Economist Magazine: “income inequality in America has risen dramatically over the past 20 years”

October 27th, 2011

More PROOF of sustained economic inequality… from Economist Magazine no less! The ‘Wall Street Journal’ of Britain!!

OccupyWallStreet in 1 Chart

October 20th, 2011

Here’s the sum total of what OccupyWallStreet is protesting against:

Wages as Percent of Economy

Real Wages are at their lowest in 50yrs+, while corporate profits are at their highest… -&- the top tax brackets at their lowest.

But don’t take it from me– here’s a whole PAGE full of charts, from BUSINESS INSIDERnot a bastion of ‘Liberalism’, far from it.

Details:

  • Unemployment is still at highest level since the Great Depression
    this is the lowest percentage of Americans with jobs since the early 1980s
  • Corporate profits are higher than they’ve been since the 1950s.
  • CEO pay is now 350X the average worker’s, up from 50X from 1960-1985.
  • CEO pay has skyrocketed 300% since 1990. Corporate profits have doubled. Average “production worker” pay has increased 4%. The minimum wage has dropped.
  • After adjusting for inflation, average hourly earnings haven’t increased in 50 years.
  • The top 1% of American wage earners are hauling in a bigger percentage of the country’s total pre-tax income than you have at any time since the late 1920s.
  • US now ranks 93rd in the world in “income equality.” China’s ahead of us. So is India. So is Iran.
  • Social mobility in this country is also near an all-time low.
  • The top 1% of Americans own 42% of the financial wealth in this country. The top 5%, meanwhile, own nearly 70%.
  • The richest 20% pay 64% of the total taxes. Of course, that’s because they also make most of the money: 59.1%

BUSINESS INSIDER

THEY DID IT!!! BLOOMBERG BACKS DOWN!!!

October 14th, 2011

BREAKING: #OCCUPY WINS! Bloomberg backs down!

After Bloomberg said ‘I agree with the Protester’s right to assemble’
Then Bloomberg said ‘It’ll be a ‘temporary’ evacuation to clean the park’
Then the details came out: ‘New Rules’ would be posted, prohibiting people sitting or laying down in the park, etc
Then MoveOn collected 300k signatures

Then THIS Happened: :-)

@OccupyWallStreet has no coherent demands? Don’t believe the Hype…

October 4th, 2011

Over & over the media says, “@OccupyWallStreet has no coherent demands”.
Well, maybe they should use that vaunted journalistic ‘better-than-bloggeres’ ability & do a little RESEARCH.

But they won’t- just like not a single major MSM outlet is on record estimating how many protesters there are…
Yeah, you’ve gotta go to GERMANY to get an estimate!
Congrats MSM Mental Midgets– every single time 100 TeaParty ppl gather, they get wall-to-wall coverage; hell, Fox News sends Hannity out on Lear Jet!

So- here’s the FACTS:
Der Spiegel: “During a demonstration on Saturday it has more than 700 of 1500 protest-learns arrested.” link.

And heres the COHERENT DEMANDS from OccupyWallStreet:

  1. CONGRESS PASS HR 1489 REINSTATING GLASS-STEAGALL ACT.
  2. USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS
  3. CONGRESS ENACT LEGISLATION TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY REVERSING THE EFFECTS OF THE CITIZENS UNITED SUPREME COURT DECISION
  4. CONGRESS PASS THE BUFFETT RULE ON FAIR TAXATION SO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE & CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOP HOLES AND ENACT A PROHIBITION ON HIDING FUNDS OFF SHORE.
  5. CONGRESS COMPLETELY REVAMP THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
  6. CONGRESS PASS SPECIFIC AND EFFECTIVE LAWS LIMITING THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATING THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION THAT ENDS UP ON THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS.
  7. CONGRESS PASSING “Revolving Door Legislation” LEGISLATION ELIMINATING THE ABILITY OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GOING TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS THAT THEY ONCE REGULATED.
  8. ELIMINATE “PERSONHOOD” STATUS FOR CORPORATIONS (Sorry Mitt Romney)
  9. RE-ESTABLISH THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES IN THE U.S. SO THAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME

link.

