The REAL reason Vermont is now relevant

[Nazi Flower Power]

Yeah, I love New England, but the winters are longer than I want.

But winter is so much fun.

Not when you have to go to work and there is 3 ft of snow to slog through... Or when you sell art on the sidewalk, and you can't sell in the winter because of the snow and cold.

Don't get me wrong, there are some fun winter sports and the snow is pretty. It's just inconvenient when you are trying to go places and do things and you can't use the sidewalk because there is a mountain of snow in the way. Or if it snows and you just don't feel like shoveling.

[Distruzio]

Yes. I'm anti-democratic. I'd rather the US return to a more oligarchic reality. But, that said, I can understand the desire for certain corporate interests to be restricted or otherwise eliminated (the slaveocracy, for example).

Wait...

What?

You want America to become even more oligarchic than it already is? Or rather, I would argue that's it's more like a plutocracy based on crony capitalism, but same difference...

Point is, America is in deep trouble because the one percent has amazed a heck of a lot of power over the least few decades. And you actually want to give them more?

One percent? Really? Yes, I want America to become more oligarchic (although your argument is more appropriate, truth be told). She has no tradition of appropriate government and could not easily make the transition. But the government she has had, the government she currently has, has led her to a significant degree of prosperity for the greatest number of the population. There is no reason to assume the plutocracy wouldn't continue to benefit the masses.

And your wealth envy isn't very persuasive.

[Aurora Novus]

Wait...

What?

You want America to become even more oligarchic than it already is? Or rather, I would argue that's it's more like a plutocracy based on crony capitalism, but same difference...

Point is, America is in deep trouble because the one percent has amazed a heck of a lot of power over the least few decades. And you actually want to give them more?

One percent? Really? Yes, I want America to become more oligarchic (although your argument is more appropriate, truth be told). She has no tradition of appropriate government and could not easily make the transition. But the government she has had, the government she currently has, has led her to a significant degree of prosperity for the greatest number of the population. There is no reason to assume the plutocracy wouldn't continue to benefit the masses.

And your wealth envy isn't very persuasive.

The problem is, you're wrong there. The plutocracy we live in has harmed us, and has been steadily harming us since the 70's. Most of the population has been getting worse and worse off. And it's preciesly because of what you propose.

[Distruzio]

One percent? Really? Yes, I want America to become more oligarchic (although your argument is more appropriate, truth be told). She has no tradition of appropriate government and could not easily make the transition. But the government she has had, the government she currently has, has led her to a significant degree of prosperity for the greatest number of the population. There is no reason to assume the plutocracy wouldn't continue to benefit the masses.

And your wealth envy isn't very persuasive.

The problem is, you're wrong there. The plutocracy we live in has harmed us, and has been steadily harming us since the 70's. Most of the population has been getting worse and worse off. And it's preciesly because of what you propose.

Really? How has the majority of the population suffered?

[Othelos]

But winter is so much fun.

Not when you have to go to work and there is 3 ft of snow to slog through... Or when you sell art on the sidewalk, and you can't sell in the winter because of the snow and cold.

Don't get me wrong, there are some fun winter sports and the snow is pretty. It's just inconvenient when you are trying to go places and do things and you can't use the sidewalk because there is a mountain of snow in the way. Or if it snows and you just don't feel like shoveling.

Or if the power goes out for three days.

Living in the northeast sucks in the winter.

[Othelos]

You'd like NH, too. They also have lots of guns and minimal government meddling in people's lives.

Time to move...

New England has some of the most sensible people in the nation. You'd like it.

[Geilinor]

The problem is, you're wrong there. The plutocracy we live in has harmed us, and has been steadily harming us since the 70's. Most of the population has been getting worse and worse off. And it's preciesly because of what you propose.

Really? How has the majority of the population suffered?

Real wages have fallen since the 70s and the United States no longer has the most prosperous middle class.
http://www.mindcontagion.org/html/real_wages.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/upshot/the-american-middle-class-is-no-longer-the-worlds-richest.html
The economy needs a strong base of people with excess money to spend.

[Distruzio]

Really? How has the majority of the population suffered?

Real wages have fallen since the 70s and the United States no longer has the most prosperous middle class.
http://www.mindcontagion.org/html/real_wages.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/upshot/the-american-middle-class-is-no-longer-the-worlds-richest.html
The economy needs a strong base of people with excess money to spend.

So... the past 200 years of growth and prosperity were reversed during the 70s?

Moreover, how are they evaluating real wages? Are they suggesting that the oligarchical elements of society have managed to control middle class wages? Are you suggesting that corporate monetary contributions directly relate to the real wages of society?

[Brickistan]

Wait...

What?

You want America to become even more oligarchic than it already is? Or rather, I would argue that's it's more like a plutocracy based on crony capitalism, but same difference...

Point is, America is in deep trouble because the one percent has amazed a heck of a lot of power over the least few decades. And you actually want to give them more?

One percent? Really? Yes, I want America to become more oligarchic (although your argument is more appropriate, truth be told). She has no tradition of appropriate government and could not easily make the transition. But the government she has had, the government she currently has, has led her to a significant degree of prosperity for the greatest number of the population. There is no reason to assume the plutocracy wouldn't continue to benefit the masses.

