On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.

On 8-Sep-2010, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They haven't

given up.

When the concepts implied in the writings were in place, the U.S. was
growing exponentially, uneducated millions were making good wages and all
were successful. Now (since the 70's) handouts from the productive minority
(who are now gone) have taken priority, and the masses have to move back to
concrete housing complexes.

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 02:04:29 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:




Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

productivity went up 30% between 1997 and 2007. the middle class saw
none of this in increased wages while the rich got richer.

On 8-Sep-2010, Wayne.B wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the

neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They
haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?

One way trade agreements that bled all productivity from the U.S., initiated
by Clinton with the most favorite nation status, and NAFTA, originally
promoted by Bush 1. The maniacs however all blame W because they want
higher welfare checks and didn't think it might happen until the current
jackass took office. It WON'T happen (lowest income rate goes up 50% on
January 1, 2011) now either, but the mindless worship will continue. The
key word is mindless.

On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

ayn rand wrote pablum for the intellectually challenged who believe
the easter bunny is real

Which book do you disagree with? Oh.....well....guess there wasnt time, but
"I heard on MSNBC.........." Hahahahahahahha

Reading cures stupidity.

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:07:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

There are no complicated concepts in Rand's books. The books are
long-winded, but they're pretty straightforward. They're fiction, but the
neocons used them as a blueprint for wrecking the US economy. They
haven't
given up.

I'd be interested in hearing about exactly what you think the so
called "neocons" did to wreck the US economy. The war in Iraq was
ill advised and increased debt but hardly wrecked the economy. The
deregulation of Wall Street was already well along under the Clinton
administration. Relaxation of mortgage lending standards began in
the Clinton administration. What else?




Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general, and gut social programs to promote their
ill-advised, Ayn Rand-like philosophy of the free market uber alles. Do
your own research or get your head out of the sand? Where have you been
for the last decade? Have you picked up a newspaper? The Iraq war cost us
over $1T and counting. Ill advised? How about criminally negligent. If you
want to blame a former president, start with Reagan.

And, you're probably going to tell me next that the last crowd of
Republicans are going to make things better by doing the same thing they
did last time they were in power. What else.

Where is that objective "stated"?

On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME
FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

productivity went up 30% between 1997 and 2007. the middle class saw
none of this in increased wages while the rich got richer.

Productivity has nothing to do (usually) with labor hours. Automation and
imported materials (such as in the autos you buy) decrease costs; cost has
nothing to do with price, productivity increases as prices remain the same
or increase with the lower cost or labor consumption. Less resources are
used during output, revenue is maintained and profits increase. Increased
productivity has nothing to do with factory rats working harder. In fact,
technology and imports made labor irrelevant.

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 02:24:30 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

Productivity and profit are the goals (your wages are YOUR profit) but
they're undermined by the slime you've elected. No more handouts due to
bankruptcy, no more core industries, no more jobs. Handouts WHICH CAME
FROM
YOU IN THE FIRST PLACE cannot make you whole, and are making you broke.

productivity went up 30% between 1997 and 2007. the middle class saw
none of this in increased wages while the rich got richer.

Productivity has nothing to do (usually) with labor hours.

you're missing the point, as usual. you keep pretending the middle
class should reap NO benefits at all from the economy, save slave
labor wages.

AND you keep pretending the rich, by virtue of being rich, DO
contribute something to the economy.

go ahead....prove it.

Automation and
imported materials (such as in the autos you buy) decrease costs; cost has
nothing to do with price, productivity increases as prices remain the same
or increase with the lower cost or labor consumption. Less resources are
used during output, revenue is maintained and profits increase. Increased
productivity has nothing to do with factory rats working harder. In fact,
technology and imports made labor irrelevant.

gee. tell it to the mexicans

On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 02:12:28 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:


On 8-Sep-2010, bpuharic wrote:

99% of the posters here couldn't read Ayn Rand - too many big words, no
bedwetting welfare philiosophy, it's takes more than 30 minutes, and it
would interrupt Dancing for Dollars.

ayn rand wrote pablum for the intellectually challenged who believe
the easter bunny is real

Which book do you disagree with? Oh.....well....guess there wasnt time, but
"I heard on MSNBC.........." Hahahahahahahha

Reading cures stupidity.

obviously you've never read a book in general, or ayn rand in
particular

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:31:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Oh come on Wayne... the neocons stated objective is to destroy the middle
class and the economy in general

I've never heard anyone say that, right, left, or middle of the road.
You are regurgitating the talking points of the left without adding
any substance.


It is classic disaster capitalism, and was openly stated by several in the
previous administration, e.g., Paul Wolfowitz. Read Naomi Wolf's The Shock
Doctrine and get back to us. You don't read enough, apparently.