'We the (mindless) people' need to fight back for our government
Six million people have lost their jobs. Many will never work again. Eight trillion dollars of middle class wealth has been destroyed in the housing collapse. Fifty million people are living in poverty, and one out of eight Americans is on food stamps.
Corporate profits are at an all time high, while the taxes paid by corporations, are among the lowest in the industrial world. Between 2000 and 2006, two-thirds of all growth in the entire economy went to the top 1 percent, while the American taxpayer bailed out the “too big to fail” banks, which are now bigger than ever, reaping in billions of dollars in profits and bonuses.
In the Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II years, the national debt had doubled, all to further the wealthy base. The Republican response? Let the working and middle class pay. They can sit subservient, and docile in front of their TVs watching a continual rash of mindless, inept drivel. The real intelligence and logic of America being locked out.
The Republican and Tea Party condemn the government at every turn. However, it was our government that has made America great. There was a time in America when the common good of the people meant something. We are now being fed a systematic, well-organized propaganda system blaming our ills on the government.
Our Constitution states: “We the people.” However, today the people are not represented by those that have the common good in mind. We are represented by congressmen and senators who represent corporations that have ploughed billions of dollars into their elections, and payback is the name of the game, government control is in their hands.
We have become a mindless, unintellectual nation, that has lowered its standards to the Charlie Sheen’s, Paris Hilton’s and others, the lowest denominator of reason and decency.
Pat R. O’Malley
Ann Arbor
Comments
loves_fall
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 1:51 a.m.
I agree with the gist of this -- regardless of what side people are on politically. I think in a lot of ways we've really regressed to a culture of sound bites and reality TV. We fork over a ton of money for concerts and sports without caring how much those people get paid, work like lemmings for companies with hugely wealthy CEOs, shop at places that further those corporate values, then complain that our teachers get paid too much. There are obstacles to creating a good life for the middle class, but that doesn't mean we can't try harder to find creative solutions that are fair and don't drive off all business. We can do better, but we can't trust others to do it for us. Unless we can come together and stand up for ourselves politically, make needed compromises and demand change, we're going to continue to be taken advantage of.
John B.
Fri, May 6, 2011 : 1:52 a.m.
Right on. As the Repubs say, 'an ignorant electorate is our best electorate.'
shepard145
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 12:22 a.m.
Actually, we are non of the things you've listed - keep trying!
David Briegel
Tue, May 3, 2011 : 1:11 a.m.
We aren't "non" of those things, we are MOST of those things! LOL
Mr. Ed
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 11:56 p.m.
We are not a Republic or a Democracy. We are Corporatism. The Country is run by big business and corporations. The US Government is the largest Corporation.
Carl Manheim
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 10:13 p.m.
Patrick: Keep on telling the truth. The Republicans were quietly reaping the benefits of of the Reagan "reforms" -- those that doubled the military budget in peacetime so that contractors could rip off the treasury, those that fed the trickle-down, supply-side economic crap to the public so that their corporate bosses could make millions, those that cut the taxes on the wealthy, those that set up corporate welfare and demanded sacrifice from the public, etc. -- Now the gang has run out of hiding space, so they are coming out in the open and just trying to steal the wealth of the country with their phony "reinventions." The public must end this corruption. I will never vote for a Republican in my lifetime. Everyone should go to the poles and kill this evil party. The so-called "tea party" is just a front set up with corporate (Koch, etc.) money to make it seem that there is popular support for them. The poor angry idiots that are taken in by this propaganda should wake up. Their anger is directed 180 degrees in the wrong direction.
shepard145
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 9:45 p.m.
Yea, join mindless Pelosi and convince yourself that the country will prosper from the bottom up on the power of welfare checks and wealth redistribution!! LOL All Americans should be horrified that this fool will forever be the country's first female Speaker of the House. Speaking of which - spoiled, petulant, ignorant moochers who do little more then occupy space in this nation of great prosperity seem to think the bankrupt democrat party should continue to reshape our economy into the kind of European socialist state that has already bankrupted Europe. For a supposedly educated community, Ann Arbor is actually home to a disappointing number of politically and economically vapid socialist crawlers who don't and never will "get it". .
David Briegel
Tue, May 3, 2011 : 1:10 a.m.
Golly Shep, "spoiled, petulant, ignorant moochers"? You must be speaking of the noble, patriotic corporations who send middle class and working class children to die for their empire. And then pay no tax! Right? lol, very funny drivel indeed. LOL
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 12:04 a.m.
"I'm sorry Shepard, was there an argument in this?" Nope. Nor is there a fact. Nor is there any logic. Nor is there ever any of the above. Good Night and Good Luck
DBlaine
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 10:31 p.m.
I'm sorry Shepard, was there an argument in this? You know, name calling doesn't qualify as logical argument. It's generally regarded as the last province of the people with nothing to say. But then, maybe you've said it all.
