Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditJustice Louis Brandeis once said, "It is one of the happy accidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory, and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." The Maryland General Assembly has taken advantage of this "happy accident" to pass a National Popular Vote bill and is expected to pass a Living Wage bill today as well.
Maryland State Senator and Nation contributor Jamie Raskin told me, "We passed the National Popular Vote bill in the General Assembly by mobilizing the essential democratic principles: the person with the most votes for president should win the office and every citizen's vote should count equally regardless of geography or time zone…. And with the Living Wage bill we have said that the state government should not be a neutral umpire in the economy but an active instrument for lifting people out of grinding poverty into at least the modestly secure working class. The gap between the minimum wage and the actual living wage is an index of shame, which we are about to close in Maryland."
The National Popular Vote bill calls for awarding Maryland's 10 electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote instead of the winner of the state vote. It only takes effect when states representing a majority of votes in the Electoral College agree to join a binding National Popular Vote compact. The movement is being led by the National Popular Vote campaign and it has over 300 sponsoring legislators in 47 states. Other organizations involved in the effort include: FairVote, Progressive States Network, Asian American Action Fund, National Black Caucus of State Legislators, National Latino Congreso, Common Cause, and such former Members of Congress as Republicans Tom Campbell and Jake Garn, independent John Anderson, and Democrat Birch Bayh.
According to Rob Richie and Ryan O'Donnell of FairVote, "Under the Constitution, states have exclusive power – indeed have responsibility – to award their electors to reflect the interests of their people." Like Maryland, Hawaii also passed its National Popular Vote bill and so have single chambers in Arkansas and Colorado. Last year, California passed its own version but it was vetoed by The Terminator. Richie reports that establishing a national popular vote is supported by 70 percent of the public according to polls. "This should be no surprise," Richie and O'Donnell write. "The current system makes most Americans irrelevant in electing their most powerful elected office."
"[Maryland], like the two-thirds of all states consigned to the safe red or blue column, has been reduced to ‘spectator' status in presidential elections," Raskin said. "… I believe that Maryland and now Hawaii can kick off an insurrection of the spectator states to demand a truly national presidential campaign instead of this debased division and polarization of red and blue states, a process which depresses turnout and participation."
Richie points out that in 2004, voter turnout was 8 percent higher in battleground states than non-battlegrounds and "fully 17 percent higher among young adults – a division only to grow in future elections with presidential campaign activity limited to battlegrounds…." And Richie and O'Donnell note, "The presidential campaigns and their allies spent more money on ads in Florida in the final month of the campaign than their combined spending in 46 other states." Raskin adds, "In the last two [presidential] elections, 99 percent of campaign dollars and candidate visits were spent in 16 battleground states and two-thirds of the money and appearances in just five key ones like Ohio and Florida."
"By strengthening the voting power of all Americans and treating all voters equally," Richie says, "the National Popular Vote plan is based on two of the key pillars of lasting reform: equality and universality."
Maryland's Living Wage Bill will have a lasting impact as well. "It's going to lift tens of thousands of Marylanders out of poverty," Delegate Tom Hucker told the Washington Post. "It makes Maryland a leader in ensuring that our tax dollars are helping build the middle class rather than perpetuating poverty."
And it's not just Democrats who are doing the work of small-d democrats. Florida's Republican Governor, Charlie Crist, has fulfilled his campaign promise to work towards restoring voting rights for convicted felons in his state despite the fact that it will add "tens of thousands of Democratic voters to the rolls -- possibly pushing a House seat or two into the blue column" and helping any Democratic presidential nominee. (Maryland's General Assembly has also acted to secure voting rights for more people with felony convictions and Governor Martin O'Malley is leaning towards signing the bill. Richie says that O'Malley – the only challenger to defeat an incumbent governor in last year's elections – has been instrumental in spurring progressive change by promising to sign such legislation as this.)
These actions by the Maryland General Assembly and the action of a Republican Governor serve as reminders that what Nation article John Nichols wrote in a 2003 still holds true: "… some of the most important fights – for affordable healthcare, education, environmental protection and clean politics – are taking place beyond the Beltway. Often there is far more space for debate on these issues, and more opportunities for victory, in statehouses… Thus, while it is essential to battle Bush and his minions in Washington, it is equally essential to understand that the road to renewal may well run through the states."
Share this article
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Thoughts on politics, current affairs, riffs and reflections on what’s in the news and what’s not--but should be.
RSS
Maryland is free to do what it wants with its electors (within the Constitution)....but you DO realize that under such a law in 2004....solid Blue Maryland would have....gone to Bush!... despite who Marylanders as a majority would have voted for! Is that democratic?!?!?
As for the Living Wage Bill....I noted it only effects "employees in state contracts". So anybody NOT covered still doesn't get $11.30 an hour.
But it is good to note a FIGURE finally being given for WHAT the "living wage" is....$11.30 an hour, but no more.
Posted by Mask at 04/10/2007 @ 1:27pm
Although this is a good first step in updating Presidential elections, I strongly believe that basing the awarding of electoral votes on who wins the most popular votes nationally would skew the elections toward the highly populated states and be unfair to the small, thinly populated states.
A better and more competitive and comprehensive approach would be the awarding of electoral votes based on the percentage of votes a candidate gets in each state's general election. This approach would force candidates to campaign in all 50 states, and moreover it would enable the impact of independent candidates to be fully felt.
One caveat: The new concept may need to address the possibility that one candidate may not get a majority of the nation's electoral votes.
Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/10/2007 @ 1:37pm
Our city passed a living wage ordiance in order to do business with the city...and required all workers be paid a living wage...whatever that is...according to who, I am not sure , but here is where problems occured..
City parking lots and ramps are manned by city workers and had to raise rates...the managers said we have some workers who have been here longer than others, they bitched," it isn't fair to have all being paid the same and I have been here longer than..."....mean time, the city council wants to lower parking rates in order to attract more business downtown...so now you have a mandated $ 9.00 for workers and city fathers want to lower the parking rates, which, never had enough to pay the % 7.50 they were currently being paid..guess where the extra money for workers is going to come from? Yup, the same tax payers who never went downtown before...and won't tomorrow..
or this gem..
The city pays a private firm to run the,for a better word, the dog catcher service, on a bid basis....now, the company has to bill the city for their wages and expenses on an agreed contract...so..., the wages of some workers had to be raised to meet the mandate for "Living Wage" law, so the company must comply to do business with the city, and ran into the same problem regarding time some workers were there over others and the new wage...so....the company asks the city for an increase in the amount the city agreed to pay for the services in order to comply with the city law...and of course the city refused, so the company says, fine, you collect your own dogs and cats, ect.,.....now the city has to spend millions for a building and a service that they had for pennies on the dollar, and the company lays off most of their workers completely..and moves to Omaha...
