America the monarchy?

Lucky sperm? Why doesn't the gubmint start a program to assist those without lucky sperm. Oh, wait. They have.

 

Sure, just deflect. I don't know why I waste my time trying to reason with someone who writes "gubmint". Have a nice independent life.

 

I do. Thank-you.

 

in ny a few years ago there was a pregnant women who got a ticket for sitting on subway steps to rest for a minute...when asked about how ridiculous this ticket was the cop said talk to the mayor. the mayor of ny you ask? it was mike bloomburg ceo/former ceo of a couple different corporations.

 

How will you survive when all the taxpayers have been forced to move to better econonic environs. Currently , relieving the citizenry of state income tax has drastically increased th populations of NC and FL. I'm wondering if the last remaining sociialists in states like MI, NY and Il will finally close their doors. Can Detroit be a "movie trailer" for the rest of the country?

 

I couldn't find that particular story, but I did find a LAT article relating to a 'ticketing blitz' around 2003. Somebody ticketed for sitting on a milk crate etc etc.
I think at that point Mr B had extremely low approval ratings - so everything was probably his fault.

 

that particular case was on the front page of a local ny news paper so i am surprised it didnt pop up if you found the ticket blitz

 

Have you found it?

 

Huh, democracy working well for the conscience of a religious (religulous) sinner. Just one sinner at a time, I think, more probably the eventual mayor. Before Genesis there were the Nonsense, and that was/is without a mayor.:sunny:

 

didnt look because i know it was on the front page of the daily news because i purchased the paper that day. unfortunately i didnt save the paper, how could i know i would have this conversation over 3 years later.

 

You know more about the story than I do.
So, could you take a look, please. Thank you.

 

like i said it was years ago, i have since moved from the area, later on i may try to find it but today is my only day off this week so i have lots to do around the house.

 

I didn't mean right this minute. I will look again.

 

i wouldn't call it a monarchy. there are at least two koch brothers, along with carl rove and the rest of that lot. but it is a kind of neo-industrial feudalism, where basically the handful of the most powerful economic interests, have essentially usurped constitutional process, while attempting to keep up appearances of a constitutional government, when it suits their own self serving agenda to do so. the ignorance and superstition that have been promoted by corporate media, makes this possible.

a monarchy is where you have a single head of state, who is surrounded and kept in power, by a loyal cadre of supporters. who so completely micromanages, that replacing him/her, could change everything. this is simply not the case. there is no such one person.

there are, again this handful of very economically powerful personages, who might like this to be the case. but the reality is much more complex then that. so much so, that there is no one person, who's replacement would have that much effect, on anything.

during the bush regeme, the troika of rove, rumsfield and cheney, came close to grabbing that kind of dictatorial power, and in the context of forign policy, certainly exercized it. there is still excessive influence, amounting to a usurpation of democratic process, on the part of the national chamber of commerce, and the american legislative exchange council, otherwise known by its initials as alec.

we are in practice, far from the principals represented in legal writ. but the form of practice, is equally far from that of monarchy. it is however, excessively centralized and hierarchal. far more so then appears intended constitutionally.

it is also not, the visible and putative head of state, who exercises this power. at least not primarily. it is still through members of the legislature, in key committee positions, rather then the executive branch, that much, if not most, of this power is exercized. but it is a close thing, and getting closer. and these legislators in question, represent no interest not their own, and that of dominant economic forces. by close thing, i refer to departments of state and security, the military and intelligence agencies, who do remain under executive authority, though again in principle, only through the grace of congress. which in reality is a blank check.

again in principal its not that simple, but this handful of corporate ceo's, unelected by any democratic process, do in realty, exercise a kind of global dictatorship, owing fealty to no nation, even that of the u.s., which primarily harbours them.

oh, and if you're going to scape goat any ethnicity or religious faith for this condition, the most logical and legitimate target of doing so, would be protestant christian white supremists. that's who you'll find running these actual seats of power.

 

America is more of a "Banana republic" (Dictatorship) with rigged elections and bought politicians.

