PDA

View Full Version : Plutocracy ......From Bill Moyers final broadcast



Qtec
05-03-2010, 05:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> BILL MOYERS: You've no doubt figured out my bias by now. I've hardly kept it a secret. In this regard, I take my cue from the late Edward R. Murrow, the Moses of broadcast news.

Ed Murrow told his generation of journalists bias is okay as long as you don't try to hide it. So here, one more time, is mine: plutocracy and democracy don't mix. <u>Plutocracy, the rule of the rich, political power controlled by the wealthy.</u>

Plutocracy is not an American word but it's become an American phenomenon. Back in the fall of 2005, the Wall Street giant Citigroup even coined a variation on it, plutonomy, an economic system where the privileged few make sure the rich get richer with government on their side. By the next spring, Citigroup decided the time had come to publicly "bang the drum on plutonomy."

And bang they did, with an "equity strategy" for their investors, entitled, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>"Revisiting Plutonomy: The Rich Getting Richer."</span> Here are some excerpts:

"Asset booms, a rising profit share and favorable treatment by market-friendly governments have allowed the rich to prosper...[and] <u>take an increasing share of income and wealth over the last 20 years..."</u>

"...the top 10%, particularly the top 1% of the US-- the plutonomists in our parlance-- <span style='font-size: 14pt'><u>have benefited disproportionately</u> </span>from the recent productivity surge in the US...[and] from globalization and the productivity boom,<span style='font-size: 14pt'> at the relative<u> expense of labor.</u></span>"

"...[and they] are likely to get even wealthier in the coming years. [Because] <span style='font-size: 20pt'>the dynamics of plutonomy are still intact." </span></div></div>

link (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/36758)

The wealth has been redistributed................ from the masses to the few.
Q

LWW
05-03-2010, 05:58 AM
Let's compare Mr Moyers opinion with the actual facts shall we:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">People who want more government income redistribution programs often sell their agenda with the lament, "The poor are getting poorer and the rich are getting richer," but how about some evidence and you decide? I think the rich are getting richer, and so are the poor.

According to the most recent census, about 35 million Americans live in poverty. Heritage Foundation scholar Robert Rector, using several government reports, gives us some insights about these people in his paper: "Understanding Poverty and Economic Inequality in the United States".

In 1971, only about 32 percent of all Americans enjoyed air conditioning in their homes. By 2001, 76 percent of poor people had air conditioning. In 1971, only 43 percent of Americans owned a color television; in 2001, 97 percent of poor people owned at least one. In 1971, 1 percent of American homes had a microwave oven; in 2001, 73 percent of poor people had one. Forty-six percent of poor households own their homes. Only about 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. The average poor American has more living space than the average non-poor individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other European cities.

Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars. Seventy-eight percent of the poor have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception; and one-third have an automatic dishwasher.

For the most part, long-term poverty today is self-inflicted. To see this, let's examine some numbers from the Census Bureau's 2004 Current Population Survey. There's one segment of the black population that suffers only a 9.9 percent poverty rate, and only 13.7 percent of their under-5-year-olds are poor. There's another segment of the black population that suffers a 39.5 percent poverty rate, and 58.1 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

Among whites, one population segment suffers a 6 percent poverty rate, and only 9.9 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor. Another segment of the white population suffers a 26.4 percent poverty rate, and 52 percent of its under-5-year-olds are poor.

What do you think distinguishes the high and low poverty populations? The only statistical distinction between both the black and white populations is marriage. There is far less poverty in married-couple families, where presumably at least one of the spouses is employed. Fully 85 percent of black children living in poverty reside in a female-headed household.

Poverty is not static for people willing to work. A University of Michigan study shows that only 5 percent of those in the bottom fifth of the income distribution in 1975 remained there in 1991. What happened to them? They moved up to the top three-fifths of the income distribution -- middle class or higher. Moreover, three out of 10 of the lowest income earners in 1975 moved all the way into the top fifth of income earners by 1991. Those who were poor in 1975 had an inflation-adjusted average income gain of $27,745 by 1991. Those workers who were in the top fifth of income earners in 1975 were better off in 1991 by an average of only $4,354. The bottom line is, the richer are getting richer and the poor are getting richer.

Poverty in the United States, in an absolute sense, has virtually disappeared. Today, there's nothing remotely resembling poverty of yesteryear. However, if poverty is defined in the relative sense, the lowest fifth of income-earners, "poverty" will always be with us. No matter how poverty is defined, if I were an unborn spirit, condemned to a life of poverty, but God allowed me to choose which nation I wanted to be poor in, I'd choose the United States. Our poor must be the envy of the world's poor.</div></div>
&gt;&gt;&gt;TRUTH VERSUS TRUTHINESS&lt;&lt;&lt; (http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/10/31/are_the_poor_getting_poorer)

Chopstick
05-03-2010, 08:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
In 1971, only 43 percent of Americans owned a color television; in 2001, 97 percent of poor people owned at least one.</div></div>
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, but it ain't plasma cuz I'm black.</div></div>

Sev
05-03-2010, 07:46 PM
Must be hanging out in the wrong ghetto Chopper.