Jobs in the private sector lost, tax revenue lost,and another private entity doing a job cheaper than govt is dead, replaced by a more inefficient over priced union job paid for by tax payers...who never use the service..
This is occuring in Lincoln as many other companys petition for exclusions, exceptions or just flat assed, moves away...and the chumps paying the taxes get the bill for the "progressive Govt"..
Is so sad it has become funny...and our Progressive mayor is not running again...she will be lucky to get out of town alive...the amount of companys that have left Lincoln is staggering...
Unitended consequences are inherent in most govt ideas put forth by well intentioned people with no experience in the real world....Maryland will regret this bill...watch over time as the jobs move accross state lines..
You cannot artificialy create a perfect world, but you can screw one up with mindless meddling....
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 1:41pm
Freiheit-Getting votes by doing what the people you represent want is called Democracy.
Posted by i'm nobody at 04/10/2007 @ 1:47pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/10/2007 @ 1:41pm
So MAASCH, what you are saying is you want everything for free, or at least don't want to pay the real value for it.
As your salary probably keeps going up and up, you don't want the cost of the little things to go up either, because it will make you feel less rich and powerful. Is that it?
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 1:48pm
And now, the good city fathers are looking to open up city owned gasoline staions...any guesses how that is going to affect..
1. The private companys and the workers they hired as they lay off and move away...
2. The cost of gas to consumers..
3. The avaialbility of gas , since city sales of gas WILL not reach private sales.
4. Cost of gas to tax payers as city realizes it can't make any money and just bills the tax payer for shortages of revenue..
%. The consummers as they drive accros city lines..5 miles away and buy their gas..
Hopefull some brains might be awakened to this fiasco and kill it before it even gets passed the council..
America can't afford the Progressive agenda as it ignores all basic and natural laws of business...
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 1:49pm
Posted by ORAIBI1952 04/10/2007 @ 1:37pm
Why should the majority of people living in major metorpolitan areas be forced to accept a president elected by rural America. It makes no sense. Besides, those rural Americans and small-staters will still Reps and two Senators. You could argue they weild too much power in the Senate even.
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 1:51pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/10/2007 @ 1:49
I'm guessing wherever you live as no industrial base? All those middle-class jobs been shipped to China? What about the farmers, all bought out by giant agricultrual corporations? Who's fault is that? Nope, not progressives.
MAASCH it sounds like your city's economy is based on gas station attendants and parking lot attendants. Maybe you city deserves to dry up and blow away if they can't cut in the "free market".
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 1:53pm
So MAASCH, what you are saying is you want everything for free, or at least don't want to pay the real value for it.
As your salary probably keeps going up and up, you don't want the cost of the little things to go up either, because it will make you feel less rich and powerful. Is that it?
Posted by BLUETEXAN 04/10/2007 @ 1:48pm
This is what you come up with after reading how business and jobs are driven out for higher inefficient govt projects? That I don't want prices to go up?
You are shitting me, right? Not really serious..
Come be serious. This could hit your city...
Prices should go up naturaly due to availability, supplys..ect..not some govt hack...
My salary? It went down by $ 50,000 last year...which is a big chunk of my income...it is my "Living Wage" part...I had a number of customers go out of business...I had a bad year, as does happen to all from time to time...and yes prices have gone up..
Do you work or run a business or anything?
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 1:54pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/10/2007 @ 1:54pm
"My salary? It went down by $ 50,000 last year...which is a big chunk of my income...it is my "Living Wage" part...I had a number of customers go out of business...I had a bad year, as does happen to all from time to time...and yes prices have gone up.."
That's too bad, maybe you need to move to a better market. Or maybe you need a new President that knows how to stimulate an economy rather than oversee the contiunal exit of middle-class jobs and a continual growth of immigrant slave labor.
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 1:59pm
Posted by BLUETEXAN 04/10/2007 @ 1:53pm
Lincoln is the capital and home of the Sttae govt,the largest employer,the University and not a large heavy industry area..
Most of that moved to Omaha..along with Gallop that was based here, Vise Grip, Cliff notes,...and on..all moved to Omaha..
agriculture? Ted Turner is the largest land owner here and Warren Buffet is the richest man in the state..his fortune safely invested away from the state and fed tax man..
We are concerned that the only jobs we will have here, the onces you noticed, because of the Progressive loons will be gas attendants and parking lots attendants once local govt and regs drives them off the real middle class jobs to OMAHA, where despite democrat mayors, these guys are not progressive fools...Omaha has, I think it is 10 Fortune 500 companys and does well...
Lincoln tends to follow the ideals of the Nation...and is hemeraging those middle jobs you claim to care so much about...and not to China..but to other parts of the state...
It is guys like you with your ideas we need to export to China so you can "help" them arrange their economy...and in 10 years they will be so fucked up they will export their jobs some where else..and solve our "China " dilema..
I am just trying to warn others of what we are experiencing here..
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 2:06pm
America can't afford the Progressive agenda as it ignores all basic and natural laws of business...
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
Natural laws of business? If business is unable, unwilling to provide workers with a living wage then there is something flawed, false about these laws. You don't pay working men and women enough to support themselves; if you don't provide insurance at an affordable costs, then the government ends up having to pick up the slack.
Try and comprehend, old man, that not all people are middle men like you, chiseling a profit off the work of Third World labor. Some people actually work for a living and do not enjoy the luxury of an income that allows them to put money away for a rainy day or purchase health insurance out of their pocket.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:09pm
Blue Texan,
I don't disagree with your conclusion that the small states wield too much power in the Congress, specifically the Senate, but neither do I wish to live in a "tyranny-of-the-majority" nation.
Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:09pm
Posted by FREIHEIT 04/10/2007 @ 2:05pm
What's to joke about? It's not a laughing matter that smaller states have control over who is elected President. You chide I'M NOBODY about what you think is democracy, but when it comes to electing the most powerful person in the country (& world) you don't want democracy? What gives?
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 2:10pm
Freiheit-If you folks would read a history book you'll discover that your brand of capitalism is the best way to guarantee a socialist/communist revolution.Reform came about because greedy people wanted it all no matter how much their workers suffered.Greed created unions,living wages etc. and since the greedy people refuse to change and use a little common sense and decency the government has to step in and force such people to act like human beings rather than like a pack rat that never has enough.
