wrote in message
...
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 15:08:37 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:
On Friday, February 8, 2019 at 1:17:29 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 06:23:47 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:
On Thursday, February 7, 2019 at 7:09:47 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:09:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:
On Thursday, February 7, 2019 at 5:20:53 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
On Thu, 07 Feb 2019 16:45:58 -0500, wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 16:15:36 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:
On 2/7/2019 2:35 PM, George wrote:
Socialist Ocasio-Kotex makes Al Gore proud!
https://www.marke****ch.com/story/pe...eam-2019-02-07
I like this comment. Should be simple if you want to live in
the dark
Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Markey are aiming to
eliminate the
U.S. carbon footprint by 2030.
This is how dumb AOC is.
The Green New Deal would be paid for the same way we paid for
the
original New Deal, World War II, the bank bailouts, tax cuts for
the
rich and decades of war with public money appropriated by
Congress,
Ocasio-Cortez said.
We can't even raise the taxes to pay the government's bills now.
We
are borrowing close to a trillion a year. Let's see how it works
for
the democrats if they want to raise taxes enough to pay for the
"Green
Deal".
We are all going to drown in debt long before sea level rise gets
anyone
Her mother should have taught her: "money doesn't grow on trees".
She doesn't think it grows on trees. She says it's in the hands of
the
rich and she wants to redistribute it.
The problem is that people overestimate how much money the rich have
compared to a $20 trillion dollar debt or even the trillion dollar
annual deficit. A huge part of the problem is people think unrealized
capital gains are wealth.
And another problem is that people like her claim that it's unfair that
the founder of a company is worth a billion, while the lowest employees
are only making $30K. It would be nice if those making $30K were
making
$40K or $50K instead. The problem is that the govt taking the rich
guy's
billion, running it into the govt coffers, then ****ing it away on moon
beams or people who just don't want to work, doesn't get those workers
a $50K salary either. A good, thriving economy with low unemployment
is
a better way of raising their salaries. I'd be willing to at least
look
at other ideas to try to raise earnings overall, but taking all the
money
of the rich, stuffing it into govt and silly socialist ideas, just
produces another Venezuela.
The money some CEOs make is the symptom of a much larger problem.
There are far fewer companies controlling far larger portions of the
marketplace. Perhaps a better measure of CEO pay would be the company
gross and market share.
People who control monopolies tend to make a lot of money. We haven't
really tried to do anything about monopolies since the Nixon
administration.
That's because monopolies are few and far between. I can't think of a
single
company that's actually a monopoly unless they are a utility like power,
water, cable, etc. And those are regulated. There are companies that the
govt has gone after that have had lots of market power and that have tried
to use that power illegally, eg tying products, forcing a company to buy
other products to get a sole source product.
Microsoft is a monopoly in the office PC business
Pigs arse it is. You are free to use Linux or a Mac.
and it's major competition is going to
be the cell phone/tablet running Android.
BTW what regulation is there on cable companies?
It is certainly not price controlled or forced to give
the customer decent service like Ma Bell was.
Maybe you are not old enough to remember
what anti trust law actually meant.
Trust isnt the same thing as a monopoly.
We have different words for a reason.
IBM had a lesser market share than Microsoft and the government
coerced them to break up into separate business units actively
competing with each other, much like GM used to be.
But neither were a monopoly at the time.
The criteria was controlling more than 90% of any given market.
Still not a monopoly.
BTW the most oppressive monopoly is the drug
companies who buy up drugs that used to be
cheap or even free, nobody can compete with them
Bull**** they can't. India and Cuba both do.
And while ever there is more than one
drug company, it clearly isnt a monopoly.
and they spike the price 1000% or more.
That hardly ever happens and never
does with drugs that are off patent.