And your wealth envy isn't very persuasive.

Talk a look at America...

Now, will you honestly tell me that the rampant crony capitalism has "benefited the masses"?

The problem is, you're wrong there. The plutocracy we live in has harmed us, and has been steadily harming us since the 70's. Most of the population has been getting worse and worse off. And it's preciesly because of what you propose.

Really? How has the majority of the population suffered?

Oh dear...

There are none so blind as those who will not see...

Real wages have fallen since the 70s and the United States no longer has the most prosperous middle class.
http://www.mindcontagion.org/html/real_wages.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/23/upshot/the-american-middle-class-is-no-longer-the-worlds-richest.html
The economy needs a strong base of people with excess money to spend.

So... the past 200 years of growth and prosperity were reversed during the 70s?

Moreover, how are they evaluating real wages? Are they suggesting that the oligarchical elements of society have managed to control middle class wages? Are you suggesting that corporate monetary contributions directly relate to the real wages of society?

Evaluating real wages is easy. You just compare what you can buy with your money today in comparison with what you could buy last year. For example, there is the idea of a "standard food basket". If that would cost me 0.01% of my monthly income today but only cost me 0.005% last year, then my real wages have dropped, even though I might have gotten a raise.

Why does this happen? The easy answer is inflation (though there are other factors). If everything got 2% more expensive over the last year but I didn't get a raise, then my real wages dropped.

And yes, monetary contributions by the one percent has most defiantly had something to do with it. Production is America is at an all-time high, yet the worker on the floor has seen his real wage drop while his boss' wage has skyrocketed. Americans work some truly crazy hours, yet cannot survive on one job. And when the crazy speculations on Wall Street crashed the economy in 2008, it was Joe Average who lost his home.

Why do you think unions were broken? Why do you think that Wall Street was bailed out? Why do you think that no-one has been convicted for crashing the economy? Why do you think that it's the poor, not the DoD, who's facing cuts?

Washington has been bought and sold by big business. And by throwing millions upon millions into lobbying they have effectively set the agenda. And the result is plain to see - wealth is increasingly concentrated within a few (and we're not even talking the one percent here - we're talking just a handful of families) while the middle class is shrinking as people slowly sink into poverty.

And no, I do not suffer from "wealth envy". Why would you even think such a thing?

I simply see the world for what it is. I'm the guy on the floor, still struggling in the aftershock of the 2008 crash.

I look at America and I'm getting increasingly concerned. As wealth inequality increases, so does social tensions. Sooner or later, something is going to break and then what? For better or worse, as America goes, so does the rest of the West. And I really don't want to see Europe dragged down alongside America, just because America let greed run wild.

[Distruzio]

So... inflation causes diminished purchasing power. Inflation is caused by the 1%?

Really?

Now you're just grasping at straws.

But... I fear we've drifted too far from the topic at hand - a law was passed based upon paranoid delusions.

***ignore this post. I was in the wrong Vermont thread!

[Benuty]

So... inflation causes diminished purchasing power. Inflation is caused by the 1%?

Really?

Now you're just grasping at straws.

But... I fear we've drifted too far from the topic at hand - a law was passed based upon paranoid delusions.

Hardly delusional at all considering it is grounded in reality.

[Aurora Novus]

But... I fear we've drifted too far from the topic at hand - a law was passed based upon paranoid delusions.

How on earth is this based at all upon paranoid delusions? It's a readily observable phenomenon.

[Distruzio]

But... I fear we've drifted too far from the topic at hand - a law was passed based upon paranoid delusions.

How on earth is this based at all upon paranoid delusions? It's a readily observable phenomenon.

Alex Jones would say the same. GMO's are not dangerous. The anti-GMO crowd is dangerous.

[JeebusCrust]

How on earth is this based at all upon paranoid delusions? It's a readily observable phenomenon.

Alex Jones would say the same. GMO's are not dangerous. The anti-GMO crowd is dangerous.

That awkward moment.
When you're posting in the wrong Vermont thread.

[Distruzio]

Alex Jones would say the same. GMO's are not dangerous. The anti-GMO crowd is dangerous.

That awkward moment.
When you're posting in the wrong Vermont thread.

*blush*

Someone is correct.

[Brickistan]

So... inflation causes diminished purchasing power. Inflation is caused by the 1%?

Really?

Now you're just grasping at straws.

But... I fear we've drifted too far from the topic at hand - a law was passed based upon paranoid delusions.

***ignore this post. I was in the wrong Vermont thread!

Well... Yes and no...

They do cause some inflation, mostly by the rackets run on Wall Street. But they're not the primary drivers behind it - you'd have to look at banks for that.

But that's not really the issue in this case. No, the issue is that, at a bare minimum, wages ought to increased every year in line with inflation. And yet, for many years now, the workers have been told to tighten their belts and accept that, not only didn't they get a raise, they might actually have their wages cut.

And all the while, the one percent have been raking money in hand over fist. It rings a bit hollow, doesn't it, when you're told that these are lean times and we most all sacrifice something while the boss just took home another million in bonus?