes a pillage" written by an X Goldman exec. Then when you post you can sound like you actually know something
Continue the failed narrative, its worked well for the 1%.
Sigh, like you really understand what you just posted. The Business cycle ended in June of 2009. Over 2 years ago. http://www.nber.org/cycles.html
No I meant the government interfered in a self regulating system.
A self regulating system? Doesnt exist. Its a fantasy brought to you by Free market ideologues.
Why can't it?
You also said business cycle. Which I just demonstrated ended over 2 years ago, at least have the self respect to acknowledge you were wrong.