‘Ownership society’ is Bush’s aim (OMG!)

http://www.thehill.com/news/032304/ownership.aspx

President Bush plans shortly to ratchet up his campaign rhetoric on economic issues by announcing expanded individual investment plans — including for education, healthcare and retirement — under the rubric of building an “ownership society.”

snip>
These officials have now calculated that the received campaign wisdom is wrong and that private ownership of such core responsibilities as education, healthcare and retirement can help Bush win re-election.

“It’s coming up, and it’ll be part of the campaign,” said Grover Norquist, president of the conservative Americans for Tax Reform and an informal White House adviser. “Whenever I see people asked about it, say it’s coming.”

snip>
By running on an investment agenda, “Bush is saying. ‘It’s not a liability; it’s only a liability because you say it is,” said Dan Clifton of the American Shareholders Association. “He’s saying, ‘I’m going to do the work; I’m going to make this a top issue. And when I win, you’re going to pass it.’ He’s taking the cover for them.”

more...

....as long as you're the owner. :puke:

nice society, bushies.

MMMEEESSSSSSSED up.

We, as Americans, can not be soooo stupid (can we)?

distract, confuse, excite, offer, ecstacy, submit, demise.

I just used that writing to Al Franken at the NYTimes today...I thought I made it up...cool! Brilliant minds think alike.

,...which is fascism,...and fascism is the obstruct to democracy.

for the millions who will want to spend the night on your couch...

honestly, I think about it, too, constantly, and have for a couple of years. am trying to position myself to be able to leave.

Chalmers Johnson, on C-span this weekend, talking about this book, The Sorrows of Empire, said his best advice for Americans, if we do not redirect our course from empire without end, is to get another passport...

What George is promoting, btw, is the agenda of the Christian Reconstructionists, it just so happens...

those who are not "owners" in their world, will be indentured servants, if they get their way...

no shit sherlock...they advocate slavery for debtors.

:wow:

that his wife told him he should think of something more positive to say, but his advice was to get a place in Vancouver, and, in another vein, to get a second passport so that you don't have to travel anywhere else as an American...basically because we will be so hated around the world that it would be dangerous to indentify yourself as American.

My kids have dual citizenship, but I do not, and I'm now divorced.

In order to move to Canada without a job, if you pass their test to immigrate (and maybe without, I don't remember) you have to be able to support yourself for six months, which, for three people, they figure is under 15k.

This is not supposed to be borrowed money, either.

I'm also need to look into the rules for small biz owners...I would imagine they would not want to extend a letter of credit to an immigrant.

There was an article in "In These Times" this month that talks about 'the commons'. We need a 'commons-ism'.

Millions of people in history have worked to add to science, or to build public parks, or to create inventions, with the intention of bring benefit to all who come after them.

In this new hyper-privatised world that Bush Inc. wants to create, there is no room for 'a commons', and THAT is taking away the rights and the freedom of all who wish to contribute to it.

what he really means is, "You're on your own."

that word. Seems he is so proud he can pronounce it he says it constantly.

is that they don't have a word for "entrepreneur." -GWB

Every time he repeats this moranic statement, more people get to laugh!

What hasn't been given by brthright, he's taken by short-selling and trading on the family name.

But force predatory capitalism on those unable or incapable of investing their hard earned money in the market instead of America....no, that's good. What the hell is wrong with these people? Haven't they drained the middle class enough?

I really wish certain people in this administration would lose their hard-on for trying to get us all to invest money.

Personally, I own absolutely no stock and am proud of this fact -- too many companies use "our only responsibility is to increase value for our stockholders" as an excuse to treat evade all sorts of social responsibility and treat their employees like crap. Since I don't want them doing things like that in my name... no stock for me, at least until I can start taking the time to research and only make ethical investments...

Besides, the way the stock market has dropped the past few years, it's not like I'd really WANT to own stock... :eyes:

I agree with you about the stock. I don't own any either, and would only invest in ethical businesses. I think there are some, but it requires more research than I have time for.