Pretty Damn Coherent, right there…

Neither Proctor&Gamble nor CitiCorp believe the Middle Class has a Future…

September 20th, 2011

The 2008 financial crisis and the prolonged economic downturn has eviscerated Alan Greenspan’s ‘Consumption Defense’ (ie, ‘Even though inequality as measured in dollars is growing, when measured in dishwashers, microwaves and clothes dryers it’s decreasing’) as ruthlessly as it has burst the credit bubble that allowed the middle class to feel richer than it was.

Income inequality is today a fact of life, as essential to doing business as the rate of inflation:

  • Proctor & Gamble executives study the Gini co-efficient, a technical measure of income inequality, to divine what is happening to their erstwhile middle-class consumer base, and have decided the best strategy is to give up on the center and to market instead to the top and the bottom.
  • Citigroup advises investors to design their portfolios around income inequality. It calls this strategy the “Consumer Hourglass Portfolio” and has created an index of companies that serve the rich and the poor while avoiding the vanishing middle.
  • Once income inequality has become a tool for marketing executives and stock pickers it becomes pretty hard to deny. But we can still argue over what is causing it…

    More here

    Getting the Best out of your DSLR

    September 18th, 2011

    Here’s some Tips/Tricks I’ve found that help me get good imagery.
    I’ve fielded enough “how do you get shots like that” questions, I figured I’d write it up… Enjoy!

    Tip/Trick #1: keeping the camera on ‘P’/”Program” mode effectively turns your expensive DSLR into a really expensive & awkward ‘point&shoot’.

      o P/Program Mode is basically ‘safe’ mode, & you will typically get decent, run-of-the-mill shots… -BUT-
      o If you want to get very nice shots, it’s important to start turning off the various ‘Auto’ modes, so you create (much) more control over what the camera is shooting. See Below…

    Tip/Trick #2: If you want really nice shots, it’s important to:

      o Shoot a Lot! -AND-
      o Review your shots, taking note of what you did: Aperture, Shutterspeed, ISO/gain, WB (white-balance: eg Auto, Sun, Incandescent, etc), etc
      o Take notes to yourself (you might even reference the photo filename &/or day), so that you can compare/contrast, & watch/confirm your progress over time. It really works!

    Tip/Trick #3: It’s better to Get an ‘imperfect’ Shot, than futzing around for a ‘perfect’ shot than you never manage to take…

      o Whatever camera you have handy, is better than the camera you have at home!! Ideally, get a top point/shoot like the S95 or S100: pocket-size, f/2.0, full manual control, & RAW…
      o LEARN YOUR CAMERA!! Messing with the dials/menus & missing the shot isn’t worth it, & will just frustrate you enough to ‘not bother’…
      o “Don’t Worry, you can Fix Some Stuff in Post“: Photoshop is your friend—there’s a lot of stuff you can do to fix things afterwards (composure, exposure, color-balance, even some focus problems)… but not if you don’t have some sort of shot to work with…

    BASIC SETTINGS to Maximize Picture-Quality:

    “Av” Mode: Aperture Priority: I highly-recommend this mode. It’s usually best to open the aperture to maximum, as often as you can. This does the following:

      o Increases your shutter-speed (makes the number smaller: eg 1/250, 1/500, 1/1,000, etc). This makes it easier to stop motion, to avoid blurry running children, etc),
      o Shortens your depth-of-field (helping create a blurry background, ie ‘bokeh‘ which is optimal for ‘portraiture’, & instantly increases the ‘production value’ of your shot).
      o Note: in a regular zoom, the aperture ‘ramps’ as you go from wide to long. So, set Av mode, go wide on the lens, & then set the aperture wide-open. The aperture will ramp down (number goes larger as lens stops down) as you zoom-out, but the aperture will also ramp up as you zoom wide again. If you set the aperture when you are zoomed-in, the aperture sometimes won’t decrease (lens stops open) when you zoom-out/go-wide.
      o The only time you need to stop-down the lens (close-down the aperture, ie increase the f-number, ie f/8, f/11, f/22, etc), is if:
      § You really want everything to be in focus , foreground & background
      § You’re shooting in very bright sunlight, & even with the ISO at 100 or lower, the exposure is too much for the shutter (eg, the shutter is 1/10,000+)
      o There’s no real need to worry that “max wide-open creates optical artifacts”: that’s true for professional photographers who’re going to be blowing-up the image 4’ wide or printing in a magazine. Unless you’re doing that, wide-open lenses are just fine. If you’re really worried, click one stop from fully-wide, & you’ll be great.

    ISO/ASA (really: ‘digital gain’): Most good DSLR’s (Canon, Nikon, etc) will shoot extremely clean photos at ISO 400, or even 800. Above that, you start getting what looks like ‘grain’, & sometimes a bit of color fringing. Test! Or look at comparison-charts on the-digital-picture.com for your camera & lens.

      o Note: It’s important to actually choose an ISO. if you set ‘Auto’, then even if you’re in ‘Av’ mode, the camera will variously (randomly?) adjust both ISO & shutter, which can alternately give you ‘digital grain’ or low gain & long shutter, letting the shot blur(!)
      o So it’s much better to set an ISO, be in Av mode, & let the camera choose the shutterspeed for you.

    Shutterspeed: Try to be at least 1/125 or ideally 1/250 to stop fast motion. Or in other words, stop your lens wide-open, & adjust your ISO until you get the shutterspeed you want for that shot.

      o (you can ½-click the shutter-release, & look in the viewfinder… or just shoot a test shot to see what the camera thinks is the right shutterspeed).
      o I hardly use Tv (shutter-priority) mode, unless I want to blur motion, eg waterfalls or waves at the beach…

    WB (White Balance): Auto is okay, EXCEPT:

      o Indoors: Bulb. Canon DSLR’s are NOTORIOUS for crappy indoor WB. Just remember to reset it to ‘auto’ when you go outside! Or: get used to doing adjustment on your computer, eg with “Canon Digital Photo Review” application/etc
      o Sunrise/Sunsets: Auto-WB will ‘fight’ the beautiful colors at sunrise/sunset, so choose a setting that ‘looks nice’ in your LCD (ie, don’t assume that ‘Sun’/’Noon’ setting is correct for sunsets/sunrises!)

    INTERMEDIATE SETTINGS & Concepts to Maximize Picture-Quality:

    AF (auto-focus): Fix the auto-focus target to the middle of the screen. This way you always know what’s being focused-on(!!)

      o …then you can ½-click the shutter-release, hold, & re-position your framing for the composure you want, & your subject’s face (&/or ‘most-important point’: cf ‘Golden Mean’/Rule-of-3rds below) will still be in focus

    Metering: Choose ‘spot’ exposure-metering: this will also be in the center of the screen, so now whatever you focus on, will be optimally exposed…

      o Ideally, focus on your subject’s face, and now that will be in focus, and exposed correctly… And your shot will look great, even if other parts of the shot blow-out (too bright) or get crushed (too dark).
      o Occasionally your subject will be moving too fast, so learn to either
      § Quickly switch the Metering back to ‘Evaluative’, -or-
      § Aim at something with a similar exposure at a similar focal depth (often the subject’s shirt, etc)
      § Advanced: you can set the camera to set exposure separate from the shutter-release, ie with a different button (cf Canon “Custom Settings”, etc). Then you can set exposure once for a series of shots, & not worry (& it will increase your frames-per-second significantly)