Posted by i'm nobody at 04/10/2007 @ 2:12pm
It is NOT the job of government to subsidize employers or employees. To allow that is a further step into a loss of our liberties. Posted by FREIHEIT
If employers are unable to pay their employees enough to support themselves, then the government ends up subsidizing the pay of those employees.
Are you referring to the liberty of a few to exploit the many?
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:14pm
I am just trying to warn others of what we are experiencing here..
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/10/2007 @ 2:06pm
That's really sweet of you. I'm sure you had "Chicken Little's the sky is falling" counterparts back when the minimum wage was raised last time.
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 2:18pm
Posted by MTSPENCE05 04/10/2007 @ 2:09pm
Curious, MTSP....do you, like Maryland does, consider $11.30 an hour to be the limit of a "living wage"?
Posted by Mask at 04/10/2007 @ 2:18pm
Maasch-It's more likely that your income went down because you play on here too much and not for the reasons you gave.
Posted by i'm nobody at 04/10/2007 @ 2:21pm
To all your "free market", anti-living wagers...do you think the government doesn't help businesses through tax abatements, SUV write-offs, off-shore shell companies, etc., etc.? Don't you think its time the government worked for the lower men and women on the totem pole?
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 2:21pm
Posted by MASK
I have no idea. If Maryland is comparable to DFW, $11.30 would not be sufficient to support yourself, much less a child.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:21pm
Posted by RIO BRAVO 04/10/2007 @ 2:19pm
Oh and Rio Braindead shows up and exhibits his total lack of knowledge of everything (in this case...history). That isn't why the electroal college was created. Why don't you go do some homework and figure it out.
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 2:23pm
Blue,
" Or maybe you need a new President that knows how to stimulate an economy rather than oversee the contiunal exit of middle-class jobs and a continual growth of immigrant slave labor. "
We have a president that fired up the economy after it entered a recessionary stage in the last quarer of Clinton Presidency...it is the next guy I am worried about...I am not one of those wjho hold a single president capable for the economy, simnce it is so global today...and you seem to think a presdient can stop industrys from moving to more advantageous conditions..
Grown ups realize natural shifts in markets and we adjust..but politicians can fuck up an entire industry...I try to anticipate it can notsa always..
I am not sure what you are doing for a living but you seem to be somewhat hostile to me and my experiences. I am curious as to your occupation and how things affect your job..world events and markets to affect mine, since the market is the world and not just the US anymore...it is a natural progression of sorts..
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 2:24pm
What is the number of small family owned private businesses that benifit from the excesses you disdain?
Posted by RIO BRAVO
The system--the politicians--work in favor of corporate business. The only problem is that small business is too weak to change that, so they go after labor instead. The petite bourgeoise is the voting block that always supports right wing, repressive governments; their concern is not democracy, rights or anything of the sort; their only concern is making a profit.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:26pm
it is a natural progression of sorts..
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
No, it is a man made progression, steered and controlled by those ontop.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:28pm
Well, now that the forced increase to be paid workers doing Gov work has taken effect here, many businesses will simply do two things:
1. Stop doing business with the State, or, more likely, 2. Raise the cost of the end product to cover the increase in the wage, a cost which, depending on the product, will be passed on down the line. Hope the guy at the END of the line isn't the worker who got the increase!
Katrina, Your Business 101 class still awaits you!
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/10/2007 @ 2:28pm
My father in law has a painting company in Ft Worth and pays his workers $14 an hour I think...at one time he had 150 guys on his crews and painted things like the University of Texas...now he has shrunk down and has a pretty efficient company...his forman is Mexican and has been with him for 15 years..he hires only Mexicans who are citizens and seems to do very well...the hardest jobs to make any money are the schools and govt projects, so he passes on them...I think the economy is healthy down there according to him..and he is a red stater as they come...
Blue, you are a Texan, correct?
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 2:30pm
. Stop doing business with the State, or, more likely, 2. Raise the cost of the end product to cover the increase in the wage, a cost which, depending on the product, will be passed on down the line. Hope the guy at the END of the line isn't the worker who got the increase!
Katrina, Your Business 101 class still awaits you!
Posted by CHIP THORNTON
More rationalizations. What's the term, "optimum price" or something like that for the price that is right for the product (the most sales at the highest profit, etc)? It might just happen that it would mean less profit for those on top.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:33pm
Posted by FREIHEIT 04/10/2007 @ 2:25pm
Affirmative action and my beliefs on it have nothing to do with wanting our president to be elected like EVERY OTHER ELECTED OFFICAL in the country. Why does the President get elected in such an odd fashion? Why are we using a holdover system that was used to prevent the people from picking their own President?
Besides, say I did belive in affirmative action, getting rid of the electoral college would be consistent with that because that would mean the vote of more minorities would be more valuable as they tend to live in metropolitan areas.
Posted by BlueTexan at 04/10/2007 @ 2:37pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
And TX is one (if not the) leading state in poverty, crime, uninsured, number of incarcerated, etc.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:38pm
Federalist Paper No. 62, written by James Madison, should be read by all to understand why the Founding Fathers established an equal vote arrangement for the Senate. You may not agree with their reasoning, but at least you will know what they were thinking.
Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:40pm
Many of the people I know will no longer do business with the govt because of their rules, regs, red tape, and plain old foolishness. It is to time consuming to work in conditions that are so rigged as to make a profit impossible. I will never supply the govt.. and I would rather avoid the govt all together..a private company will fight me over price and time, but also realises I need profit in order to stay a reliable supplier and to survive.... I realise my customer also has to survive..we work together.., symbiotic...govt NEVER cultivates this type of enviroment...it is all compliance with forms...and kills off industry or puts them on the govt parolls...the biggest employer in the world is the Fed Govt...that is sick and eats money faster and more than any ENRON can steal..
All of those who ream big buisness and corporate hate forget the fact that all those fucking regs you think are against or punish the big guys actually fuck up the bulk work of job providers in the country...the small buisness...these are the ones who pay for your "living Wage, Min wages, regulations and rules...and in the end these guys cut the jobs in order to stay alive and away from you and the govt "helpers or fixers"...and you end up with ENRONS ...
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 2:42pm
Freiheit-Is one book and calling me an idiot all you have?If you read my posts you'll discover that I don't call people names and won't at this time either.
Posted by i'm nobody at 04/10/2007 @ 2:42pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
Has everybody seen the old Frankenstein with Karloff. Remember how the creature is burned one time by fire and from then on the monster acts irrationally toward a flame? "Arrgh, ahhh, arrrrh"--waving his arms, going apeshit. That's the old man. Sure, fire can burn you, but it is also one of the fundamental tools in the development of civilization. The same can be said of gov, taxes, regulations. They can be bad, but they're a necessity and they can do a great deal of good. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
And this infatuation with the "free" market is irrational. Economics is not chemistry or physics; these "natural laws" are not immutable facts, they are human made.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:48pm
and you end up with ENRONS ...
