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.

Politics : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: philv who wrote (20222)	2/17/2004 6:49:03 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81884

Phil, interesting how our views are so convergent. > The State has become subservient to business, and has become a tool of Capitalism. I am afraid so. But it's not the capitalism we know about. This capitalism is the one based on the printing of untold billions of dollars of fiat currency. > Fortunately we still have freedoms which holds us apart from the closed Communist experiment Yes, but we must defend them otherwise we will lose them --- if we have not already done so. One can take nothing for granted these days. > I know I must sound like some kind of left wing nut, but I am not. Just like me. In fact, in SA, someone who thinks as I/we do, is called a fascist or a right-wing racist by those who support the government --- who are, themselves, black fascists but would never admit it. However, on the internet, in the context of "big money" capitalists, we are "socialists". Actually, these terms have become meaningless --- merely a means to hit or insult someone one doesn't like. Reminds me of an incident I once witnessed here in Joburg. Two drivers, both apparently Jewish, were involved in a minor accident at a traffic intersection and were screaming at each other. In his rage, and not being able to find suitable words to use to insult the other, one driver shouted, "You, you, you're worse than a Jew!"

To: philv who wrote (20222)	2/17/2004 10:24:07 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 81884

Re: Hopefully I will never see troops on the street, stopping people from freely expressing their views even if they are contrary to the Capitalist/Corporate agenda. I have two friend who attended the FTAA protests in Miami in November and both were traumatized by the police. Though neither were arrested or beaten, they witnessed plenty of others who were. My friend Sue, who is a globe trotting anti-globalization activist has witnessed literally dozens of protests from Washington to London to Seattle, Cancun, Australia, New Zealand, etc. She said that she'd never witnessed police repression to match the fascism she saw raising its ugly head in Miami. Here's are reports from other eye witnesses: Message 19617810 Message 19534324 Message 19527226 alternet.org alternet.org So, if you are hoping to never see troops and riot-geared police, avoid any situation where people are likely to be expressing their dissent. In every city that George Bush travels to on his greedy bribery/extortion schemes, there are "Free Speech Zones" set up several hundred yards from where Bush's phony cavalcades will travel or where he'll meet with well-screened and meek supporters. Your vision of an America where dissent is considered patriotic and virtuous is more illusion than reality today.

To: philv who wrote (20222)	2/19/2004 3:49:24 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81884

Phil > I have become alarmed at the growth of Corporate power and its implications. This is the New World Order, an unwritten pact or brotherhood between the great International Corporations and Government, and each one feeding upon and supporting the other. The choices for "ordinary" people are indeed becoming harder and harder. Even if one sees the problem, what can one do about it? Take on the government? Become an enemy of the state? Those are not easy choices for those who are used to a comfortable middle-class existence --- and who wish the same for their children. Very easy to talk about being a "revolutionary" but damn hard to be one --- and then end up in jail for the rest of one's life. Here's a very good piece by Ms Arundhati Roy which addresses these questions: informationclearinghouse.info She concludes as follows: >>>How do we begin to mount our resistance? Let's start with something really small. The issue is not about supporting the resistance in Iraq against the occupation or discussing who exactly constitutes the resistance. (Are they old Killer Ba'athists, are they Islamic Fundamentalists?) We have to become the global resistance to the occupation. Our resistance has to begin with a refusal to accept the legitimacy of the U.S. occupation of Iraq. It means acting to make it materially impossible for Empire to achieve its aims. It means soldiers should refuse to fight, reservists should refuse to serve, workers should refuse to load ships and aircraft with weapons. It certainly means that in countries like India and Pakistan we must block the U.S. government's plans to have Indian and Pakistani soldiers sent to Iraq to clean up after them. I suggest that at a joint closing ceremony of the World Social Forum and Mumbai Resistance, we choose, by some means, two of the major corporations that are profiting from the destruction of Iraq. We could then list every project they are involved in. We could locate their offices in every city and every country across the world. We could go after them. We could shut them down. It's a question of bringing our collective wisdom and experience of past struggles to bear on a single target. It's a question of the desire to win. The Project For The New American Century seeks to perpetuate inequity and establish American hegemony at any price, even if it's apocalyptic. The World Social Forum demands justice and survival. For these reasons, we must consider ourselves at war. <<< Fighting words --- but is the pen really mightier than the sword? Or the dollar?!

