Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

(06-13-2011 08:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

We keep saying Obama ISN'T a socialist and is pro business yet you morons keep saying that he hates business and is a socialist. Well, guess what. Many/most liberals don't like that he is so cozy with big business. THere are SOME blue dog Democrats(DINO's) that ARE for big business-Obama is one of them.

(06-13-2011 08:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

Just goes to show the Liberals are run by the elite, while the poor and the working class are the useful idiot comrades.

(06-13-2011 11:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

Just goes to show the Liberals are run by the elite, while the poor and the working class are the useful idiot comrades.

Man, you guys are stupid.

(06-13-2011 11:41 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Just goes to show the politicians are run by the elite, while the poor and the working class are the useful idiot comrades.

FIFY

(06-13-2011 11:28 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

We keep saying Obama ISN'T a socialist and is pro business yet you morons keep saying that he hates business and is a socialist. Well, guess what. Many/most liberals don't like that he is so cozy with big business. THere are SOME blue dog Democrats(DINO's) that ARE for big business-Obama is one of them.

My observation on Obama is that he favors some semblance of government control of the economy in some form. It may be a marriage of convenience where the Dems collude with a number of large corporations in order to manage the economy by removing the competition component. So in the end, the Dems can get what they want by managing larger parts of the economy - see the Obama healthcare bill - while MNC's on the inside are happy because they can make more money by having "captive customers" - see HMO's and Pharmaceutical Co's who can benefit most from the healthcare requirements.

Look at the Dodd-Frank bill. In this case, the Dems are trying to use gov't to control the banking industry. The largest banks may grumble about this publicly; however, dig a little deeper and you'll see how the biggest banks are not as upset as they appear to be because this will make it harder for their smaller competitors to compete. Specifically, look at the banking fee caps and the onerous record keeping required by the bill. The large banks can shift fees around due to their size alone and have the means to hire more compliance employees while their smaller competitors that are more specialized in community banking - like credit unions and your local neighborhood bank - struggle with compliance and cannot easily shift fees around due to their smaller size. Who benefits the most? Why the large banks like B of A, Goldman Sachs, etc. Who is hurt the most? The local bank in Anytown, U.S.A.

In summary, the big corporations stifle competition and help preserve their profits in exchange for being on board with the gov't controlling more of the economy. We are seeing a command economy developing in collusion with large MNC's maintaining their standing. The gov't may not own the assets directly, but the outcomes will be the same if left unchecked.

(06-13-2011 01:12 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 11:28 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

We keep saying Obama ISN'T a socialist and is pro business yet you morons keep saying that he hates business and is a socialist. Well, guess what. Many/most liberals don't like that he is so cozy with big business. THere are SOME blue dog Democrats(DINO's) that ARE for big business-Obama is one of them.

My observation on Obama is that he favors some semblance of government control of the economy in some form. It may be a marriage of convenience where the Dems collude with a number of large corporations in order to manage the economy by removing the competition component. So in the end, the Dems can get what they want by managing larger parts of the economy - see the Obama healthcare bill - while MNC's on the inside are happy because they can make more money by having "captive customers" - see HMO's and Pharmaceutical Co's who can benefit most from the healthcare requirements.

Look at the Dodd-Frank bill. In this case, the Dems are trying to use gov't to control the banking industry. The largest banks may grumble about this publicly; however, dig a little deeper and you'll see how the biggest banks are not as upset as they appear to be because this will make it harder for their smaller competitors to compete. Specifically, look at the banking fee caps and the onerous record keeping required by the bill. The large banks can shift fees around due to their size alone and have the means to hire more compliance employees while their smaller competitors that are more specialized in community banking - like credit unions and your local neighborhood bank - struggle with compliance and cannot easily shift fees around due to their smaller size. Who benefits the most? Why the large banks like B of A, Goldman Sachs, etc. Who is hurt the most? The local bank in Anytown, U.S.A.

In summary, the big corporations stifle competition and help preserve their profits in exchange for being on board with the gov't controlling more of the economy. We are seeing a command economy developing in collusion with large MNC's maintaining their standing. The gov't may not own the assets directly, but the outcomes will be the same if left unchecked.

Well that certainly is an interesting conspiracy theory.

(06-14-2011 02:26 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 01:12 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 11:28 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-13-2011 08:17 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Interesting read on Obama's campaign chasing Wall Street dollars.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/us/pol...odayspaper

The GOP is always accused of being the party of big business and the rich while the Democrats are for the working class and the poor. What I find interesting in this article is that the Dems are every bit as oriented towards Wall Street and MNCs as the GOP - probably more so. Since the majority of progressives congregate to the Democrat Party, how can progressives rail against the GOP for being pro business when the Democrats are in bed with MNCs and Wall Street? Even hedge fund managers are prominently courted by Dems, and we know how evil hedge funds are...

We keep saying Obama ISN'T a socialist and is pro business yet you morons keep saying that he hates business and is a socialist. Well, guess what. Many/most liberals don't like that he is so cozy with big business. THere are SOME blue dog Democrats(DINO's) that ARE for big business-Obama is one of them.

My observation on Obama is that he favors some semblance of government control of the economy in some form. It may be a marriage of convenience where the Dems collude with a number of large corporations in order to manage the economy by removing the competition component. So in the end, the Dems can get what they want by managing larger parts of the economy - see the Obama healthcare bill - while MNC's on the inside are happy because they can make more money by having "captive customers" - see HMO's and Pharmaceutical Co's who can benefit most from the healthcare requirements.

Look at the Dodd-Frank bill. In this case, the Dems are trying to use gov't to control the banking industry. The largest banks may grumble about this publicly; however, dig a little deeper and you'll see how the biggest banks are not as upset as they appear to be because this will make it harder for their smaller competitors to compete. Specifically, look at the banking fee caps and the onerous record keeping required by the bill. The large banks can shift fees around due to their size alone and have the means to hire more compliance employees while their smaller competitors that are more specialized in community banking - like credit unions and your local neighborhood bank - struggle with compliance and cannot easily shift fees around due to their smaller size. Who benefits the most? Why the large banks like B of A, Goldman Sachs, etc. Who is hurt the most? The local bank in Anytown, U.S.A.

In summary, the big corporations stifle competition and help preserve their profits in exchange for being on board with the gov't controlling more of the economy. We are seeing a command economy developing in collusion with large MNC's maintaining their standing. The gov't may not own the assets directly, but the outcomes will be the same if left unchecked.

Well that certainly is an interesting conspiracy theory.

It's not a conspiracy theory. Anyone who can analyze a situation recognizes cause and effect relationships. When you add more regulations to an industry, the companies that have the size will be able to comply while smaller competitors eventually are forced out due to the higher costs. This raises the barriers to entry so that it makes it harder for new companies to enter a market. The higher costs that the MNCs would incur is mitigated by increasing market share in a less crowded industry. It kills competition.

No doubt these were poor welfare moms and union laborers who paid to hear their hero speak.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/14/22...miami.html

"Obama made the comments at the Miami Beach home of former ambassador to Singapore, Steven Green, where about 80 people paid $10,000 to hear the president speak."

On the other hand I'm sure they gave out of the goodness of their hearts with no quid pro quo.

The party of poor people my ass. The party that pays off poor people with pennies to keep power so they can get richer by the millions.