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
Wasn't ENRON a direct result of lax regulation, no oversight?
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:50pm
Posted by I'M NOBODY
Evidently it's the one book he has read (or the only book that supports his beliefs).
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 2:52pm
Why should those at the top have less money, #15L? Yes, the "optimum price" is that price that the market determines is the best price for a certain quantity of product. If the Gov interferes with it through artificial wage or price increases, the business must reciprocate to maintain the same margin, or lose money.
I also notice you say I "rationalize" a lot. Not sure I understand, since if you believe I'm trying to convince MYSELF of the things I say, you must think again.
Chip
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/10/2007 @ 2:55pm
or lose money.
I'm sorry, I forgot I was talking to a 50 something man that finds it important to be thought of as #1. It's sad that your life is so lacking that you must find comfort in something so juvenile.
Those at the top should have less money if that profit grotesque, bloated, iniquitous. If your employees cannot afford to support themselves with what they're paid something is wrong. Plus, the more money workers earn, the more money there is for the economy and the tax base. Those making the huge bucks can only buy so much; they pay little in taxes with write-offs. A living wage contributes to the well being of a society as a whole.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 3:03pm
MTSPENCE-The problem is that other "experts" will say different things in other books.Happens in every field of study.Anyone these days can go online and find an "expert" to back up their opinion on any subject no matter how strange that opinion might be to any person considered rational.America must be kind to us who are her "lower" class citizens.An honest days work for an honest days pay is a good motto.
Posted by i'm nobody at 04/10/2007 @ 3:19pm
The naivete of the "free marketers" always astounds me on these pages. MAASCH, CHIP, FREIHEIT, we can always rely on you guys to knee jerk react to proposals of new manipulations / distortions in what I assume you think are currently free markets.
Show me anything that you think is an example of a free market.
As to Maasch.....from what I remember you work in the insurance business.....if you don't think government regulation / oversigt has a place in a market why the fuck do you work in the MOST distorted of all markets???????
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 3:21pm
Freiheit-Apology accepted.I barely passed econ 101 and am only interested in this from the point of view of the low paid person that I was before I retired.In my case I knew before I went to college that my career choice was low paying so it was voluntary,but it still was unpleasant at times.
Posted by i'm nobody at 04/10/2007 @ 3:23pm
No, I forgot, old boy, your "above" all that #1 stuff. You can stop with the juvenile stuff anytime, though, since I am completely at ease with my "outdated" feelings about maintaining the edge. If you feel such things should disappear from the psych by a certain age, so be it, but you waste your time insulting me over it.
Now, to the question? Who is to decide how much is too much for those at the top? And where does the "top" stop? The CEO's? Mid Mgt? These are question best determined my the market and definitly not by Gov.
You must roll your eyes when I harp so much on free economics & the market. Its because I believe that political & economic rights are synonomous. Try forcing economic socialism on a society and see how long it takes for your political rights to disappear as well. Ask the Chinese, (or Maasch) how well economic equality and political freedom mesh.
Chip
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/10/2007 @ 3:25pm
And I recommend that book as a starting point for an understanding of the dangers of political incentives conflicting with market incentives. An electorate that doesn't understand that is doomed.
Posted by FREIHEIT
Maybe you should read a few history books about the crash of '29; try some of the fiction written at the time, too, describing the effects the Great Depression had on ordinary Americans.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 3:27pm
No, I forgot, old boy, your "above" all that #1 stuff. You can stop with the juvenile stuff anytime, though, since I am completely at ease with my "outdated" feelings about maintaining the edge. If you feel such things should disappear from the psych by a certain age, so be it, but you waste your time insulting me over it.
Now, to the question? Who is to decide how much is too much for those at the top? And where does the "top" stop? The CEO's? Mid Mgt? These are question best determined my the market and definitly not by Gov.
You must roll your eyes when I harp so much on free economics & the market. Its because I believe that political & economic rights are synonomous. Try forcing economic socialism on a society and see how long it takes for your political rights to disappear as well. Ask the Chinese, (or Maasch) how well economic equality and political freedom mesh.
Chip
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/10/2007 @ 3:27pm
Presidential elections are about choosing a person to serve 4 years as President, and not, as MASK seems to think, electing Maryland's 10 presidential electors. When electoral votes reflect only the vote inside a single state (instead of the popular vote of all 50 states and DC), it becomes possible for a second-place candidate to win the White House. There is nothing "democratic" about that.
More importantly, when electoral votes reflect only the majority of a single state, the practical political effect is that two-thirds of the states become mere spectators in the presidential election. Candidates only campaign in closely divided battleground states. they ignore all the rest. That means candidates only focus on issues that will help them win in a tiny handful of states (Ohio and Florida). There is nothing "democratic" about that.
Posted by joreko at 04/10/2007 @ 3:32pm
Posted by CHIP THORNTON
And huge disparities in income are beneficial to a functioning democracy? And what about how these huge disparities are employed to buy off politicians that continue iniquitous monetary fiscal policies that give those making all the money unfair advantages? And what of the effects all these low paying jobs have on the tax base? on programs such as Social Security? Your outlook appears as limited, lacking, and uninformed as your infantile need to be "#1".
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 3:35pm
America can't afford the Progressive agenda as it ignores all basic and natural laws of business... MAASCH
Yet another shopworn gem from the hit parade of that bibber of bromides, MAASCH. As any other amriki with a few pesos (no doubt hard-earned by the sweat of his majestic brow) and an over-priced diploma framed upon his wall to display his wit (and disabuse his incredulous wife of her priceless knowledge to the contrary and prove his worth to the medley of intimate hinds and onagers who stop over to cudgel one another with tales of their personal prowess), MAASCH doesn't believe in anything but his own cause. Sure, he licks off the occasional warm-hearted plea for a better tomorrow led by the brightest and most disinterested people from both sides of the aisle, but at the close of business the only thing he really peddles is his own interest, leading him to follow fawningly, if not blindly, the path hewed by the bean counters and their horde of conspiring swine where nothing but business can save not just the day, and not only the nation, but the entire ignoble and misguided world from ruin, if not assured damnation. The use of phrases like "natural laws" sounds well and good, but it implies and order that requires a small ruling class with the vast majority left no decision but to obey this camorra that of course, works for nothing less than the cure of all evil, inequality and injustice in this world and the next.