To: philv who wrote (20222)	2/20/2004 9:44:04 AM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81884

Phil > I have never supported left wing politics. But lately, I have become alarmed at the growth of Corporate power and its implications. So you should because it has a direct effect on your life and your children's. I saw this excellent piece in a local newspaper and scanned it because it wasn't on the internet. It has a direct bearing on what we are talking about. DECLINE OF THE MIDDLE CLASS By Margaret Legum M&G 20 Feb 2004 Everyone now accepts that poverty - whether actual destitution or state-aided, underclass misery - is a growing global phenomenon. The figures, though astonishing, have become a cliche. Three billion people live and die on less than $2 a day, and 1,2-million on less than $1. Even rich countries suffer homeless beggars and street kids and queues for soup kitchens. Less well known is the fact that, globally, the middle class is struggling and declining. Capital accumulation used to be a normal middle-class pattern - pensions and insurance, setting up the kids on the home-owning ladder, a nest-egg against unforeseen misfortune. Today, dis-saving is closer to the norm - cashing in inherited savings, taking out loans in excess of income, selling the family silver. Parents are bailing out or accommodating their adult offspring who, in the past, might have contributed to family pensions. This thinning of middle-class assets accompanies another trend. Two incomes are needed to pay the bond, groceries, medical bills, school fees, transport - the essentials. Middle-class incomes no longer allow even infants the luxury of full-time care by one parent. This trend has happened over 30 years, when the world's wealth-producing capacity expanded by a factor of eight thanks to the digital revolution. The world is immensely richer. We tend to put these trends down to feminist insistence on income-earning, or "the youth of today": In fact, the growing poverty from the middle class downwards is a function of the exponential systemic increase in inequality. Again the figures are well known. The top three people own more than the bottom 600-million. The richest fifth in the world earns more than 85% of world income. The pattern is worst in the United States, where 1% owned more than the bottom 95% in 2000 - up from 90% a year earlier. Where the US leads the rest of the world follows, because that is the economic system it sets for the world. Thus the astonishing upward gush of resources - from poor to rich - is depleting the middle classes. In the US middle-class households have lost net worth since 1970. Average weekly wages and salaries were 12% lower in 1998 than in 1973, while labour productivity rose 33%. Between 1990 and 2000 the CEO's pay rose by 570%. It is now 600 times that of the average worker. The increase in productivity - and more - goes to the top. This systemic concentration of wealth cannot be corrected without systemic change. It cannot be tackled by expanding growth. The more productivity rises, the more the rich take away. It will never trickle down - not because the rich are mean, but because they spend only a little of their wealth. In the past the rich spent or invested most of their money, employing other people. Today a large proportion is effectively hoarded. More than 95% of the world's savings - much of it deriving from top incomes - is "grown" by speculative trading through the financial sector, not invested in productive enterprise. There are now effectively only two classes - one with capital; the other without. Senator John Edwards, a Democrat presidential hopeful, says: "There are two Americas. One that does the work and one that reaps the rewards ... middle-class America, whose needs Washington has long forgotten; and another America - narrow-interest America - whose every wish is Washington's command:" Capital owners can demand and get historically high proportions of the product of all countries - because they are allowed to move their capital from country to country. Rates of return of between 30% and 40% are not unusual. Only 30 years ago, 10% was considered very good. As "unearned income"; it attracted more tax than worked-for income. Today it may be untaxed, because capital owners - having the power to move - profoundly influence government policy. Low taxes on capital are only one example - "flexible" labour laws and privatisation are others. The middle classes must save and ensure for health and education because capital owners frown on government expenditure on any but the most rudimentary education and health care. All this is unfair to people without capital. Even worse is the danger posed to economic and social systems globally. Daily fear of starvation is the fate of poor people everywhere. But everywhere, also, middle-class people are getting into terrifying debt; having homes repossessed; falling behind on medical insurance and pension payments, and leading a life of insecurity, stress and conflict. Divorce, family violence, mental illness, drug abuse and delinquency follow. So does a disrespect for law and profound cynicism about politics. The middle class is traditionally considered society's stable back-bone. It holds traditional ethics about decency and good behaviour. It is generally well-educated and values education. It is about moderation, stability and abiding by the law. And it is often charitable. It can be mocked for this --- but it is lost at our peril.