Lloyd Morrison is a great source of thought provoking material. Today he has circulated Losing our way from Bob Herbert of the New York Times.
There is plenty of economic activity in the U.S., and plenty of wealth. But like greedy children, the folks at the top are seizing virtually all the marbles. Income and wealth inequality in the U.S. have reached stages that would make the third world blush. As the Economic Policy Institute has reported, the richest 10 percent of Americans received an unconscionable 100 percent of the average income growth in the years 2000 to 2007, the most recent extended period of economic expansion.
A glimpse into the world the Libertarianz have in mind for us… where greed and self service are the currencies de jour.
To think “Liberty” considers our lives a socialist cesspit, in light of such devastating numbers as
“Nearly 14 million Americans are jobless and the outlook for many of them is grim. Since there is just one job available for every five individuals looking for work, four of the five are out of luck. Instead of a land of opportunity, the U.S. is increasingly becoming a place of limited expectations. A college professor in Washington told me this week that graduates from his program were finding jobs, but they were not making very much money, certainly not enough to think about raising a family.
There is plenty of economic activity in the U.S., and plenty of wealth. But like greedy children, the folks at the top are seizing virtually all the marbles. Income and wealth inequality in the U.S. have reached stages that would make the third world blush. As the Economic Policy Institute has reported, the richest 10 percent of Americans received an unconscionable 100 percent of the average income growth in the years 2000 to 2007, the most recent extended period of economic expansion.
Americans behave as if this is somehow normal or acceptable. It shouldn’t be, and didn’t used to be. Through much of the post-World War II era, income distribution was far more equitable, with the top 10 percent of families accounting for just a third of average income growth, and the bottom 90 percent receiving two-thirds. That seems like ancient history now.
The current maldistribution of wealth is also scandalous. In 2009, the richest 5 percent claimed 63.5 percent of the nation’s wealth. The overwhelming majority, the bottom 80 percent, collectively held just 12.8 percent.
This inequality, in which an enormous segment of the population struggles while the fortunate few ride the gravy train, is a world-class recipe for social unrest. Downward mobility is an ever-shortening fuse leading to profound consequences. “
Here is the plan – almost all has been addressedd or carried out, not working
http://www.act.org.nz/plan
When John Key came into power- apparently to his surprise as he was so illprepared -the Dom post said in an editorial’ something to the effect that it was great to have a money trader as a P.M. because he was used to thinking ‘on his feet’ and making spontaneous quick decisions off the top of his head. I thought -not the type of thinking – i.e. ‘quick thought, action, hope, no planning’ – that a goodleader of a country needs.
In my opinion (as Duncan Garner said Friday night of Mr.Goff whilst undermining him again, this time on hearsay) John Key had no plan. He is not that type of thinker – he just carries out the wishes of others as a front man or perhaps ‘middlemanager’ in the business world (negotiating, telling one side one thing and another side something else-anything they want to hear so they like him -and trade.) He therefore needed someone who had a plan and who was experienced – Rodney Hide- hence the Plan above.( Key also said to reporters on Oct.20,2009 ‘politics is much harder than you think’, so I think he was finding it challenging then.)
We know English and others Lockwood? had the plan of doing what they wanted once they got into power(the reported phone text).This explains many of their broken promises(GST) bulldozing laws(what they wanted e.g.ACC, Hobbit, 90day law etc.)’abuse of power as regards the law ((Paula Bennett and the solo parent) and anti-democratic actions (E-can), all do as we want, we’re in power.
SO in fact the only Plan laid out for the country was Acts’ and judging by the content it is , or was, the only one being used. Interesting, as Act was only voted in thanks to Epsom (and National manipulation), by a very small amount of the electorate, and yet it is their plan we (New Zealand) are suffering under.
Was it not these people with their short-sighted, neoliberal ideology that hi- jacke the Labour Party in the 80s in the guise of Douglas,Prebble etc. Is not one of them still in Act now, and did not Epsom vote them in?
I believe that the people were deceived and trusted that that that ‘nice Mr Key” who had lots of money himself had a plan for a brighter future for New Zealand. Never mind that we never saw the plan or policy details as to how this brighter future was to come about(except Tax cuts and Nat Standards,no detail though. However Mr. Key says it will be so, so it must be true and he has such a nice smile.
Even though it was shown before the election, that he did not tell the truth about shares and even though he, Rodney Hide and the media followed no principled process by saying Winston Peters was guilty of something even before the outcome of any hearing that they had called for(where he was exonerated,) no one thought anything was wrong with him.
It came to be that whatever John Key said or did it must be alright because he was so ‘nice’. Never mind that untruths were told, unprincipled behaviour was displayed and no plan was ever shown or seen.