Qtec
05-04-2010, 01:07 AM
LOL. The poor now have air conditioning.......LMAO

Paulson made a BILLION $$$$ on ONE deal!
The poor have to work 3 jobs to make ends meet. Yeah, the profits the America has made have been shared........in your dreams. That's why Americans are getting calls <span style='font-size: 20pt'>from India</span> to tell them to pay their bills or lose their house.

LWW....living in the Twilight World.

Q

Gayle in MD
05-04-2010, 08:04 AM
Losing Moyers is a national tragedy.

Just a few of the travesties of the Bush Administration, in the interest of the wealthy corporate fascist pigs.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

SIERRA CLUB PICKS WORST BUSH ADMINISTRATION ENVIRONMENTAL EXPLOITS OF 2003

Tripling allowable levels of mercury pollution, shifting the burden of toxic clean up from polluters to taxpayers, and undoing rules for cleaning up America's dirtiest power plants topped a laundry list of Bush administration exploits to weaken decades environmental progress in 2003.
"The Bush administration is systematically turning back 30 years of environmental progress," said Carl Pope, Sierra Club executive director. "You really have to go back to the McKinley administration in the late 19th century to find so many gratuitous giveaways to special interests looking to exploit our air, water, and natural areas. Americans want a 21st century administration that can deliver forward-thinking environmental solutions."

The Sierra Club surveyed subscribers of RAW, the organization's twice-weekly electronic newsletter tracking the Bush administration's environmental record, to determine the worst-of-the-worst decisions affecting public health and the environment. Mercury pollution, toxic cleanup, and soot and smog registered as the greatest concerns, from a list that also included oil drilling on sensitive lands, a secret amnesty deal for giant factory farms, and lax environmental enforcement, among others.

The survey also found that the public is largely unaware of the broad scope of the Bush administration's assaults on the nation's air, water and lands, Pope said. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Many respondents expressed surprise that they haven't heard more about the administration's environmental record from mainstream media. </span>

"Trying to limit my vote to three big ones is beyond difficult," wrote one RAW reader in a typical response. "This administration is doing more damage than the Reagan & Bush Sr. ones did. And I didn't think that was even possible! Thank you for making the effort to educate Americans about what this administration is really doing to this country!"

The full list of 2003 Bush administration actions, ranked according to the survey response, appears below. To subscribe to RAW, visit http://www.sierraclub.org/raw.

1. MERCURY RISING - Issued public health warnings to pregnant women and children about mercury after announcing policy changes to triple amount of mercury pollution allowed from power plants.

2. SUPER DUPED - Became first administration to support shifting burden of Superfund toxic waste cleanups from polluters to taxpayers.

3. SOOTY SANTA - Dismantled provision of Clean Air Act that requires oldest, dirtiest power plants and refineries to curb soot and smog pollution.

4. BACK IN BLACKOUT - Proposed a national Energy Bill that did nothing to reduce dependence on foreign oil, repair or address antiquated electricity grid, <span style='font-size: 20pt'>or protect special places from oil and gas drilling. </span>
5. DRILLING WILDERNESS - <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Opened nearly 9 million pristine acres in Northwest Alaska to the oil and gas industry for exploration and drilling. </span>
6. STONEWALLING, BIG TIME (tied)- Continued to withhold documents from secret meetings between Bush/Cheney Energy Task Force and energy industry lobbyists.

6. DON'T AX, DON'T TELL (tied) - Promoted a wildfire policy that expanded commercial logging in the backcountry but did little to protect people where they live.

7. NEXT STOP, SHINOLA - Allowed untreated sewage to be blended with treated sewage, cut funding for local sewage treatment, and didn't require health officials to warn public about sewage in water.

8. CRITICAL CONDITION - Obliterated the process of critical habitat designation for imperiled wildlife under the Endangered Species Act.

9. COP OFF - <span style='font-size: 20pt'>Continued pattern of willful negligence for enforcement of even basic clean water and clean air laws. </span>

10. POST 9/11 LIES - Discovered by EPA Inspector General to have lied about post 9/11 environmental health hazards near Ground Zero.

11. ROAD WARRIOR - Expanded the legal loophole that allows obnoxious road claims through federally protected wilderness, national parks, and public lands.

12. HOG WASH - Secretly negotiated backroom deal to exempt giant animal factories from laws governing air and toxic pollution.

13. POLLUTED LOGIC - Refused to classify industrial carbon emissions, linked to global warming, as an official pollutant under the Clean Air Act.

14. HOT AIR - Proposed fantasy hydrogen power initiative to improve auto fuel efficiency rather than promoting more proven technologies like gas-electric hybrids.

15. ESTATE TOX - Ended a 25-year ban on the sale of PCB-laden real estate.





</div></div>

And we wonder why America has such low health ratings. So much cancer, and so many birth defects!

G.