But MAASCH is not free of inner compunction, which occasionally reveals itself in his attempts to combat his detractors with unsolicited boasting about the good he does for others and the pity that swells his little heart and compels him to toss some scraps to the mendicants and underdogs, who in his eyes may be a waste of space and own no place in the world ruled by "the natural laws of business", but it makes him look and feel less cold and gives him back that spring in his step to the next well-deserved dollar. All is good in the world so long as MAASCH and his ilk have their jack and all the little freedoms it provides, the bulk of them material gimmicks cherished as talisman and passwords for happiness. And so with the proclamation of these "natural laws" comes tumbling after the torrent of other dogma about free enterprise and unfettered money being the most important rule in life - at least for those seers with a true eye for seeing the only savior in today's world - everything else coming as a natural product of the ability of money to do what money wants. The poor will rise, the elderly will be cared for adequately, children will have better education, crime and delinquency will decline, wages will increase and jobs will be produced, to wit, the collective prosperity of the USA will restore the greatness of God's Country and thus set the stage for the power of rampageous but righteous dollars to then take the Good Society it has created to the door of beggary, disease, terrorism, despotism, socialism, racism and all other maladies of the world so as to introduce them to the grave once and for all and cast the world under one truly Star Spangled firmament. For if money is matched with the "natural laws of business", well, money will make love with itself, multiply without respite, and solve all the problems that have been plaguing humanity since the dawn of time - even those of the "Progressives".
Keep the borders, passports and visas on the people, but tear them down for money. Limit or destroy the workers' right to unionize, but let money meet money and collectively bargain a better tomorrow. Restrict the rights of foreign nations to tax international corporations, but demolish any restrictions on capital flight. Allow the air, water and soil to be polluted with impunity, but demonize any and all people who stand in the way of the reign of the Mighty Dollar. Create an increasingly unequal playing field for business and call it a grand plan to make a more even field for the people of the world who never seem to get that bigger piece of pie always promised to them. It is no coincidence that we live in a world in which people, especially children, are often referred to in biological terms, such as bugs, parasites, viruses and of course, animals, all while money gains a new and improved luster and is referred to in the most grandiloquent terms of endearment and respect. But it is clear that just as the efforts to create ever-new and crisper bills goes on without sleep in order to protect our Great Provider and baby from forgery, corruption and debauchery, those that go towards counterfeiting the actual uses and results of the mighty dollar are just as sleepless, despite all those hard-working American Dreamers we here so much about and that indubitably natural desire to become a card-carrying member of the American Dream Club.
The fact is, everyone can't be in the club, though MAASCH no doubt wants everyone to join him at the table… unless they see and think like he does.
Posted by chimichenga at 04/10/2007 @ 3:36pm
I am astonished that so many people can be so convinced, firstly, that minimum wage hikes are ineffectual, and secondly, that they are a threat to everything we hold dear.
The effect of increasing the minimum wage is of course always very slight, because of course the cost of living continues to rise, making future increases in the minimum wage necessary if we are to insure that the working poor can enjoy a decent standard of living. However, one positive effect of the minimum wage is that it brings the working poor ever so slightly closer to the idle rich, whose income must be adjusted ever so slightly to accommodate the change. I believe this always makes it worthwhile.
Does this require us to establish a maximum wage as well? I dunno. Determining the level at which wealth becomes superfluous is a more subjective judgement than determining the level at which poverty becomes painful. On the other hand, limiting wealth would be a good way to slow our consumption of nature's ecological capital, which is presently impoverishing future generations. And frankly, I would not miss the opportunity to become a billion-zillionaire. Money can't buy everything, after all, no matter how much of it you have, and it wouldn't magically become able to buy everything even if all taxes were abolished.
It also astonishes me that so many people believe we should not distribute wealth from the rich to the poor until we first have determined exactly the level of a just wage. Surely this is not necessary. All we have to do is determine what abject poverty is and what superfluous wealth is, and work toward the middle. The theoretical "average" need not concern us, since a "class-free" society is neither desirable nor possible. But a society in which all are more or less middle class is both desirable and possible.
It is, after all only for middle-class people that one's wage and one's merit are truly strongly correlated. This becomes less true at both the lower end and at the upper end of the income spectrum.
It is therefore these extremes that we should counteract -- through progressive taxation and such mechanisms as the minimum wage -- without concerning ourselves with the search for the elusive (and probably illusory) "golden mean."
Posted by JakobFabian at 04/10/2007 @ 3:54pm
So, SPENCE, what is a Wall Mart, for example, supposed to do? They start this big company which provides low paying jobs but plenty of them and sells lots of products at cheap prices and that makes many people happy, cause many more better quality products are now available to more people. So what do they do? Raise their wages to a level that some numbnut bureaucrat thinks is fair? Cause if they do, there go the low priced products. They could shut the place down, bad boys, and how will that help the tax base? The third alternative would be for the execs, the ones who spend 80 hours a week making the company function structurally, to take less money. And if we were a nation of socialist minded nincompoops who go into business "for the good of society" the execs probably would. But, democracy has worked so far under this system, somehow, so I see no reason to sacrifice constructive greed and give up our #1 status. ;)
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/10/2007 @ 3:57pm
As for the "Fair Vote" legislation, all I can say is "two cheers!" What I really want to see is the abolition of the Electoral College nationwide and the direct election of the President by means of instant-runoff voting.
Still, as Wendell Berry says: "To accomplish the possible is to enlarge it." The people of Maryland deserve credit for leading the way toward greater democracy. And governor Ahnold deserves to be pied in the face for his anti-democratic veto of a similar reform in California.
Posted by JakobFabian at 04/10/2007 @ 3:58pm
"The possibility that one candidate may not get a majority of the nation's electoral votes" worries ORAIBI1952; however, this is impossible under the National Popular Vote legislation signed by Maryland's governor today. Under the bill, all of the state's electoral votes would be awarded to the presidential candidate who gets the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC. The legislation would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes. So, the winning candidate will always get at least 270 electoral votes and there will never be a tie in the electoral votes. Hence the election of the President would never be thrown into the U.S. House (with each state casting one vote).
Posted by joreko at 04/10/2007 @ 4:09pm
"Raise their wages to a level that some numbnut bureaucrat thinks is fair?"
How about raising wages that allows a man/woman to support themselves, their children?
Why do you think Wal-Mart is able to sell things at such low prices? There is no free lunch.
"The third alternative would be for the execs, the ones who spend 80 hours a week making the company function structurally, to take less money."
I'm not talking about men/women that work.
"But, democracy has worked so far under this system, somehow, so I see no reason to sacrifice constructive greed and give up our #1 status."