I hope the dom post can now see that stock floor trading skills – spontaneity, litle thought needed, few principles -just the luck and instinct of a gambler and the ability to be sparing with the truth when one has to try and play all sides when trading. These skills are not are conducive to good leadership especially when the leadership required is that of running a great country- running it and not running it into the ground.
However there was a plan – a HIDEous one.
Trevor, this sound like michael moore,
maybe this is the plan, if you look after those at the top and make it hard for those at the bottom, it makes it easier for those at the top to control the masses.
It would not surprise me if national raise the idea of making our election cycle 4 years instead of three.
Where is the plan?
I have to agree.
balance deleted troll warning ban next time Trevor
sica
nice rendition of the emperor has no clothes!
waterboy, it’s the american way, look after the folks at the top who everyone says pay “all” the taxes, but the wealthiest pay almost none, cos of offshore havens etc etc, andthen make sure you have a political arm which will repeat ad nauseum that the poor are poor of their own making, dont try hard enough, too lazy, parents disinterested, so now you are poor and it’s your own fault, so of course the vERY wealthy deserve to be left alone, oh and dont forget to accuse anyone who opposes this system (because it IS a system) of just being envious of successful people.
Tracey, all true what you say (that’s why I got out and I am here), but the disturbing bit is that I am hearing the same despicable line of reasoning here. And no one seems to be bothered by it.
Yeah, we don’t even have a CGT yet …
An interview with Warren Buffett
Jeffrey Sachs from Harvard was saying that the United States is turning into a plutocracy. And this is a feeling you get throughout the world, that the politicians are not powerful and the power is in the hands of a few strong players in the business sector. Do you feel that way?
“We are still a democracy, but we have moved in my lifetime towards a plutocracy. We do not have a plutocracy, I want to emphasize that, but the distribution of wealth and the influence of wealth have moved in that direction.
“If you look at the 1992 top-400 tax returns in the United States, the average income for those 400 people was $45 million per person. The last available figures show $340 million per person – that is eight for one in a period when the average worker went no place.
“The average tax rate for the top 400 went from 28% down to 16.6% during the same period, so we have had a system where as people have gotten richer and richer, they have been favored by taxation and have gotten richer to a greater degree. To my mind that is a bad trend, and it will probably get corrected in time. The rich have more influence in politics than they did 50 years ago.”
How will it change?
“I think it will change because we still have a democracy. Eventually the power of a correct idea is felt, but sometimes it is long and delayed.”
http://english.themarker.com/warren-buffett-the-u-s-is-moving-toward-plutocracy-1.351236
Interestingly, according to many, including the current government, the figures above, which show more money in the hands of the extremely wealthy is supposed to lead to job growth and higher wages, but it’s not. Funny that.
Gaby
One of the problems is that the National and ACT parties have alot more money available, both overtly and covertly to further their agendas, than most if not all other parties. Accordingly national and Act have been able to spend an awful lot of money and time “framing” the argument, with PR and marketing/advertising techniques of old. There are an army of people who are allowing themselves to be so mesmorised by the alleged misdeeds of the past government that they will allow the current one open slate no matter what the consequences.
MOST NZers are hurting financially now. MOST NZers believe this government couldnt do anything to prevent the current state of affairs and the earthquakes have assisted that misunderstanding. This is a clever and manipulative Govt (all governments are I might add of whichever ideological persuasion)which truly believes what it peddles. People are convinced by that. Labour has chances to mitigate the damage to NZ. By a strong hard focus, and they could do with taking sica (above’s) message and repeating it ad nauseum until the election. NZers, like most human beings have this habit of belileving that if something is repeated often enough it must be true.
I agree with you Sica, and to me the point that your comment makes is ‘What did the country elect when it returned John Key?’
An empty suit.
The more time passes, the more it seems like John Key wanted to be the front man for policies he didn’t bother to understand. No matter how bad the economic data is, John Key will not reign in Bill English, because Key doesn’t understand economic performance enough to question English’s position. No matter how much the house is abused by its leader Gerry Brownlee’s insistence that urgency should be used at all times, Key won’t pull that in because he thinks it is the only way to proceed.
When a plan is presented to him, as you put it Sica, out of the ACT party manifesto, Key will agree to it, because he never developed a plan of his own and is unable to assess merits and flaws of the proposal for himself.
The country deserves better. I know he is popular, but John Key’s performance on measurable outcomes makes Jim Bolger look good.
Sorry I thought you were asking yourseves “where is the plan”
Tracey – the “world” that Libertarianz have in mind is one where individual rights are respected and no-one is sacrificed to anyone else.
It doesn’t bother me if others are earning more than I am. My income reflects how hard I work – as it should. If others earn squillions through honest effort, then good on them – they are probably creating work for others.