The American Ruling Class

[minoly]

Did you just have this Xray taken, Minoly? It looks kind of scary, so I hope everything turns out okay for you.

Grow up...

[jdodson]

I seriously think rickoff has a better grasp on things than half our congressmen and senators do.

The single biggest problem I personally have with corporations is their magnitude. I support those who start a company and make it grow, though I think there has to be limits (like everything else on this planet). The fact that any corporation can be deemed "too big to fail" means it is already to big to begin with...Basically taxpayers were held hostage by the threat of collateral damages of bankruptcy which is why we had to cover colossal losses with the tarp program.

I guess thats the biggest problem with the stock market. The more the biggest players grow, the more people get rewarded, which is why they cant fail. So whats going to change? I'm not an economist and certainly not the smarest person here, but it seems like a run-a-way train heading towards its next crash.

It doesnt shock me GE pays no taxes, they are megalithic in scale. I cant imagine the amount of impact (or power and control) they have in the economy. Why are people worried about foreign terrorism when we are being held hostage here on the homeland.

[minoly]

I think rickoff has a very good grasp on the issues in the world. His analyses are usually spot on. Implying so blatantly that he is stupid with the Homer Simpson brain X-ray, makes an ass out of you, minoly. Please act civil.

Dave

I tend to agree, however, maybe you should read his post and mine before making a similar supposition.

[Mad Scientist]

Speaking of lack of corporate “trickle-down” to the masses how much trickle-down are we seeing from our corporate UNITED STATES, or the corporate senate and house, or justice from our corporate supreme court? Followed by our corporate state governments. All of these things that we think of as being “our” government have been turned into corporations just like any other company.

Thus in the same manner when you’re hired to work for a company your boss will tell you what you can and cannot do, our corporate government has the same control over you. It did not start out that way but over time bit by bit you have been turned into a slave of our corporate government. Of course many people still think that they are free, but what better way to the control the slaves then by convincing them that their slavery is freedom.

Welcome to a brave new world.

[jdodson]

So, as you can see, raising corporate taxes makes no sense at all as it can only hurt workers or consumers, or both those groups.

Even eliminating corporate taxes would not reduce labor costs and we know american unions cant compete with foreign labor, not to mention business policy and eviromental regulation would still be unaffected which is a major factor. Also nothing would stop foreign governments from matching our policy to keep those corportions on foreign land. They much like us, are held hostage by the economical imact of that corporation production.

I personally cant see america winning the competition battle with a desperate delevoping nation to host a productive corporation.

Also, eliminating corporate taxes would allow them a much greater profit margin which means they have control of the money that would otherwise been collected by the government. So, what makes you think they would reinvest that capital without stockpiling the resource or comsuming their competition at an ever faster rate? Would no taxes simply allow a corporation to grow bigger than ever before at an even faster rate?

I support corporations, but how big is too big? How much power is one corporation allowed to have? The government has three branches for a reason, what about corporations?

I tend to agree, however, maybe you should read his post and mine before making a similar supposition.

I think, the only problem anyone has is the picture.
Disagreeing is fine, but using words or pictures to insult another member doesnt help the dialog and nothing is gained. So theres really no point in it.

[rickoff]

The single biggest problem I personally have with corporations is their magnitude. I support those who start a company and make it grow, though I think there has to be limits (like everything else on this planet). The fact that any corporation can be deemed "too big to fail" means it is already to big to begin with...Basically taxpayers were held hostage by the threat of collateral damages of bankruptcy which is why we had to cover colossal losses with the tarp program.

You raise some valid concerns. We can all see that some corporations have become so large that they effectively control their market sector, and that smaller companies or corporations really don't stand much chance of competing. And when competition is effectively eliminated, the situation can be likened to monopoly, or oligopoly power. The difference between monopoly and oligopoly power is actually very slight, with a monopoly being controlled by a single large corporation while an oligopoly derives its power from two or more very large corporations colluding together to annihilate any outside competition. Both monopolies and oligopolies are for the most part unlawful because of existing Antitrust laws which were designed to thwart business entities from eradicating existing competition or prevent business start-ups that could pose competition.

In the US, Antitrust laws apply to any business entity that engages in interstate commerce. Certain exemptions to these laws, however, do allow some entities, such as insurance companies, sports leagues, and labor unions, to form monopolies or oligopolies. AIG was one such insurance company, and received a taxpayer funded bailout. As of 2011, the exemption for insurance companies came under threat due to predatory pricing of insurance policies, but I am not certain how that was handled by Congress. Knowing how Congress works, it is probable that either nothing changed, or that some law was passed having the appearance, but not the actual effect, of instituting fairness.