That all depends on your definition of democracy. As I recall you don't care for Howard Zinn. Is that because he pointed out the fallacy of democracy in this country, where justice and freedom is only a commodity those with the money are able to afford? Try reading a little and you'll discover what informed, intelligent, objective men/women have said about gross disparities of wealth does to a "democracy".
(It's funny how all these "common sense" types talk about the foolishness of human nature while commenting on socialism and communism, and yet to take that same human nature into consideration when analysising capitalism.)
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 4:09pm
Tell me, MTSPENCE05, are you confident you know where our money comes from? And who controls that access?
Posted by FREIHEIT
No, I am not.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 4:10pm
Regarding WalMart and "low prices" -
Knowing a bit about the hellish conditions and wages the workers of China, WalMarts primary supplier of goods, I'd like to hear just how paying $39 for a microwave there is so much lower than spending the $44 or $46 it might cost at Sears or Target. The only thing that's low is the wages and conditions that produce the crap Americans buy. LowER, perhaps, but not low considering what goes into producing the goods...
Posted by chimichenga at 04/10/2007 @ 4:19pm
Chimi,
I usually like to read your posts and find them entertaining and sometimes very informative...however, you are geting a little wind bagged..or long winded..if your post were a sermon in church we all be dozing by now or nodding off,or at best, doodling on the programs...use punctualtion or new paragraphs,..
I am aware of what you think of me and those like me who work hard long hours and raise up from nothing but a desire to better ourselves...and I know you castigate me for not genuflecting at the alter of Democrats/GOVT/Progressives for allowing me to make many of my pursuit of happiness dreams come true(since you think it comes from govt, I guess)..and that instead , as I pass their good office I let lose a long held by product of digestion...louder the better..
so , as I also realize you are down in the Latin Paradise because there is more virtue, honesty, political pureness,better opportunity,and less things hateful than the good ol' US of A...then PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF ALL,
enlighten us, or at least me...what is the help you are supplying down there to mantain the place that we up here are not benifiting and why is it you prattle against the US and not talk up the place you have found to be your preference for living?
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 4:20pm
If Maryland is comparable to DFW, $11.30 would not be sufficient to support yourself, much less a child.
Posted by MTSPENCE05 04/10/2007 @ 2:21pm
So "living wage" must be set on a state-by-state basis...not a national basis?
Posted by Mask at 04/10/2007 @ 4:20pm
freiheit,
Nope markets aren't free.....but it hasn't been a problem for either US econmic expansion or global expansion...yet you and your bretheren continue to drone on and on about how THIS LATEST manipulation will send us all back to the stone age.
It won't.
Look at CHIP....he's now extolling Walmart. Walmart is a company that takes all taxpayers money and uses it so they can lower the wage component of their workforce. They do this by not paying health insurance on part time employees. They do a damn good job of it too by making sure that large numbers of their workers only get the exact number of hours that does not make them full time.
Walmart also benefits at general taxpayer expense because of the fantastic port infrastructure that has been set up (at huge government cost) without which, Walmart wouldn't have thousands of containers a day coming in from China. Walmart trucks probably use the interstate highway system....where was Walmart when the innitiative for that huge expense came up?
What you object to are not distortions....but distortions that don't immediately favor big business....and if you were honest you'd admit it.
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 4:21pm
And don't say pussy...that is everywhere..except SF...
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 4:21pm
JAKOBFABIAN, Poverty has little to do with money, in my opinion. Nor does wealth.
Your statement "All we have to do is determine what abject poverty is and what superfluous wealth is, and work toward the middle. The theoretical "average" need not concern us, since a "class-free" society is neither desirable nor possible. But a society in which all are more or less middle class is both desirable and possible. is a chilling example of everything I disagree with.
Posted by FREIHEIT 04/10/2007 @ 4:06pm
And a chilling effect on those who make the money he wants to, ah, fairly re arrange...
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 4:23pm
Yes, SPENCE, I know they charge low prices cause they pay less. I said that above, (although in reverse) There is also the question: How much do you want for punchin' a CR all day?
And yes, your correct: I don't care for Howard Zinn. Don't even regard him as a bonifide historian, because he only thinks of the history of this country in terms of the oppressed, and the sins of the big bad white man. With all the other info out there from hundreds of other historians over many decades , he simply cannot be viewed seriously due to the narrowness of his view (and this goes back to the 70's-Had one of his books in college) When I drive home in a few minutes, I will pass hundreds of houses with middle, lower middle and upper middle class people in them. NONE of them are as well off as Bill Gates (May ALLAH Praise Him!) but neither are ANY of them the trodden down victims of capitalism Zinn would have you believe.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/10/2007 @ 4:28pm
I'd like to hear just how paying $39 for a microwave there is so much lower than spending the $44 or $46 it might cost at Sears or Target. ---Posted by CHIMICHENGA 04/10/2007 @ 4:19pm
CHIMI's probably not been in a Target store for a while, so let me enlighten him......this is the cheapest microwave that they offer--
Emerson .9 cu. ft. 900-Watt Microwave - Black
$49.00
List price: $59.99
You Save: $10.99 (18%)
There are 4 buttons in the next section, to make the tab readable click it and navigate past the buttons. The currently selected tab is additionalInfo. • Rugged construction for reliability • Beautiful design looks good anywhere • Easy to clean touch pads • 14Hx20.5Wx16D" See Features and Additional Info for more details. • You may return this item to any Target store. • Catalog # : 10487601 ASIN: B000M9FLJ4 DPCI: 072-01-0156 • Item can be gift wrapped. • Imported
Now....the Emerson Radio company which "makes" this product as of 2002, IMPORTED 84% of their products from China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, South Korea, etc.
Posted by Mask at 04/10/2007 @ 4:29pm
I will pass hundreds of houses with middle, lower middle and upper middle class people in them. NONE of them are as well off as Bill Gates (May ALLAH Praise Him!) but neither are ANY of them the trodden down victims of capitalism Zinn would have you believe.
Posted by CHIP THORNTON
Maybe you should drive a little farther.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 4:30pm
Walmart is a company that takes all taxpayers money and uses it so they can lower the wage component of their workforce. They do this by not paying health insurance on part time employees. They do a damn good job of it too by making sure that large numbers of their workers only get the exact number of hours that does not make them full time. Posted by FREEDOMPLEASE
Privatize the profit, socialize the costs--that's the new American economy.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 4:35pm
Freedom,
"Walmart is a company that takes all taxpayers money and uses it so they can lower the wage component of their workforce.
True, after the airlines, auto and many other industrys could no longer pay those bennies they folded and the govt took them over as with many pension plans...and now with the Left politicians all rushing to promise to provide health care for the entire world..FREE...why would any business even consider providing any bennie as it is only a matter of time before some politician declares bennies a right found in the Constitution.....
