Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

rhett o rick

rhett o rick's Journal
rhett o rick's Journal
April 28, 2014

This is only a secret to those that live in a naive denial bubble.

It has to be glaringly obvious what has happened to our "two party" system. It's only logical Captain, that the wealthy oligarchs would buy control of both parties. Duh!

The naive among us (maybe they're just lazy) want sooo badly to be able to know who to support from only their party affiliation. D's are good and R's are bad, and plez dont complicate things by pointing out the flaws in that thinking.

The naive are ecstatic that the Republican Party appears to be in major trouble. They believe that their troubles would all be over if the Republican Party just disappeared. They dont recognize that the value of the two-party system. They think we would have just one big party of good guys, that the right-wing ideologies die with the party (I think cherry is their favorite flavor).

I have been saying over and over that a Clinton vs. Christie race would be win-win for the Wall Street Oligarchs. Now it looks like a Clinton-Bush race*. Same difference. Maybe we should dispense with the election and flip a coin to see whether Clinton or Bush should be president with the loser being the Vice President. The Wall-Street Oligarchs are already celebrating.

The fact that Clinton is a favorite of Wall Street isnt a secret except for those with their heads in their sand.


*IMHO the BFEE still are a faction to be reckoned with KR's finger prints are all over Christie-Gate. Just sayin. Always keep your eyes on KR.

April 22, 2014

That would be the smart thing to do, but unreg-capitalism doesnt have a mechanism for that.

In unreg-capitalism the goal is having the greatest wealth. So who is going to step forward and "let loose" with their wealth?

Adam Smith thought that enlighten-self interest would drive individuals to build or create wealth. And I dont think he was wrong. But he was relying on these capitalists being "enlightened", and that is not practical in the capitalistic system. Those that are "enlightened" are soon buried by those that let greed lead the way. It is so much easier to steal wealth than create it.

Bad Analogy Time: Unreg-capitalism is like have no speed limits on our roads. Those with the biggest cars would bowl over everyone else.

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Member since: Fri Apr 22, 2005, 01:05 PM
Number of posts: 55,981
Latest Discussions»rhett o rick's Journal