    Composure/Focus Target: “Rule of 3rds/Golden Mean”

      o Wide Shot: The person’s body is in focus, & place them at one of the ‘corner’ points of the ‘grid lines’ (ie, the optional rectangle, ~1/3 inset from edge-of-frame, ‘square within a square’ of the viewfinder):
      o Medium Shot: Their torso is at a corner point
      o Close-Up: Their face is at a corner-point
      o Super-close-up: Their eye is at a corner-point
      Rule: as long as their eye(s) are in focus, the shot is in focus. If the eye(s) aren’t in focus, it isn’t ‘creative focus’, it’s just blurry :-(

    Creating blurry backgrounds, or ‘bokeh’:

      1. Widen your aperture to max
      2. Zoom-in as much as you can (ie, max the telephoto)
      3. Increase the distance between your Subject & the background
      Note: there is often an inverse relationship between aperture & zoom: until you invest in expensive ‘fixed-aperture’ zooms, most zooms decrease the aperture as you zoom-out. This is to avoid bad optical problems, such as pincushion distortion, color fringing, etc, but WRECKS the bokeh(!). So: practice with your zoom, & find the optimal zoom distance which allows some level of bokeh. Here’s a few guidelines:
      o f/5.6 or above is usually extremely difficult to get good bokeh. Use f/4 or wider if possible
      o Wide-angle, eg under 24mm focal length, is difficult to get good bokeh, unless you’re shooting f/2.0 or wider.

    SHOOT WITH RAW:

      o Yeah, there’s lots of arguments/religious warfare re. “JPEG is Faster” & “I can edit my JPEGs JUST FINE”
      o Ignore those ppl. Once you open a RAW file in the native software (eg, Canon Digital Picture Professional, or Nikon (whatever?)– RATHER THAN ADOBE RAW– you will unlock amazing levels of super-clean adjustment: from exposure, white-balance, color-correction, sharpness… to simply zooming-in & reframing: VERY VERY CLEAN.
      o The only time to not shoot RAW, is if you absolutely must need super-fast burst, &/or have no spare memory card. Sure, the file is bigger, so get a faster laptop, & back-up media…
      o Correspondingly- unless you’re a professional on daily-turnaround assignment, there is no reason to shoot “RAW + JPEG”. You’re just slowing the camera down, making the file fatter, & you can do all that afterwards on your laptop… w/ arguably better quality.

    THREE RECOMMENDED ‘PICTURE PROFILES’ (to be used as a ‘starting-point’):

      · Indoors:
      o Purpose: to shoot without flash as much as possible indoors, you need to get the shutterspeed at least 1/125
      o Av, aperture wide-open
      o ISO: 800 or 1600 (test!)
      o WB: ‘Bulb’/Incandescent.
      o Lens: wide as possible, no more than 50mm zoomed-in, or you will lose a lot of light

      · Outdoors:
      o Purpose: Shoot without a flash with as much bokeh as possible.
      o Av, aperture wide-open (unless you’re overexposing at ISO 100 or below)
      o ISO: 100-200 for noon/bright light, more if you’re zooming w/ a non-fixed aperture lens. 400-800 at dusk is fine.
      o Lens: zoomed-in as much as possible.
      o WB: Auto… Except at sunset!
      o Subject: Ideally subject is as far away from the background as possible.
      NOTE: Avoid having the sun behind you: the subject will have a lot of front-on, flat/uninteresting light (or at noon, they’ll be washed-out). Similarly, avoid direct overhead ‘noon’ light: it creates harsh shadows & is really unflattering to faces.
      Much Better to have the sun behind or on-profile to your Subject! This allows the sun to create highlights or ‘rim light’ against their hair, etc.

      · Portraiture
      o Purpose: Shoot with as much bokeh as possible.
      o Av, aperture wide-open (unless you’re overexposing at ISO 100 or below)
      o ISO: 100 or lower, for minimal ‘gain’ artifacting
      o Lens: zoomed-in as much as possible.
      o WB: ‘bulb’ if indoor, auto if outdoor.
      o Subject: with back or profile to the sun, allowing the sun to create highlights or ‘rim light’ against their hair, etc. Get the person out from under direct sunlight, & position something white’ish nearby to ‘bounce’ the sunlight on their face… Also, Ideally the subject is as far away from the background as possible.