[aljhoa]

International Corporate Consultant
At present, Dr. Kissinger is Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., an international consulting firm that has represented some of the world's most powerful multinational corporations.
Book Henry Kissinger for Public Speaking, Keynote Address, or Motivational Speech

Kissinger Associates does not disclose its list of corporate clients, and reportedly bars clients from acknowledging the relationship.[11] However, over time details from proxy statements and the tendency of senior businessmen to talk about their relationship with Kissinger have leaked out and a number of major corporate clients have been identified.
Kissinger Associates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al

[rickoff]

International Corporate Consultant
At present, Dr. Kissinger is Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., an international consulting firm that has represented some of the world's most powerful multinational corporations.

I would say that Henry Kissinger is either the power elite's top puppet, or a puppet master himself. He is a longtime member in all the elitist organizations (Bilderbergers, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, and others). There isn't much, if anything, of anything important which goes on, that Kissinger is not involved in. Kissinger was Secretary of State, and National Security Advisor, to Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, and one might reasonably wonder if he was actually directing those two puppet Presidents, at least when it came to foreign affairs.

Another elitist, who was National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, was Zbigniew Brezinsky. That of course was no accident, as Carter himself had become a member of the Trilateral Commission and soon after became President. Brezinski was a founding member of the Trilateral Commission, and established that organization under the direction of David Rockefeller. In Brezinsky's 1970 book, Between Two Ages, he revealed himself to be a classic CFR man, a globalist, and a Marxist. He wrote that, ‘National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept’, and that ‘Marxism represents a further vital, and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision. Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man, and a victory of reason over belief...’

[dutchdivco]

"Backhanded compliment?"

While I don't see TOTALLY 'eye to eye' with Rick on everything,
"I seriously think rickoff has a better grasp on things than half our congressmen and senators do." may not have been the 'compliment', or supporting statement the author intended.
jdodson, this is somewhat toungue in cheeek; I think my DOG has a better grasp on thngs, than ANY/ALL of the 'our' congressman, and at that, I am probably insulting my dog!

Jim

[Mad Scientist]

Kissinger an elitist? Why he is such a nice kind compassionate man who is only interested in the betterment of mankind. One only needs to look at some of his quotes to understand his total commitment.

“Let us fashion together a new world order.”
or
“NAFTA represents the single most creative step towards a New World Order.”
or
“It cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change its perceptions.”
or
“The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.”

Who could possibly doubt where this man’s heart is, assuming he has one.

Doesn’t it make you feel good to know that he and others like him are running the government?


A short video.

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! - YouTube

[5150]

3-D Printer controvery, where do you see it all going?

I am amazed with new technology like this. I mean when a new technology comes along that can overnight transform an entire industry and have a huge ripple effect on so many other aspects of daily life, you have to be amazed. When digital cameras came out the entire film camera, film processing and entire personal film camera market went belly up over night.

When the internet took off with companies like Amazon brick and mortar book store locations suffered. On-line retailers took off and overnight the information age changed. long standing companies like Encyclopedia Britannica, Kodak film, and many more that at one time were considered cornerstones of business become obsolete overnight and went out of business

Amazing 3D Printer - YouTube

The 3D Printing Revolution - YouTube



The largest controversy at the moment regarding these new 3-D printers are their ability to print actual working firearms (Guns). Why is this so controversial. Well first of all apart form the obvious fact a person is now able to simply print their own gun which allows them and avoid the layers gun laws and background checks or waiting period it opens the door to other business that would go out of business overnight.

Can you imagine plastic guns that actually work? Well then consider the hundreds of thousands if not millions of metal detectors that would become obsolete overnight. Students would be able to pack a plastic toy gun and easily smuggle it into a school and if they are caught well is it really considered a firearm? I mean its plastic like a toy gun right? see where this can go?

I guess with anything there is good and bad with it so I am wondering what your take on this is and where you see the benefits and negatives of 3-D printers coming into play.

[jdodson]

The largest controversy at the moment regarding these new 3-D printers are their ability to print actual working firearms (Guns).

@5150, thanks for the link

thats very cool. A few months ago, I seen a 3D printer....building houses. I cant find the link now. I think your right and this will transform industries.

This technology is inevitable. Controversy wont stop it. Not only will you be able to print plastic guns, but metal ones as well. No serial numbers, no trace of ownership. This is why 'gun ownership laws' will be obsolete. Everyone will have a gun with no trace of where it came from.

What that first clip with the wrench doesnt tell you about, is the modeling process.
I've never seen 3D printing like this before, but what is clear, is that the wrench is scanned into a 3D Modeling program.
(Movies like "Transformers" are built using these same 3D Modeling programs.)
Scanning an object will give the exterior appearance. However it will not reveal the interior details and chambers. A gun for example has alot of interior parts that a scan would not reveal. Thats perfectly fine, once its scanned and converted into a 3D model, the interior details can be manually added within the 3D software.