You are going to receive what you have been demanding for years and you will hate it..and we will pay too much for it and it will not work or cost as promised...but that is your govt, where you want to put MORE responsibility and power over you and your wallet....
who can blame them..it seems to me another course could have been taken, buit that would involve a litle personal expenese and we can't expect one to actually pay for evertything one uses in l;ife...some things have to be free...right?
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 4:50pm
And yes, your correct: I don't care for Howard Zinn. Don't even regard him as a bonifide historian, because he only thinks of the history of this country in terms of the oppressed, and the sins of the big bad white man. With all the other info out there from hundreds of other historians over many decades , he simply cannot be viewed seriously due to the narrowness of his view (and this goes back to the 70's-Had one of his books in college) Posted by CHIP THORNTON
Interesting "reasoning". What is it they say? The winners get to write the history or something like that? So your position is that these men, women, children Zinn chose to write about did not exist? It's not only Zinn that wrote about the have nots of American history.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 4:52pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
Americans pay much more than other industrialized nations for medical care, coverage, and yet receive far less. Why is that? Wal-Mart doesn't provide insurance coverage, but can the employees afford to buy their own insurance with what they make? Is this really so hard to wrap your old lying coward mind around? Don't provide insurance and don't pay enough for the employees to buy their own coverage does not address the problem. And what's your solution? Tough luck? sol? That is no solution. You're nothing more than a dumb animal, an unthinking human being.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 4:57pm
I hope you don't mind an off-topic comment, but I think this is important:
Re: the Iraq war in general
Ever since the months prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, there have been a few reports in the newspapers that the Central Intelligence Agency was casting aspersions on the intelligence the White House was relying on to justify the war. The CIA has never given a position on whether the war is needed or justified or said that Bush is wrong to go to war. But doesn't it seem much more likely that the CIA is an extremely right wing organization than a left wing one? After all, even if the people working for them and at least a lot of the leadership really wanted a war for their own reasons, there are a lot of reasons for them to not want to tie their credibility to what they know is faulty information. They and their personnel, present and former, could use other means of promoting the Iraq war, and still be motivated to make the statements in the media. If the CIA got behind faulty information, they would have to make a choice between whether they would be involved in scamming the American people and the world once the military had invaded Iraq and no weapons were found- so: 1) Imagine the incredible difficulties involved in pulling off a hoax that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. Imagine all the people you would have to be able to show the weapons to- the inspectors from the UN / the international community, the American press, statesmen, etc. Then imagine the difficulties of substantiating that story to people who would examine it- the lack of witnesses to a production plant that made the weapons or to transportation operations or storage of the weapons during Hussein's regime of them. 2) If the story fell apart upon inspection or the CIA tried not to hoax it at all, imagine the loss of credibility they would suffer. The CIA, it is safe to bet, does not want to be known to the American people as a group that lies to them to send them to war. Even within the CIA there could be disagreement among people about how involved they should be in promoting the war or the neo-con agenda more broadly, so the CIA would have to worry about lying to and managing its own people after trying so hard to get them to trust their superiors in the agency, and perhaps there simply might be too many people in the agency who knew enough about what was going on in Iraq to know if someone was deceiving people to promote this war.
So there is a lot of reason to be cautious against being seen as endorsing what they knew was false intelligence even if they were very strong supporters of going to war.
Posted by Swan at 04/10/2007 @ 5:04pm
Maasch,
Again you are not railing about the GOVERNMENT funded system that allows commerce as you know it....only railing about MORE government innitiative which some would say would further help and others (like you) claim will be the last gasp of capitalism.
Never got an answer on why you work in insurance given that is THE LEAST "free" market of all.
But take any company or industry....they operate within our currency, our banking system, use the water, the water purification systems.....and millions more general "welfare" things.
If you were honest with yourself you'd be against new government involvement as proposed by progressives but not against government involvement in the entirety.
(But nobody here expects honest introspection from our knee jerk visitors).
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 5:05pm
MAASCH,
Surely you don't think I despise you just for poking fun at your posts and embellishing my impression of you, do you? I think all the accusations of me being a lunatic communist are equal fodder and I don't take them personal, despite hearing them from much of the peanut gallery. I'd never hold your livelihood, family, health or any other social indicator you've attained against you; however, I do not agree with your cheerleading for a mindset so obviously proven to increase the abyss between rich and poor while restoring the privilege of class and the puissance of money over all else. Do I think it's great here? It's not necessarily the economy, government or any of that that appeals to me, for if they did I'd be as much a rube as the dolt in Nebraska working as a sandwich artist at Subway and voting Republican. It's the vibe and rawness that does it for me, the unknown and freshness of life abroad, which never fails to entertain and occasionally, scare. The US is all about reality shows and vicarious living - imitating cinematic fantasies and living beyond your means, filling holes in your heart and stuffing yourself with drugs in order to find consolation in the land where imminent doom lurks everywhere from bags of spinach and bad burritos to dirty bombs and Al-Qaeda trick-or-treating on your front porch.
The US isn't even fun to watch anymore seeing as how silly and far-fetched it has become. There is no international organization called Al-Qaeda, there are only groups of angry Muslims here and there that are inspired by what it once was, which for the most part was a bankroll for other little terrorists with more bark than bite. But people there honestly think the world is a better place now than it was 50 years ago, and that is just hilarious. The world has decayed greatly in your slinking shadow, and will continue to do so. While I don't deny the corruption, poverty, violence and other niceties that constitute many places south of the border, they are no less characteristic of locals in northern latitudes, though not to the same extent. But nothing is swept under the rug here, and I admire that. Whereas in the US, nothing is wrong, just as nothing is wrong in Iraq, why, walking through a Baghdad market is like walking through a bazaar in Indiana. Riiiiiight. Everyone is full of shit today, but in the US there's a tendency - no, a patriotic duty - to deny that bullshit exists and that the people, just like the government that sets them chattering, is the greatest dynamo of bullshit this side of the Milky Way. So enjoy your coinage and go to the fair, just don't expect me to buy any of the trumpery you're mouthing...
Posted by chimichenga at 04/10/2007 @ 5:06pm
MTSPENCE,
Part time Walmart employees have coverage....it's called Mecicaid (which by the way is tremendously efficient system since less than 1 % of it's money goes to admin versus 14% for the private healthcare industry, but that's another topic).
Medicaid is paid for by the state......so if you live in Alabama and there is a Walmart there and if they have part time employees and one of them gets sick.....take it out of your paycheck....just leave Walmart alone!