    Recommended Lenses (of course, this is a personal preference, but many top shooters have found this a good ‘starting-point’):

      · 24-105 f/4.0L – Fixed-aperture ‘L’ lens, terrific “walking-around” lens w/ great bokeh, esp fully zoomed-in.
      · 70-300 f/4.0-5.6L – Fantastic image-quality super-zoom. 4 stops of dual-mode IS, focuses in near-dark, & pin-sharp at 300mm wide-open(?!) Its nearest competitor is the 100-400 f/4.0-5.6L, which has 12yr-old technology, & is really outclassed…
      · 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 – This is a prime (non-zoom), & perfect for indoors. Super-fast, & good ‘portrait’ distance. The f/1.8 is a very low-price lens, & not built as robust, but the optics are good
      · 100mm f/2.0 – This is a prime/non-zoom, which will have terrific bokeh at f/2.0
      · 135mm f/2.8 ‘soft focus’ – I would borrow/test this lens; soft focus is pretty soft, ideal for portraiture, but I personally like the option to selectively blur in photoshop/etc

    HOPE THAT HELPS!!
    Now get out there & SHOOT!!! :-)

    PS: If you want More where this came-from, check-out my post: “Does your Shot Work?

    In praise of “Columbiana” & the ‘solid-B movie’

    September 8th, 2011

    So I love most of Luc Besson’s work– from the brilliance of the (original) “La Femme Nikita” and “Leon”, to the solid action’ers “Taken”, “Wasabi”, “District B13″, & even “Kiss of the Dragon” (having a young daughter myself really makes the last 1/3 of that movie work brilliantly). And hey- give Besson props for “Angel-A”, a very nice ode to Wenders’ triumphant “Wings of Desire”.

    So of course I couldn’t wait for “Columbiana”, & was a bit stunned how much the critics slammed it…

    But know what? I think there’s some kind of hubris running thru most reviewers when confronted with an action movie… regardless if it’s a ‘Thinking Action’ movie. They feel ‘cheap’, & feel it’s their duty to diss… even to the extent of tuning out 1/2-way thru the film, & or even making shit up (cf Ebert’s review of “King of New York”: it’s clear he never watched the full movie).

    Even famous multiple Oscar-winning screenwriter William Goldman lamented this, noting that “action films will never win a Best Picture Oscar” [Note: "Braveheart" or "LOTR" are 'Epic/Adventure', not 'Action'] & he even joked, “maybe an action film about medical malpractice could win”. Well, we had that film, “Constant Gardener”, & it was brilliant, Rachel Weisz got her well-deserved Oscar, but nope it still didn’t win “Best Picture”.

    Ironically- lots of the ‘great’ filmmakers have made ‘Thinking Action’ films:

    • “Runaway Train”: scenario written by Kurosawa
    • “Blade Runner”: based on & ‘approved’ by Philip K. Dick
    • “Heat”: written by Mann, based on work by Edward Bunker (“No Beast so Fierce”)
    • “City of God”: written by director of “Constant Gardner”
    • “Apocalypse Now”: written by Milius, directed by Coppola

    So- let’s get into a few examples from the reviews[sic] trashing “Columbiana”, shall we?

