Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (43232)	12/2/2000 9:01:26 PM
From: wsringeorgia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Pearly, anyone not born here and without multi-generational deep roots here in this country just cannot have a grip on the nature of our problems any more than some Georgian like me could have a sense of yours there in England. One thing though that I guess you would agree with: Your welfare state is much older and much more extensive than ours here. It also has completely different origins and purposes in that your Tories were fearful of the contagion of "red revolution" from across the channel and wanted to assuage "class warfare" with a simple expedient that would pacify "the lower orders" so that the "uppers' could retain their position. Things here were a little different; we never had fixed "upper class" but by the 1920's were beginning to develop one, our "robber barons". Due to the scale of things here vast aggregations of wealth began to accrue and it was realized that if some action was not taken to "re-distribute" wealth that in time ALL the wealth would be in the hands of a tiny few, just like in Europe. So to avoid this eventuality, a series of moderate reforms arising out of the "New Deal" in the 1930's were instituted. The main features were an inheritance tax, on old age pension and a mildly progressive income tax along with the most potent weapon of all; the ability of the government to inflate the currency in order to over time erode great estates. Here we have never had a real "labor party" like you have had there or labor politicians comparable to Ramsay McDonald, Clement Attlee or Tony Blair for that matter, though I guess Blair is a different, more modern sort. Our "left" is really very far "right" by most measures and very pro-business, especially big business, something McDonald, Attlee or even McMillian was rarely accused of. Our problem here is very different from yours; in your country I imagine any "shift to the left" would be very rough on the general economy. Not so here; a modest leftward shift would be economically sustainable and maybe even stimulative (not that I would like that!) And the "our oil" remark? I think there is a growing danger, a REAL danger of this country becoming a great international bully (many would say it has already happened). There is an element here that really think that the whole world is their cookie (that attitude shouldn't be too hard for a Brit to understand) and that anything done to anyone in the name of American progress is just fine. This is dangerous for us and for the whole world. WSR