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 5:09pm
Never got an answer on why you work in insurance given that is THE LEAST "free" market of all.
I wasn't aware you asked any questions of me..
I wouldn't and never have worked in insurance industry. I think they are corrupt..they mandate themselves by law into our lives and then fuck us over ..banks, govt amd insurance are all beaucratic nightmares for all....zero common sense or flexibility...everything set in concrete..and not a thinker in the bunch, muchless outside the box...and to be avoided like the plague if possible.
I have only a term life policy and didn't have any health care insurance 17 years of kids and marriage. I paid out of pock since I calculated and used the same tables the insurance companies use when firguring your premiums..I took the same gamble as they did...I saved $130,000 in 15-16 years of not paying premiums and deductables..instead negoiated direct with Drs and hospitals, and then paid cash or on time paymenyts...and we had emergency broken legs, arms Hystorectomies, apendix...all of it...
I used my brain and not the emergency room or waited for Hillary...I now have an MSA
the improvements ..ie your "....they operate within our currency, our banking system, use the water, the water purification systems.....and millions more general "welfare" things. "
Haven't got a damn thing to do with "progressive policys"... they came from free enterprise thinkers and risk takers..not progressive takers from thos who earn it..
Only successfull societys in their later development can tolerate progressive anything..prior to the "arrival" stage of an successfull economy or society that has abundance there is nothing for the progressives to, er , redistribute or take to make a "better for all"..
Posted by john maasch at 04/10/2007 @ 5:20pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH
Yeah, yeah, yeah...
But without labor you've got nothing. And not everybody can afford to buy coverage out of pocket or any of the other bs you do. Good for you, old man. Bravo. Everybody give the old lying coward a hand. But, once again, this does nothing to address the problems of a highly complex industrialized nation. Your "solutions" are nothing more than self serving anecdotes and a step backward to the good old days when greedy fools like you were free to do whatever they wanted while the vast majority of the population suffered, went without. No wonder you like doing business in China and other nations where labor has no rights, no protection.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/10/2007 @ 5:26pm
they came from free enterprise thinkers and risk takers.
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/10/2007 @ 5:20pm
You sure about that John....or do you think that they were paid for from general welfare?
Who is paying to dredge US ports today? (Hint it's overseen by the US Army Corp or Engineers!)
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 5:28pm
Who is paying for the occupation of Iraq?
The media whose jungle drum baiting got us there (and convieniently assisted in their bottom lines with better wartime ratings and newspaper sales)?
No.
The military contractors?
No.
The oil companies whose interests we're protecting?
No.
We all are so some can make out like bandits.....it's called corporate welfare and it stinks to high heaven.
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 5:36pm
Not that I'm saying that corporate welfare is evil....I'm simply pointing out that you've got to be kidding when you say you want "free" markets. What you really want is markets that you can profit from and you're not bothered whose money gets thrown in to the mix to make that happen.
Posted by freedomplease at 04/10/2007 @ 5:39pm
New voting block in Florida---EX CON DEMOCRATS---Somehow it just has a nice ring to it. Soon those in prison will have the vote and candidates can go there and campaign promising better food and less slippery soap.
Posted by Len Mosse at 04/10/2007 @ 10:31pm
MTSPENCE....never got an answer from you.
State-by-state minimum wage laws, due to the difference in cost of living?
Posted by Mask at 04/11/2007 @ 07:20am
All regions and time zones are equally important. Populations are not distributed equally among them. To address this inequality, the legislative branch has been split in two - one caters to population, the other caters to region. The executive branch has done the same via the electoral college. It makes sense to not have the most populous regions pick all presidents, as a president should serve Wyoming equally as he or she does California (unlike legislators, who should represent their regions). To circumvent the electoral college is like eliminating the senate. Not a good idea in my mind. What is a good idea is to make unlawful the collection and use of voter opinions by a presidential contender to get elected. Let each candidate be elected based on his or her own ideas of leadership and let the each president be removed by an unsatisfied public. Ban public opinion polls, and let real elections happen. Short of this, we can save alot of time and money by electing presidents using polls instead of elections...
Posted by jimhalat at 04/11/2007 @ 09:02am
MTSPENCE....never got an answer from you.
State-by-state minimum wage laws, due to the difference in cost of living?
Posted by MASK
You're a smart boy, you figure it out.
Posted by mtspence05 at 04/11/2007 @ 09:23am
Posted by MTSPENCE05 04/11/2007 @ 09:23am
Okay....I assume you want it state-by-state, since you indicated that you felt that $11.30 in Maryland would be insufficient for Texas.
We're in agreement. I think making "living wage" a STATE issue and not a Federal issue is fine and dandy.
Posted by Mask at 04/11/2007 @ 12:39pm
I like where Maryland is ultimately trying to go with their electoral policy, but their method, to me, is somewhat confounded. How can a state government make the national popular vote the deterministic factor in awarding their electoral votes? This seems to debase the electoral will of Maryland and its citizenry, which, in my view, should maintain a certain level of autonomy apart from the rest of the union.
Would it be in any way unreasonable for the people of Maryland to award their electors on the basis of their own state's popular vote? Would this not be a more democratically just route for Marylanders? I would be interested to know what KVH and the rest of you have to say on this.......
Posted by theFIFTH at 04/11/2007 @ 5:47pm
Um...wow, somehow I didn't even catch what Maryland's bill actually was. Huh. That's really interesting. Silly me, for some bizarre reason I thought that electors were supposed in some way represent the citizens of their state. Oh wait! They are. Yeah, this is terrible. Since the Presidency is determined solely on the basis of the electoral vote, this basically means that the actual citizens of Maryland have no representation in the Presidential election. It just takes all the incentives in the system against voting...and adds yet one more. The same, of course, applies for any other state. Also, if this forces candidates to campaign in places other than swing states, swing states will never pass this because they like the publicity that candidate visits bring. Since the benefit of this proposal depends on the swing states (whose votes candidates would supposedly no longer seek), this proposal basically disenfranchises an entire state's population for nothing. Nice.
Posted by Thrawn at 04/11/2007 @ 10:41pm
Nothing like a little Marx accurately reflect the political philosophy of MTS.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need Karl Marx
Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/11/2007 @ 7:17pm | ignore this person
Actually, the last time I heard that line, it was in a post right here at The Nation...
...from CPT, claiming that was exactly how the military worked!
Posted by Lillian at 04/12/2007 @ 01:51am
LILLIAN:
What a tick. Hypocrisy? From these right-wing-nut-jobbers? Oh NO!!! Say it ain't SO!!!
Posted by jorcheim at 04/12/2007 @ 11:36am