On 26/07/2010 4:35 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:39:02 -0600,
wrote:

On 25/07/2010 5:21 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 09:54:26 -0600,
wrote:

1/2 if not more of the politicians are on the
take, or there because they don't ruffle the cartels business. With
terms of 6 years, their leaders are term dictators.

right wingers dont mind govts on the take. bush's whole administration
was a division of oil companies. yet the right said nothing.

in mexico, a small group of rich people control the country. and it's
getting that way here. american has the worst GINI coefficient of any
of the 28 industrialized democracies

How does this differ from the US or Canada?

Say I was worth billions, knew Obama would bail me out, so I gave him
lots of "donation".

well you're not too bright so let me explain economics 101.

as KEYNES once said, 'if you owe the bank $1000 you have a problem. if
you owe the bank 1,000,000 the bank has a problem'.

the rich have privatized rewards and socialized risk. that's the
whole point of moral hazard theory...to identify banks 'too big to
fail'.

while dems were working on a regulatory package to resolve this, the
conservatives kept bleating the middle class HAD to bail out the rich
in the FUTURE otherwise the rich couldnt stay rich

Solve what? SOX wasn't persued. Just more BS for the masses, Obama
bailed out their sorry asses and still does today. Did you ever ask
yourself where does $1.5+++ trillion/year go?

--

Government has liberals, idealists and lawyers, but where is the common
sense?