Enso
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 10:21 p.m.
Pure drivel.
Enso
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:08 p.m.
"'Trickle-down economics' and the trickle-down theory' are terms of political rhetoric that refer to the policy of providing across the board tax cuts or benefits to businesses, such as tax breaks, in the belief that this will indirectly benefit the broad population." -Wikipedia As of today: Corporations have the lowest tax rates than they have ever had in modern history. The distribution of wealth in this country has not been as unequal than any other time since the Great Depression. The top 1% of earners own more than hundreds of millions of Americans combined. A question to those on the right, and others who believe in the tickle-down theory of economics: Where are the jobs? If rich people need money to create jobs and we give it to them, if corporations need tax breaks to create jobs and we give it to them, if the 'job creators' in the country have most of its wealth so they can create jobs... WHERE ARE THE JOBS? At what point are we going to consider the THEORY of Trickle-down economics wrong? How much more obvious does it have to be before we institute a new way of distributing wealth? We have in this country redistributed the wealth for the last several decades to a very few people. Has it worked?
Jim Nazium
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 2:39 a.m.
EXACTLY! Everything you said is Fact. Those who disagree generally hide their heads in the sand when confronted with a well rounded factual argument that they can't possibly contradict with any intelligent counter-point.
Roger Roth
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:01 p.m.
On the one hand I heartily agree. But I think it's a futile fight and it might be better, as Obama says in Audacity of Hope, for us to find common ground. But resentment and greed make even that difficult to achieve. There's so much wealth in this country. Enough for everyone. We've got to get beyond petty jealousy and resentment, pull together and make it the mission of the ablest amongst us to help everyone in America and everyone coming into America to reach the dream. That's what this country is about. Doing so will make America even better. One need not live better at the expense of anyone else in America. C"mon, folks, let's pull together! Start with the debt. There has got to be a way to pay it down that everyone helps with and agrees upon. Get over Republican and Democrat and be American! Our politician's bickering serves absolutely no one. There's a chance for history to be made here! Make it!!!
Jay Thomas
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 7:30 p.m.
"In the Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II years, the national debt had doubled, all to further the wealthy base." Thank goodness we didn't add trillions to the debt during the Clinton Administration! Phew... what a relief.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 12:40 a.m.
"Cute numbers - you appear to be a google expert except when it comes to Obama" Shep, you REALLY do need to read more CAREFULLY. I will do you good!! I posted Obama's numbers above. And having inherited a government that, in Bush II's last year, ran $1.9 Trillion deficit, I wonder what you think Obama should have done to have balanced the budget?? Inquiring minds want to know. Good Night and Good Luck
shepard145
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 12:07 a.m.
JD - Does that really sound right to you bankrupt democrats? LOL Maybe you need a less "crafted" bit of data or at least find yourself a source that isn't anther shill working full time on the obama campaign. ....and I hope you don't tell us you really don't know any better...
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 12:02 a.m.
@Jay: Nope. The debt is the debt. It is money the government has borrowed from other sources (in this case, from the Social Security Trust Fund) that it must repay. @JD: any facts that are inconvenient to Shep's world view he dismisses as the result of a Google search--as if that makes the facts therein any less valid. Good Night and Good Luck
JD
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 11:26 p.m.
Here's some more "cute" numbers. Although I'm not a google expert, I just happened to read it in the news this morning. "All told, Obama-era choices account for about $1.7 trillion in new debt, according to a separate Washington Post analysis of CBO data over the past decade. Bush-era policies, meanwhile, account for more than $7 trillion and are a major contributor to the trillion-dollar annual budget deficits that are dominating the political debate." <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/running-in-the-red-how-the-us-on-the-road-to-surplus-detoured-to-massive-debt/2011/04/28/AFFU7rNF_story.html?hpid=z1" rel='nofollow'>http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/running-in-the-red-how-the-us-on-the-road-to-surplus-detoured-to-massive-debt/2011/04/28/AFFU7rNF_story.html?hpid=z1</a>
shepard145
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 10:18 p.m.
Ed. You prove my point nicely. Cute numbers - you appear to be a google expert except when it comes to Obama...then all data stops. This is where you need to begin to educate yourself about the value of truth over democrat talking points and factoids issued by the government. Good luck with your new journey.
Jay Thomas
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:30 p.m.
You are under counting things like Clinton taking 158 billion from social security toward the end of the decade so he could leave office with the public believing there was a "surplus".
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:07 p.m.
Source for the above: <a href="http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm</a> Note: One must be able to do math and must understand which presidents are responsible for which FY's budgets--both are a stretch for some folks. Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:05 p.m.
Under Reagan the debt increased by $2 Trillion, a tripling of the debt in 8 years. Under Bush I the debt increased by $1.6 Trillion, an increase of 60% in 4 years Under Clinton it increased $1.4 Trillion, an increase of 30% in 8 years Under Bush II it increased $6.1 Trillion, more than doubling the debt in 8 years. So who, exactly, is to blame for our debt crisis? Good Night and Good Luck
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 6:28 p.m.
