Jump to content
  • Announcements

Signifyin(g)Monkey

Member
  • Content count

    2,791
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Signifyin(g)Monkey last won the day on August 1 2015

Signifyin(g)Monkey had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

644

About Signifyin(g)Monkey

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Remember the whole you're guilty until proven innocent thing? Yeah that's, like, US law.
  2. Any gains in wages coming from a corporate tax cut like this are going to come from small businesses. That's really the only pro-labor angle here. Most Mid-sized businesses and almost every megacorp are simply going to spend the windfall on stock buybacks and, to a lesser extent, new equipment. They might even cut wages to maximize these payouts to shareholders and the ROI on new fixed capital. Cogent arguments about corporate tax reform and any positive effects it might have on the working class should be about how it benefits small businesses. The notion that it's going to get large industrial and financial companies to raise wages (which is what much of the financial press has been preaching ever since the bill was floated as a possibility), or reshore jobs, and that you and/or working class people should support it for such reasons, is nonsense.
  3. Pelosi finally calls on Conyers to resign

    The only thing worse than this revelation is the title of this thread; for god's sake clean it up!
  4. Timing's a big factor. Tax increases are contractionary--If there's a recession going on, raising rates would probably worsen the downturn. The time to raise them and cut spending is during the boom phase of the business cycle. I don't know if we'll be in recession in 2027, but we're overdue for one at the moment. If it happens soon, though, and by 2027 it's over and we're expanding robustly, then higher rates might be just what the doctor ordered.
  5. President is a piece of shit racist

    Good lord, can you imagine the Republican rage if President Obama had consistently taken to social media to trash talk companies that rubbed him the wrong way and admonished them to make certain business decisions--fire this person, suspend this person, etc. They'd all be talking about his 'radical Marxist agenda.' It's amazing how quickly the party of so-called 'free market' principles sacrifices them for political convenience. Even the supposedly 'purist' tea partiers. All without a hint of cognitive dissonance.
  6. Searching for a response of humanity

    There are no other horsemen on this cold earth, Death is not so obvious as that anymore; it has foregone notions of apocalypse, of release and dispensation , unraveled into subtler everyday abstractions--webmd apps on smartphones, threads of Facebook rage, panic on the evening news...all the faded echos of the horsemen, the Balkanization, digitizations and globalizations of Death's supremacy, of that final dark jolt, the one after which there can be no more, the one we must erect a thousand facades, everyday, to forget, deny and repudiate from here to the farthest star--even knowing it is fruitless, pointless, futile as it has always been
  7. The working homeless and the homelessness crisis on the West Coast

    People of all political stripes are hostage to stereotypes about the homeless that are totally outmoded on the coasts. Many of the homeless in these cities are hardworking people who would be solidly middle class in places with cheaper housing.
  8. Why I like living in Iowa, despite the damn winters.
  9. Here's what I think/predict given the information that's trickled out so far: It's very possible that, if Mueller is not somehow removed from his post, that he will determine that Trump aides engaged in some form of collusion with the Russians. But if that turns out to be true, it's not going to be a Watergate scale thing. It's probably just going to amount to some members of the Trump campaign using Russian contacts to get dirt on Clinton, or something like that. It likely won't directly implicate Trump, and thus won't be able to serve as a basis for impeachment. The Republican base will dismiss the scandal using various rationalizations, such as "Clinton did it too, Mueller's biased", and "the issue's overblown, Trump himself didn't do anything", etc. At the end of the day, Trump will still likely get re-elected, unless A.) a recession hits by 2020, or B.) the Democrats produce a strong, charismatic candidate with a really well-organized campaign. I can see A happening, but I don't know about B. The Democratic bench looks pretty weak, although I think a popular, centrist governor like Hickenlooper could be competitive. But I don't see a Sanders, a Warren or a Booker beating Trump. Whatever happens, though, it seems to me that American politics is totally broken, and the balkanizing effects of social media may keep it from ever being put back together again. But I'd love for my cynicism and pessimism to be totally refuted.
  10. Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States of America, during the Cornerstone Address:
  11. It would be nice, however, if Clinton would stop giving him the ability to do this via her undisclosed skeletons. Btw, just saw a headline that said Manafort is turning himself in. edit: dammit, two posts late!
  12. Do you sympathize with people who kill other people? Note that placing any conditions on said sympathy is, according to your own logic, no kind of sympathy at all. You cannot sympathize with soldiers who kill for their country and people who kill in self-defense but not sympathize with Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer. Which is, you know, a *totally* reasonable position.
  13. @Massdriver @sblfilms How do you think this will effect your businesses? Did the storm wreck any of your key infrastructure? What contingency plans/preparations do you have in place? I realize at the moment everyone's rightly more concerned with merely surviving, but I fear the economic toll could be worse than the death toll in the long run, a la post-Katrina New Orleans. I hope your livelihoods survive the deluge.
  14. But those increases in income have been more than offset by increased indebtedness, as well. The middle class makes more now than in the 1980s in nominal terms, but much more of that income must now go to debt service because they are also on average more in debt now than they ever have been. The national savings rate is negative, and the national debt-to-income ratio is far higher than it was three decades ago. (second graph compares this trend in the US to Japan and China) So while the middle class saw income growth in the past three decades, this has come at the expense of debt peonage. Granted, this polarization of the economy and the reduction of the middle class to debt peonage is not all at the feet of Reagan, or even just globalization; it is the legacy of the subordination of industrial capital and investment in new factories and means of production to finance capital and its stock buybacks, leveraged buyouts, and creation of debt as an end in itself--most of which leeches off of the surplus that the industrial economy creates. This takeover is the result of a multifaceted process whose most basic substratum is neoliberal ideology and its attempt to eliminate the idea of economic rent from our economic vocabulary and way of thinking. On top of this are things such as the rise of monetarism, reckless deregulation of debt markets, ill-executed privatization of public assets, and the disintegration of the power of unions both at the hands of union-busters and corruption within the unions themselves. (certain countries, of course, managed to elude these traps--Germany, for example, still has a thriving industrial base, a high savings rate, and a modest financial sector, as well as excellent relationships between capital and labor) Reagan and Friedman certainly helped, but they are also simply part of a much larger movement attempting to reverse the industrial reforms that began with the rise of industrial capitalism from feudalism and continued to the progressive era, and to erase the influence of the ideas originally propagated by classical economists--Ricardo, Smith, Hume, etc.--who recognized the parasitic nature of rentier income and finance capital, and spearheaded attempts to prevent it from overtaking the productive forces of the industrial economy.
×