In the video clip above, they manually added the rotation ability of the wheel within the wrench they scanned. When he clicked on that part of the wrench, it automatically highlighted and you could see how it attached inside of the wrench. They added that functionality after it was scanned.

So, we know any object that can be 3D modeled can be 3D printed (which is everything from a toy, to a gun, to a car, to a skyscraper.)

Any material which can be liquid form can be printed. Rubber, Plastic, Glass, Metal, Chocolate ect.. could all be printed to create any type of object.
The more intricate an object is internally would be the harder that it would be to 3D print. A computer could probably not be 3D printed because of the intricacy of the interior connections which would have to be added within the modeling stage. A gun on the other hand would probably not be that hard.

[dutchdivco]

Progress?

I recall reading, somewhere, the # of 'harriers' (horse 'shoe-ers') in the U.S., at the turn of the century, i.e 1901, compared to the present; point was how 'new' industries, (in this case cars) displace occupations and whole industries.
Thing is, the PACE of such change is excellerating.It took TIME for Henry Ford, etc. to 'convert' our society from horses to cars, even with his mass production techniques, so a 'generation' of harriers could, at least to some degree, retire.
On the other hand, if we 'evolve' too quickly, to every household having a 3-d printer, and downloading 'plans' for all the household items they now purchase manufactured, the disruption to our 'current' system of manufacturing and distribution could be massive!

As to making complex objects, in the case of something like Guns, you can take them apart, and 'model' each part, rather than 'scanning' or modeling the 'whole' piece.

And therein lies the 'problem' for some; there is at least 1 gun, can't recall which it is, where there is only one piece, the 'reciever', I think it is, that detirmines whether its a semi-auto or a fully auto. So, you can buy the semi-auto version, and then 3-d 'model' the fully auto reciever, and thereby 'circumvent' fed gun laws.

Actually, a 'study' of Fed. gun laws, is an excellent illustration of the limits of the 'ability' to restrict human behavior thru laws; people have been very 'creative' at finding ways to explore 'loopholes' to get around the existing laws.

For instance, you can't (legally) have a shotgun with a barrel less than 18 1/2"; thats a 'sawed-off', and illegal. But, a 'shotgun' is defined as a 'smooth-bore', whereas a 'pistol' or 'rifle' is described as having rifling in the barrel. But, the law doesn't say it has to have rifling for the whole length! So, a # of manufactureres made pistols, chambered for either .45 Long colt, OR .410 shotgun shells, and put about 1/2" of rifling in the end of the barrel, thereby 'getting around' the law, without in any way 'violating' it.

Anyway, there is a gun you can buy, right now, that you don't have to register; you just have to 'assemble' it, yourself; which includes making 3 pieces out of thick guage sheetmetal, and doing some welding.Because the 'kit' doesn't include an assembled and working 'breech' its not considered (as sold) a 'firearm', and is therfore 'exempt'.

I don't see this 3-d modeling as being MAINLY a problem for BATF, although it may well be an 'annoyance' for them; the underlieing problem with gun laws remains that criminals don't CARE that they are 'violating' the Law; its kind of a 'requirement' of the 'job'!

Still, while 3-D modeling, and home manufacturing COULD cause a major change in lifestyle, I suspect Civilisation will collapse, long before it can be 'rolled out'. Jim

[rickoff]

I recall reading, somewhere, the # of 'harriers' (horse 'shoe-ers') in the U.S., at the turn of the century, i.e 1901, compared to the present; point was how 'new' industries, (in this case cars) displace occupations and whole industries. Thing is, the PACE of such change is accelerating. It took TIME for Henry Ford, etc. to 'convert' our society from horses to cars, even with his mass production techniques, so a 'generation' of harriers could, at least to some degree, retire.

Good example, Jim, although horseshoers are farriers, not harriers (those are VTOL jet planes). In 1915 the population of domestic and recreational horses was at 21.5 million, and by 1949 had dwindled to 6 million. Today that figure has risen somewhat to about 7 million, but can certainly be accounted for by the fact that the human US population, and therefore number of recreational horse owners, has increased dramatically.

It is reported that there is a need for more farriers these days, and one would wonder why those slots have not been filled when considering the fact that a farrier typically charges around $78 per hour. Here's an explanation written by farrier Ray Legel in the book, Tails of a Horseshoer, that tells why being a farrier nowadays is not nearly as lucrative as one would think:


Make $78 per hour
Author is Ray Legel in Tails of a Horseshoer

The local high school called different business owners in the area to see if they would be interested in giving a one-hour talk about their business to a high school business class. I accepted and took my turn the following week.

The first thing on my agenda was to explain to the kids what a farrier does, being there was only one gal in the class that knew. I told them to ask questions. No question is a dumb question if one does not know the answer. I had just finished explaining what a farrier does and what a normal day consisted of when a hand went up.