 

I think it's you. "Monarchy" isn't the word you're searching for. "Oligarchy" or "plutocracy" would be better fits. You're absolutely correct that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, but the national government is paralyzed by an obstructionist Congress that works to keep it from functioning except in foreign policy, which is also highly ineffective. Multinationals hold the real power. But that's not monarchy.

 

monarchy only works well in fantasy stories. anyone who thinks they'd want to live in one, forget that only the one percent lived in castles, and everyone else lived in hovels as their virtual slaves.

of course one did and could have a decent life as a skilled trades person, but there was little opportunity to become one, and even if you did, you could be stripped of your advantage on a whim.

of course if you were in the one percent, you could loose that in a dual too. monarchies tend to be precarious from top to bottem and bottom to top.

that might be fun to role play, but how much fun is it when you don't feel like playing?

an 'anarchy' of universally mutual consideration would be safer and more free, but people fear the responsibility to be considerate.

hatred of logic or no, you can't expect someone else to be considerate for you, under any structural form, and its the degree of universality of consideration,
that determines the quality of life you have to experience.

 

47% of Americans don't have $400, so apparently no savings is normal in the USA.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/05/my-secret-shame/476415/

The best bit is this ...
"Wolff also examined the number of months that a family headed by someone of “prime working age,” between 24 and 55 years old, could continue to self-fund its current consumption, presuming the liquidation of all financial assets except home equity, if the family were to lose its income—a different way of looking at the emergency question. He found that in 2013, prime-working-age families in the bottom two income quintiles had no net worth at all and thus nothing to spend. A family in the middle quintile, with an average income of roughly $50,000, could continue its spending for … six days. Even in the second-highest quintile, a family could maintain its normal consumption for only 5.3 months. Granted, those numbers do not include home equity. But, as Wolff says, “it’s much harder now to get a second mortgage or a home-equity loan or to refinance.” So remove that home equity, which in any case plummeted during the Great Recession, and a lot of people are basically wiped out. "

40% of working American families would be absolutely broke the instant their paycheck stopped.
The next 20% would only last 6 days, and the next 20% 5 months.

 

in russia you have putin, as the god-father of organized crime, holding that nation's highest office.
in the u.s. today, we've just seen the god-father of organized crime in the u.s., installed in our highest office.
laws, to an organized crime boss, are something to break, and that's what we're seeing.

do i exaggerate? no way to be sure really. but you look at the odds and follow the evidence,
the behavior and so on. i mean he walks and talks like a cleche out of an old movie about organized crime.

if you look at a police detective story out of the 50s, who acts the way he does?
mafia crime bosses. i'm not saying that's conclusive, but if the part doesn't fit,
why has his stratigy been to act it?

ok, its worked and he doesn't care about anything else.
ok, i get that, and some of the things, wanting to 'renegotiate'
nafta and the tpp, well no one is all bad, not saying anyone is.

but really really, anyone who thinks they gain anything by him,
has just been thoroughly conned.

and already, he's in violation of major portions of the constitution on day one.
not that he cares. crime boss. laws are to be broken.

 

i live in the u.s.
i would love to live in a free country.

When your only free choice, is rent, mortgage or jail,
this is not a free country.

When your only free choice is walk or indenture yourself to a car,
this is not a free country.

When your only free choice is oil, coal, hypothermia or electric that comes from coal or uranium,
this is not a free country.

Millions or billions of people, having to choose between a very small number of people,
none of whom they have any certain way of knowing anything meaninful about, to be ruled by,
does not make it one.

today's republicans are not 'conservative'.
conservative is not a binary opposite of conservationist.

they talk about wanting to deregulate,
but the only things they ever really want to 'deregulate',
is little green pieces of paper (euphemistically meaning symbolic value, in whatever form),
and how they find their way into their own pockets,
never actually the lives of any real living individual persons, other then themselves.

yes we need something other then a single political party,
preferably an unlimited number of them, (with fair and unbiased, if not always equal, treatment in the press)
or an electoral system, sufficiently immune to corruption,
that it would not require there to be any.

and while america's constitution may not be purrfect,
it could and would do a great deal more good if it were actually fallowed,
instead of trying to see how many corners could be sheared off of it.