    “If that sounds like an intensely generic plot outline that because it is”
    “Action aside, what ultimately kills the film is a complete lack of originality or initiative”
    -> Perfect straw dog for a Reviewer who’s already decided to dislike the film. Did they even watch with both eyes open? Let’s take 4 examples:

      1) “with a smart FBI agent (Lennie James) right on her tail, she needs to execute before it’s too late”
      -> You’re right- that does sound hackneyed. Oh wait- that’s NOT WHAT HAPPENS AT ALL IN THE FILM.
      In the *actual* film “Columbiana”, Cataleya not only isn’t ‘worried’, ‘rushed’ nor even ‘inconvenienced’ by the FBI; she casually abandons her digs w/o a murmur nor even anger at her boyfriend when SWAT blows a hole in her door. She then casually outwits said FBI guy, & turns him into her stalking horse, & then scares the shit out of the suave CIA guy as well, w/ the very .50cal she pulled right out from under the FBI’s noses. “Before it’s too late”?! This is even more elegant than “Taken”‘s Liam Nielson messing about with cellular gadgets to outwit triangulation!

      2. “the script makes little attempt to establish [Saldana & Vartan's] personal connection”.
      -> So, you’ve just ignored 3 separate scenes, plus the underlying theme running thru *all* their scenes together: “Can’t we do something together like normal people?” Vartan asks the very first scene. Then he (tries) to withold sex to ‘ask questions’ [now c'mon! that's pretty Original right there! We've seen 'female love interest's do this in Action films, but a MALE love-interest?! Nice!]. Then she’s willing to risk phone triangulation to let him “ask three questions” as she’s running away. IOW- she’s not into ‘talky/feely’ ways of showing she cares, but she just took an ‘Action’ one. Sure it’s not a ton of character development, but saying “makes little attempt” is just ridiculous.

      3. “it’s never explained how the men she murdered are connected to the Colombian kingpin.”
      -> Now it’s clear the Reviewer definitely ‘tuned out’ 1/3 of the way thru the film. Sure, we think that when we first see her wax the scary Danny Trejo-looking guy… & the screenplay throws us a feint, letting us think “oh she’s killing her father’s murderer’s crew”. But wait- then she’s killing a Madoff-like white guy: CLEARLY NOT RELATED TO DON LUIS! Huh? And then for the duffers, just like said Reviewers, the film actually SPELLS IT OUT, TWICE: “Oh, [she's] sending a message” says FBI guy, -&- “Oh, you’re sending a message to Don Luis, not us!” says FBI guy again(!)
      It’s not “Who” is being killed, it’s the Orchid Drawing on their chest! In lipstick, to just nail that point home. And guess what? Don Luis figures it out IMMEDIATELY!

      4. “That’s nothing, however, compared to the fact that Cataleya and Don Luis never share a single scene together in the entire film.”
      -> I suppose the very climax of the film, a ‘telephone two-shot’, doesn’t count? And especially when she resolves it so elegantly? “Eat!”

    For a film with so much similarity to “Taken”, plus the added spice of a woman in the lead role, it’s curious sites would rate “Taken” a 3, & “Columbiana” a 1.5 Perhaps the Reviewer doesn’t appreciate “B” movies? And wishes he was watching Bergman instead? Or worse, it’s “ok” to have “guilty pleasure” of male-based Action, but somehow disquieting if women kick ass too?

    FWIW- I just watched “Debt” & found it long, turgid, morally corrupt & philosophically inept. A paean to whining, the film manages to make the ‘heroes’ come-off as petty incompetent bureaucrats, while the Bad Guy comes-off as more morally honest, & successful to boot! What more perfect ‘evil villain’ exists than a Nazi Torturer, & yet these pathetic liars incompetently screw-up twice, then take-credit & brag for 30 years for a success that never happened. “I knew it was going to come-back and haunt me?” Shit lady- quit thinking of your pitiful life, & consider the thousands of murdered people whom you just cheated of JUSTICE!

    Mirren was much, much better in “Red”: “I kill people, dear”. And Justice was much, much better served in “Columbiana”: “Eat!”

    Obama’s Great Betrayal

    September 7th, 2011

    Perfectly said:

    Barack Obama’s betrayal will resonate in history long after he has become just another name on the over-priced celebrity speaker circuit. It is a betrayal of far more than the youthful idealists and loyal progressives who put him in the White House.

