Showing posts with label plutocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label plutocracy. Show all posts

Saturday, December 1, 2012

December 2012

Jack Donovan on "Police State Liberals"
Contra expatriating
Reaping what you sow: SF murals being defaced by taggers
Soviet-era spy tech still spying on ex-satellite states
The long, strange (ego) trip of Anonymous member "Commander X"
Game show host talks about his sensory deprivation chamber experiences
 Obama should jail his opposition "like a third-world dictator"
Making brain cells from urine
Is it time to put a "may be dangerous to your financial future" warning label on graduate school?
 Experimental handcuffs under development can shock, inject drugs as well as restrain
Urban Outfitters buys garage sale clothes and resells them to hipsters
Items found between the pages of second-hand books
NTSB seeking to require black-box recording devices in all new cars
Defending the world, bankrupting ourselves
Small business owners, white collar professionals are today's kulaks
Amsterdam to create "scum town" neighborhood to exile its anti-social residents to
 Obama campaign still asking for contributions a month after winning re-election
Elites prefer to rule an impoverished citizenry to not ruling at all
 Fresh crop of "celebrity victims" making the mainstream media get real about SWATTING
 CA city official tells residents to "lock your doors" and "load your guns" after PD lay-offs
In a brave twist, Microsoft releases an ad for IE 10 that mocks those who hate Internet Explorer

Saturday, July 16, 2011

Sign of the times: The Gentrification of the Democratic Party

The new gentrified Democratic donkey
Although private sector labor unions are still a big influence on the Democratic Party the policies actually followed by Democrats once in office is distinctly anti-working class. Democratic Party politicos tend to work hardest for policies favored by the gentrified college educated professionals that inhabit the suburban areas. And  if you are a non-unionized blue, pink or white collar working-class stiff the Dems don't do much for you; you just don't have enough clout.

"...California, New York and Washington, D.C. represent progress due to the enlightened social and environmental rhetoric espoused by the media, academics and politicians based in these regions. But in reality,"says demographer Joel Kotkin, who studies these things," this new ruling class seems likely to create an American future that looks a lot like today’s Great Britain, with a significant affluent population concentrated in core cities and some affluent suburbs that lives an exciting life at the top of the world economy, surrounded by a large underclass and a fading middle class."

Modern Democrats will fight to the death to make sure urban, unionized public employees like bus drivers, cops, firemen, teachers and bureaucrats get top pay and benefits, and gold-plated retirements that they can take at age fifty in return for their money and votes. The rest of us peons with no clout get downsized, privatized, out-sourced,  and displaced by immigrants and are then told to shop at Wal-Mart for the best value for our food stamps. I wonder what FDR would say about all this? Wall Street banksters and well connected corporate CEOs are green-lighted to scam the system in every way possible. And then merely wrist slapped and then bailed out if they fail. It's no accident that in recent years as much money from the financier class goes to the Dems as to the Republicans. State socialism for the rich and laissez-faire for the poor.

"The genius of our ruling class", says Gore Vidal, "is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return."

Indeed.

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Weblog

Waiting for Warren: The problem with being a successor in waiting
"You frequently see problems like this at family owned companies:  the children get tired of waiting for Dad to die, and start freelancing.  The problem is presumably worse at Berkshire Hathaway, because Warren Buffett isn't their father, and he's very long-lived."

Sunday, December 19, 2010

weblog

Further proof that the University of Michigan benefited greatly by having Lee Bollinger leave to be president of Columbia - NYP
Why is Chicago so corrupt? - Chicago (via NewGeography)
A fascinating read.
Corporations okayed to make artificial life forms without regulation - PopSci
Isn't this how all those zombie apocalypse movies seem to start out?
Economics based haiku - ST
Corporate welfare queens
Make out: we get something, too:
Debt with the Chinese
Intel's new processors have a remote kill switch to protect your data if your device is ever stolen- TechSpot (via Slashdot)
Of course once this chip is able to be hacked by vandals, hackers, crackers, paparazzi, mafiosi, law enforcers, intelligence agencies et al then they'll all be able to remotely kill your device too, so there's that.
The disposable academic: Why going for a Ph.D. is a a waste of time - Economist
Grad students and post-docs are smart, inexpensive and thoroughly disposable. Even better in the eyes of the colleges, they pay them for the privilege of obtaining an expensive but largely useless advanced degree. Go figure?

Monday, March 22, 2010

weblog


Ann Arbor's mayor a true greenie - Michigan Daily

To wit: 8-11% of their income goes for things like penalties, reconnect fees, late fees, additional interest. Yikes!
Who cares as long as they get the name right, eh Rich? I dunno if it's a good idea (for the reason of possible damage to your credibility) to associate yourself with the Randroids though.
"Plutonomy"? Isn't that the same as "plutocracy"? - Front Porch Republic (John Medaille)
Yeah, but this is still a pretty good and emotionally satisfying populist rant.
A universal remote with a bottle opener built into it.
War on Drugs a "stimulus plan for Mexican drug cartels" - Wall Street Journal online (M.A. O'Grady)
At least someone gets it.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

weblog

Thought experiment: What if the U.S. Senate was apportioned by income? - Brainiac.com
"Under such a scenario, 8 senators--the same number, of course, who now represent California, Texas, New York, and Florida-- would represent Americans with zero income (!). Sixteen would represent the interests of those making less than $10,000 a year. Meanwhile, 34 would represent the broad, middle-income band of $30,000-to-$80,000." The senate is often called a millionaire's club, a reference to the wealth of current members, but, in Lowrey's restructured senate, millionaires, as an interest group, would not even receive a full complement of two politicians. At best, they'd get one. (Lowery proposes Michael Bloomberg for the thankless role.) Might battles over bank regulation and health care take on a different cast if the upper house looked like this?"

Yes it would. but I for one would be willing to give it a try.