I know many people won't agree with me, but I think that companies use the "shareholder" excuse to justify their own greed. Some shareholders, however, don't care about anything but their own dividends. They don't know anything about the appalling working conditions and wages workers live with, and moreover, don't care to know. They are parasites that live off the proceeds of others' labour.

We North Americans can thank the developing countries for supporting our greedy lifestyles, owing to our sense of entitlement.

Enough of ranting!

Again, welcome! :toast:

There are some ethical companies out there, but you're right -- it takes a lot of research to find them. Granted, you can do a quick job of it by eliminating companies that produce firearms and other weapons and perhaps alcohol and tobacco, but that doesn't go far enough for me.

I don't like how workers in developing nations are getting treated, and I don't care for how workers in the United States are being treated either -- particularly with all the offshore outsourcing going on. I personally don't want to invest in companies that won't invest in America. Since I work in IT, offshoring is a particulary touchy issue for me -- and my company has started offshoring a lot of production, though they haven't done IT yet. That'll probably wait until the execs decide they want another bonus.

This is one of the reasons I'm not signed up for the company 401k plan -- their match is in company stock, and although the stock has reasonble value right now, I don't consider their stock certificates as being good enough to use for TP, let alone a portfolio. :)

I'm almost to the point where, if I can't get stuff that's made in the United States, I'd rather just buy it from a foreign company directly. This eliminates the middleman and the management at American companies that offshore production, but screw 'em, management is the enemy anyway.
:evilgrin:

Anyway, sorry for the rant. Thanks again for the kind welcome. :)

a big salute for you and I hope you enjoy your stay here! :toast:

A google search for "green investing" lists pages of sites devoted to the subject. I don't own stock in any company although I am self employed and hope to expand my fledgling company to employ a few others. I believe in individual ownership and responsibility, for real, not corporate style.
CEO's, board members and all top executives should be legally responsible for their corp. I never understood how someone making millions from the corp trough could claim they were just doing what was "best" for the company when things go bad.

Aren't you glad you didn't invest your social security in stock?

mutual funds available now. Their business has been picking up bit since 2000. Of course if you're not invested already, now is probably not the best time to bother to start!
Even with the options available, it will take a lot of reseach to find the one that meets an individuals criteria. Just something for future reference.
:hi:

The whole business/stock market/corporate world has seemed so wrong to me. I have a freind who was into day trading a few years ago. She quit her job and spent all day in front of her computer studying trends, and got very good at it. She knew the pattern of several stocks that would start the day low, peak mid afternoon and then trend down again; so she bought in the morning, sold later in the day generally cleared several hundred dollars a day. I'd say "But aren't you just skimming the cream off the top? What is left? What tangible thing have you created that you are being compensated for? What value did you add to your society for the money you are taking?" She would laugh at me for being so "stuck in the 60's."

I'm stuck somewhere. I don't belong here. I think this whole society is based on values that are vaccuous, unsatisfying, and spiritually unfullfilling.

Got that off my chest. Let's go invade another country so we can feel all energetic and superior again.

There are at least several of us that think there are too many parasites and not enough host for all this to continue much longer.

{rlg}

... in many companies, in addition to what you mentioned. In many companies it seems that only the CEO comes out ahead.

Read this chilling article:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5646.htm

It happened quietly, with barely a mention in the media. Only the Washington Post dutifully reported it.<1> And only Kevin Phillips saw its significance in his new book, American Dynasty.<2> On December 24, 2001, Pat Robertson resigned his position as President of the Christian Coalition.

Behind the scenes religious conservatives were abuzz with excitement. They believed Robertson had stepped down to allow the ascendance of the President of the United States of America to take his rightful place as the head of the true American Holy Christian Church.

I don't have the link for the yurica report, but that one should be required reading.

Norquist is an evil man.

Quite possibly the most chilling thing I've read about in a long time. I've read about Reconstructionism, of course, but this is darker even than that.

This is theocratic fascism, plain and simple. I would be a target, as would all my friends and loved ones.

I don't see * glowing with holy light or anything like that. He has the hubris to think he was Chosen??

He himself is a scary guy to look at and listen to. In fact, the first time I saw him, before he ever opened his mouth, I was repelled. I can't explain why. It was instinctive, like suddenly meeting a bitter rival from a former life. It even scared me a little, so strong was the repulsion.