Question. How much do you make per hour? I was going to get around to that in the end, but I quickly changed my format and answered the question.

"I charge $22 to trim a horse. I can trim 3 horses in an hour which is $66, plus a $12 minimum trip charge, which adds up to $78. Let's see a show of hands of those who would like to make $78 per hour."

All hands shot up, and the teacher had her hand the highest. I told them I would also like to make $78 per hour, but there is a big thing called "over-head" we must enter into the picture.

I then went to the blackboard and wrote down the things that make up my over-head: 1. Vehicle- Cost to buy, depreciation, gas, oil, tires, and estimated repairs.
2. Insurances- Health, vehicle, liability, disability, and life.
3. Equipment (hand and power tools)- New cost, repairs, and replacements.
4. Inventory- Several different kinds of bar stock, shoes, nails, pads, acrylics, propane for the forge, etc.
5. Continued education- Clinics, workshops, and farrier magazines to read.
6. Office costs- Telephone, cell phone, possibly a pager, stamps, statement pads, and business cards.
7. Retirement account.
8. One or more employees- Many more expenses then come into the picture. I do not have anyone working for me at this time.


Adding up my over-head, not including the countless hours on the phone, going to clinics and workshops to improve my skills and knowledge, checking on a horse, replacing a shoe at no charge, estimating the number of horses I do in a year, I figure it costs me $12 to trim one horse.

"So, $12 X 3=$36. $78-$36=$42. How many of you would like to make $42 per hour?"

All hands went up, but not as fast and not as high as before. I told them $42 per hour is really good, but just a minute. We have not paid our state, federal, and F.I.C.A. taxes yet. Now we take 30% of $42 and we get a total of $12.60 that we must pay in. Let us round that back to $12 for easier figuring, subtract that from our $42, and now we have $30.

"Now, how many of you would like to make $30 per hour?"

Slowly a few hands came up, but only about halfway, not knowing for sure what was coming next. I told them I would too, but just one more thing. I still had to drive to this place and drive home.

"Say for instance a half hour on the road each way, now we have 2 hours total involved trimming the three horses. $30 divided by 2 gives us $15. In reality, I make approximately $15 per hour I can actually take to the bank. Is $15 per hour bad? Not really, but it's a long ways from $78 per hour. A farrier basically is selling labor and experience. It's a very tough and physical job and not just everyone can do it. Besides the strength needed, you must be good with horses, must be good with people to handle all the situations that arise, and you must be a very good craftsman to do the job. Yes, $78 per hour would be great, but it just doesn't happen in my business."

[rickoff]

Misleading numbers

I'm sure that you are probably already aware of today's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) November report, which the mainstream media touted as both an increase in jobs as well as a decrease in unemployment to 7.7%, but this BS just doesn't tell the real story. For the real story, you have to dig deeper. The following report, found at NumbersUSA, is the real deal, and explains exactly what is really going on:

"November unemployment numbers were released earlier today, and while much of the focus is on the fact that the overall rate dropped 0.2 points, few media outlets are focusing on why the rate dropped: 542,000 Americans gave up their job search and are no longer being counted in the overall statistic. And while the overall size of the population grew by nearly 200,000 people, the number of people working or looking for work has dropped precipitously.
So, who's dropping out of the workforce?

• Black Americans make up 12.3% of the civilian workforce, but from October to November, 340,000 Black Americans dropped out of the workforce, accounting for 62.7% of the total number of individuals who left the workforce.
• Hispanic Americans make up 15.2% of the civilian workforce, but from October to November, 132,000 Hispanics dropped out of the workforce, accounting for 24.3% of total.

While data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show the unemployment rate going down, the same data also show that some of the most vulnerable Americans are still being hurt by the jobs depression.
And yet, we continue to open the newspaper or turn on the news every day and hear media pundits and politicians talk about the need for an amnesty to give work permits to the 11-18 million illegal aliens along with increased levels of legal immigration.
Just this week, former President George W Bush, who tried desperately to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration, once again called for 'comprehensive immigration reform.' And New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg hosted a conference with leaders from the high-tech industry saying that without more immigration, America is committing 'national suicide.' "

Calls for amnesty to illegals and increased legal immigration, at a time when over 23 million US citizens are out of work or underemployed, are nothing less than the kind of insanity that actually will lead to national suicide. Media pundits and establishment politicians keep telling us that the only way to increase revenues is to bring in more and more immigrants and put them to work at jobs which pay taxes. But when the truth is known, that kind of thinking is idiotic. To put all those immigrants to work when we cannot find work for 23 million Americans would of course require putting a like number of US citizens out of work. And if that were not done, then all of the immigrants would be jobless and collecting welfare for the foreseeable future. Of course that's the real government plan, based upon Keynesian economic policy.