    Obama has unmoored the Democratic Party from its foundations — philosophical and electoral. No longer is it an expression of the persons, programs and ideas that crystallized with the New Deal and which dominated the country’s politics for sixty years. Its future is that of ad hoc assemblage of hustlers and special interests whose sole claim to govern will be that it is not the amalgamated Tea/Republican Party.

    Obama, by this Oedipus-like act of patricide, has also betrayed the country that voted for an enlightened leader with a social conscience – a country in desperate need of the opposite to the fate he has laid on us.
    More

    The Middle Class– We’ve Been Cheated, & We’re Fired Up!!

    August 16th, 2011

    1) Worker productivity & economy has risen steadily for past 35 years
    Yet worker salaries have held steady, if fallen.
    2. People still ‘have’ more, b/c
    a) women now work
    b. people work more hours, *lots* more hours
    c. For years ppl used their ‘house ATM’, & now they’re max’ing their credit cards
    3. Meanwhile, the share of $$ to the richest has risen astronomically
    a) our country profiles like a Banana Republic
    b. while some disparities in the other top-30 world economies, USA has by far worst disparity
    c. OUR OWN CITIZENS, RICH & POOR, REPUBLICAN & DEMOCRAT, DON’T WANT THIS DISPARITY:
    (1) when polled, they think the disparity is much less
    (2) when asked what kind of economic distribution is ‘equitable’, they choose #’s that look like Sweden!!
    (3) They Agree that Gov’t Deficit & Debt are massive problems, & ASSUME that we need to cut Services… but when they find-out that top companies pay NEGATIVE TAXES– they’re INFURIATED.

    4. This is not Happenstance
    a) it’s predicted, even by Adam Smith
    b. it’s aided & abetted by tax code, tax incentives, even ‘consumption easements’ designed specifically to aid the top 1/10% of the richest Americans
    c. cf “Plutonomy Memos”: the very richest Americans *want* this disparity, & know their ‘weak spot’– “that the ppl can vote”. & thus they spend MASSIVE amounts of $$ to persuade ‘the masses’… NOT b/c they’re ‘generous’, but b/c it’s a GOOD INVESTMENT. Note: Yes the Rich & Corp’s donate to Dems as well as Repubs– but at a factor of 1/5!!!

    5. This is not Inevitable, nor Permanent
    a) Country after Country, Culture after Culture has fought this
    b. We did this ourselves in our own country:
    (1) Great Depression: 24% Unemployment, soup lines & ppl starving everywhere
    (2) Gov’t put ppl to work; FDR recognized & fought-back against the massive heated propaganda thrown by corporatists: “I welcome their hatred!”
    (3) Progressive Taxation, strong union laws, trust-busting, etc reined-in the monopolization of wealth, & Social Security began the social safety net
    …& NONE OF THOSE THINGS ‘DROVE THE RICH TO QUIT’, LEAVE, ‘GO GALT’, OR ‘QUIT INOVATING’… Let-alone ‘BANKRUPTED THEM’. No- they simply worked harder, & thrived.

    HOWEVER:
    6. Continued massive economic disparity, coupled w/ massive unemployment, equals civil unrest. This has happened in EVERY Country, thru EVERY Era, & even has happened here in this country.

    I only hope the Rich wake-up, & realize it’s in their OWN ECONOMIC SELF-INTEREST to begin to SHARE THE WEALTH…
    …b/c they won’t be sitting pretty when a massive Crash happens
    …& if they think they can hide behind armed, guarded fortresses? Then they need to remember that the USA has the highest per-capita gun-ownership in the world– & that Class Anger is an issue in BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES…

    —————

    Heckuva Job, Tea Party!

    August 8th, 2011

    Nuff said.

    Update: And the Tea-Baggers are Taking Credit for the downgrade!! I suppose when interest rates rise, inflation rises, their mortgage payments rise, & their paychecks fall (& everything costs more)– that won’t have anything to do with the Debt Ceiling, & everything to do with ‘Democratic Spending’.