I seriously have doubts as to whether this man is completely human. He's betrayed so many causes and people and told so many lies and bitter exaggerations that it's actually difficult to decide where to start. He's so bad that any one thing, or even group of things, gets washed away in the noise of all the rest. This is currently Kerry's biggest problem, and I don't see how he or anyone could possibly counter it.

I weep for the future of all I hold dear. I cannot tolerate again being yoked to the will and whim of another.

I will not tolerate that. If I go down, I'll go down fighting.

is an eye opener! :scared:

pour their energy, love and money into these organizations, and yet they too will be the debt ridden slaves of the plan.
They live their lives fearful that they or someone they love may not be "good enough" to be saved by the "Rapture".
Yet, if there was an anti-christ, Shrub would be it!
Very sad in a way.

“Investors think differently once they get about $5,000 in the market,” said Clifton. “They become much more free-market. And it cuts across all demographics: African-Americans become more Republican, women become more Republican, young people become more Republican.”

Someone should tell Clifton that when the market tanked and all those people lost their $5,000 investments, they all went back to being Democrats.

it's only because business owners tell their investors that the government is what's holding back earnings and lower taxes and deregulation are the panacea.

Then govt. regulation gets loosened and taxes on corporations and capital gains get lowered and then you end up with Enron.

Public education started with the colonists -- their aim was that every person should be able to read the Bible in English and interpret it for himself, as opposed to having the Bible exist only in Latin and having a priest interpret it.

Public support of education was there when the homesteaders and sodbusters settled the Plains -- a grid of parcels of land was laid out, and out of every so many, one was set aside for the schoolhouse. The government said so, and the people agreed wholeheartedly.

Home schooling was not the norm -- it was only practiced by pioneers who were settled far from a community. A community meant having a school.

Of course, since the times of the Greeks, Romans, Middle Ages,... Jane Austen's and the Brontes' novels... "home schooling" always was there for the nobility, the wealthy, the privileged. They hired governesses for the little kids and tutors for the older ones. The boys went to university and were fitted for lives as rulers. For centuries the village school -- if it existed at all -- subsisted on a much lower standard and gave the children only as much education as was necessary for their lower-class lives.

We Americans thought that was the way they did things in the Old Countries we had left behind. We thought we could do better by educating all our citizens.

I think of all the things the Neocons, the Dominionists, and yes, the Libertarians, want to dismantle in the US, the destruction of tax-supported education may well be the most grievous loss of all.

It is where our children and young people are not only given an opportunity to learn and grow and fit themselves for a good life (ideally), but ALSO and so very importantly, they are given a common civic experience and a common civic language. Over a century ago during some of the great waves of European immigration, one of the well-thought-out goals of public education was to assimilate young Poles, Irish, Norwegians, Jews, Italians and whoever else, into an "American" way of thinking and being. Half a century ago the US government decided it was high time to racially desegregate the nation's schools, and after bitter battles, it was done.

We used to think this was progress.

There's a movement afoot that will end up re-segregating our schools, dividing our American children along economic, cultural, religious, and racial lines, and making public education the place of last resort for those too poor or too handicapped by health, language, behavior or any other reason to have access to a private education.

Hekate
:argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:

attacks on public education = attack on 'American values'

I seem to recall Thatcher used a catch phrase something like 'ownership society'. If so, there is nothing new under the conservative sun (although I suppose that's almost a tautology).

Whatever the catchphrase is, though, it's all about them with property owning democracy/society

Conservatism that morphes into fascism. Welcome to the future.

She believed that we were all just little self-contained economic units, whirling through our zero-sum lives, vibrating with Adam Smith's equivalent of Brownian motion.

so who is going to own society? kind of reminds me of a spin on the golden rule... who ever owns the gold, rules...

http://motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/01/12_402.html

<snip>
Norquist, the master of ceremonies, sits in the middle of the room, a microphone pinned to his tie. Stout and bearded, with rosy cheeks, he calls on speakers in his eager, nasal voice, cutting off ramblers and keeping the proceedings on track. There is no time for canned political rhetoric. The focus is on winning. Here, strategy is honed. Talking points are refined. Discipline is imposed. "It's the most powerful, nihilistic movement in Washington today," says Ralph Nader, who recently attended one of Norquist's meetings to give his views on corporate welfare. "It is such a cold-blooded atmosphere it would sustain icicles."