"You obviously think "common good" means socialism and as for the national debt. President Obama has done to the debt in two years what it took Bush II ( as you call him) eight years. " As is almost always the case, Stun, you're just making it up. Increase in the debt during Bush II = $5.1 Trillion (with the last year's deficit being $1.9 Trillion--to date the largest budget deficit in the nation's history) Increase in debt during Obama admin = $1.6 Trillion with another $1.6 Trillion projected this fiscal year. Source: <a href="http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm</a> Funny how TeapubliKans are OK with a white man running a $1.9 Trillion dollar deficit but get nervous when a black man runs a $1.6 Trillion deficit. I wonder why that is? Good Night and Good Luck
jdawg7214
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 6:20 p.m.
Mr. O'Malley, have you ever heard of tax shelters? If you raise taxes, these corporations will simply move their headquarters and main operations to countries like Ireland that slash corporate tax rates. Raising taxes on corporations, while it sounds like a quick and easy way to bring in more tax revenue, is as good of an idea as it seems. Maybe you should do a bit more research next time in order to demonstrate that you, too, are not one of the "mindless" of whom you speak.
JD
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:24 p.m.
Yes, this sounds like Fairtax to me! Check it out! <a href="http://www.fairtax.org" rel='nofollow'>http://www.fairtax.org</a>
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 6:31 p.m.
Simple solution: end the tax shelters. Tax corporations a % of the business they conduct inside the United States. Then it doesn't matter where they are. They are being taxed on their transactions here. And this might actually draw business back to the US. No longer will it be profitable to offshore one's HQs, operations, production. They's still be taxed on the transactions they undertake in what is still the world's most powerful economy. Good Night and Good Luck
debling
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 5:23 p.m.
Right on Pat. Great letter. The heart of the problem is a misconception that America is a Democracy. It is not. It is a Republic. The essence of Democracy is rule by the people, but in a Republic it is rule by representatives. Representatives have their own agendas and are influenced by special interests, the wealthy, lobbyists and their party. Rarely are they concerned with obeying their consituents will. Only when Americans get involved in their country and take control will things change. Don't rely on the Democrats or Republicans to make change. They have their own self interests to care about and have proven they cannot work for the common good of the country. Start at the local level. Get involved in city meetings. ORDER the City to obey the public. Work the county government as well. Tell the STATE government what they must do, not the other way around and push for changes at the Federal level too.
Soothslayer
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 5:44 p.m.
BINGO! Except I would go further to say we've been at an aristocracy for at least a century and we've been led to beleive that we're in a democracy as a ruse. It doesn't matter which of the two parties you vote for. Since they've been given the rein to do so corporations (and the wealthy shareholders behind them) have ensured that they can create an environment to break labor unions by shifting production overseas, benefit from tax loopholes and other legislation by which they can increase their very own power and profit from. Economic crash of 2008? Wall Street called their buddies in power and got a get out of debt free card without the consent of the taxpayers. There is no working class anymore. It's us and them. But sure, keep voting. Watch this movie, or not. Decide you've had enough or don't: <a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inside_job_2010/" rel='nofollow'>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inside_job_2010/</a>
stunhsif
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 5:22 p.m.
"There was a time in America when the common good of the people meant something." "In the Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II years, the national debt had doubled" You obviously think "common good" means socialism and as for the national debt. President Obama has done to the debt in two years what it took Bush II ( as you call him) eight years. I am just very thankful the rest of Michigan doesn't think like most of Ann Arbor does or we would still be stuck with Jenny !
David Briegel
Mon, May 2, 2011 : 3:09 a.m.
JD, You are absolutely correct!
JD
Sun, May 1, 2011 : 8:20 p.m.
Not quite. Offering huge tax breaks to the rich while failing to budget for 2 wars and Medicare part D is a huge reason we are where we are now (nevermind the economic collapse which some might say came as a surprise). "All told, Obama-era choices account for about $1.7 trillion in new debt, according to a separate Washington Post analysis of CBO data over the past decade. Bush-era policies, meanwhile, account for more than $7 trillion and are a major contributor to the trillion-dollar annual budget deficits that are dominating the political debate." (And no offense or anything, but when you cry socialism, people like myself immediately assume you haven't a clue what you're talking about and it weakens any argument you may have) <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/running-in-the-red-how-the-us-on-the-road-to-surplus-detoured-to-massive-debt/2011/04/28/AFFU7rNF_story.html?hpid=z1" rel='nofollow'>http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/running-in-the-red-how-the-us-on-the-road-to-surplus-detoured-to-massive-debt/2011/04/28/AFFU7rNF_story.html?hpid=z1</a>