The same spirit that chills Nader warms the heart of Norquist. When he founded his weekly Wednesday meeting in 1993, its numbers rarely brooked a dozen. "It was like a conservative version of Seinfeld," says an attendee of those early meetings, "with people double-dipping into the bagels and cream cheese." But conservatives, with Norquist as one of their pre-eminent strategists, have since overtaken the capital. Once a consigliere to Newt Gingrich, Norquist now has the ear of Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser, who has been known to stop in at the Wednesday meetings. In turn, Norquist plays the role of national ward boss, delivering the coalition that has rallied around the president's policy agenda.

Norquist calls it the "Leave-Us-Alone Coalition," a grouping of gun owners, the Christian right, homeschoolers, libertarians, and business leaders that he has almost single-handedly managed to unite. The common vision: an America in which the rich will be taxed at the same rates as the poor, where capital is freed from government constraints, where government services are turned over to the free market, where the minimum wage is repealed, unions are made irrelevant, and law-abiding citizens can pack handguns in every state and town. "My ideal citizen is the self-employed, homeschooling, IRA-owning guy with a concealed-carry permit," says Norquist. "Because that person doesn't need the goddamn government for anything."

Few in American politics are as blunt about their plans. "If the American people really want to know what George W. Bush is up to, the best place to look is the candor of Grover Norquist," says Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way. Norquist is not above equating tax collection with a street mugging, or suggesting that arguments for higher taxes on rich people echo the ones Nazis used to justify their targeting of Jews. "Bipartisanship is another name for date rape," he told a reporter in May, borrowing a phrase from former House Majority Leader Dick Armey. He likes to say he wants to shrink the size of government in half over the next 25 years "to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."

And plenty of police.

mind everybody's damn business?

/rhetorical question

If Bush makes the dollar worth the current value of a nickel, then the price of our stocks will inflate twenty-fold.

When you factor in the forty percent devaluation of the US Dollar against the Euro, over these last three years, our stock market has actually performed much more poorly than what the numbers say.

For example, what if you had stocks worth $10,000 in January 2000? Since the Dollar's value, in Euros, has now dropped by forty percent, your stock portfolio better have risen up to $14,000 by today, because otherwise your nestegg has actually lost buying power.

We have inflation here that the White House would rather not measure. Sure, Walmart's prices are cheap, but that's cause the Chinese Yuan is tied to the US Dollar, but what about healthcare and gas?

Anyone want to move to Canada with me and start a commune? :grouphug:

I'm only half joking. :7

???

Handing control of government social programs to corporations.

will become a thing of the past. I think that Bush's psycopathic disconnect should be an indication of the kind of neighborit will create. I know, because I live in the midst of a white ownership society and nobody wants to volunteer for community service unless they can abuse the position and profit in some way.

soup kitchens and non-profit organizations. There are many volunteers that serve without abusing the position and without looking for profit. You can't judge one instance with the whole.

And that's the key. IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. Meaning that such behavior is rampant and if well-meaning people, such as yourself, were to see just how rampant it is, you might suddenly feel a little less charitable with your time.

... I think this is another classic case of the right overplaying its hand.

Americans are finally noticing the vast divide between Bush*'s promises and the reality on the ground. On the "war", the economy, on just about any front you care to name, Bush*'s failure is obvious.

To try to float this horsecrap in the face of such failures might very well look like more misguided hubris to a lot of Americans. I just don't think they can spin fast enough to get traction with this.

Basically, a bell curve is divided into four sections - 12.5% on the bottom, 33.3% just under the median, 33.3% just above the median, and 12.5% at the top.

The few people at the top are the ones who are always at the top - the rich, the well-connected, the insular self-styled patricians who think it's their right to rule.

The vast majority in the middle are split - the third under the the median are just barely getting by, with many periods doing without; the third above the the median are one or two steps away from disaster. The ruling class uses the crumbs they grant to those they favor within the vast majority as bait - and use the suffering they impose on those they don't favor as a switch.

Those on the bottom are the ones who are always on the bottom - the poor, the disfavored minorities, and the outsiders deemed to be destined to be marginalized by the ruling class.

Market forces are fine if they're used to distribute material possessions - how much money you make, what kind of car you drive, what sort of house you own, etc. etc. But with life-and-death issues like access to health care, the safety of our food water and air, the need to not only be free from crime and civil unrest but to FEEL safe and free. Also with issues which effect our ability to be a democracy - education, access to information the we need to make informed decisions, a free press disseminating the truth unencumbered by either government or corporate propaganda.

The Bushies don't advocate fascism - this is feudalism.

Is someone skimming off the top? ;-)

8 am and you want me to ADD!?

and the goal is not efficiency; it's forcing us as taxpayers to pour money into the pockets of Republican companies, which then donate millions to keep this right wing regime in power.

This is indeed a melding of corporate power and government power.

for the Bush market bubble to solidify before popping after November. Should things go South you will never know there was any such proposal. "overseer" society maybe, but there are two classes in that system, as there are I suspect in the "ownership" society.

wonder if that's part of the plan..

If dubya pushed this "Ownership Society" it would give the Democratic Party an excellent chance to compare and contrast our vision of America with theirs.

For instance, we could very easily point to Corporate abuses and criminal conduct as being the off-shoot of unbridled capitalism. We could very easily acuse them of worshiping money instead of people.

In short it would open them up to all kinds of images that Mr. & Mrs Middle America find disturbing or repulsive.

I don't think dubya can be stupid enough to take this track. It's a loser for the repubs .... with the obvious caveat...if we're smart enough to use it.

I remember from economics a graph that showed the level at which people begin to save and it is the point were their income is greater than the cost of living. A large portion of people were below the line, which means that they did not earn enough to cover their living expenses.

How will there be 100% stock ownership if many of the people don't earn enough to save? And with the growing loss of jobs and the decline in wages that group will grow.

Also what happens when the value of the market declines?

This repub plan is a ruse. What they really want is to get the government completely out of social issues.

plan for Social Security comes in.

As Medeval England was an "ownership society".

As America during the Slave Years was an "ownership society".

A few are owners. The rest of us are owned.

I will (comment radacted) to stop these Totalitarian Monsters from privatizing the Commons as Hitler and Mussolini.

Bring it on, pigs!

is being trashed by Bush Inc. Absolutely TRASHED.

Heh. I used to work for Steve Goldsmith, Mayor of Indianapolis and "High Priest" of Privatization, a false religion invented by the Hudson Institute, I believe...

He tried to privatize EVERYTHING in city-county government. He gave control of the jail annex to Community Corrections of America, and that has been expensive. He tried to privatize Fleet Services, and they got with the program and actually beat back the attempt, and the Texpayers have saved money. He tried to Privatize MY department, and after 2 years of BEGGING groups to submit proposals, the final report was "we don't see how they do so much for so little"...

Then there was the privatization of IT and the "Y2K" fiasco. They gave the city's IT department to some outfit called SCT, who was going to get the City ready for Y2K for about 500 kilobucks.
As the date got closer, they were more frequent with their begging in front of the city-county council. "We need another $2 million...". I think the taxpayers finally payed almost 12 megabucks for a "problem' that didn't really exist in the first place.

Goldsmith worked HARD for the Chimp's '00 campaign, after failing to win the governor's election, he thought he would take his false doctrine of Privatization to DC and some cabinet position. Best he could do was the #2 spot at the office of faith-based doo-hickys.

Now L. S. Goldsmythe (that's how he was registered to vote. Ficitous name and bogus address, "for security reasons") is a VP for some WAR contractor. But it seems he left some of his poison behind

That's what they really mean: an oligarchy. Everything privately owned and beyond the control of the citizens, including all of the functions traditionally reserved to a government.

, but rent apartments and cars and take on extreme debts to get an education for a lower and lower paying job as an indentured servant for big banks.