Doug's Darkworld

War, Science, and Philosophy in a Fractured World.

DOW Jones Rises, America Loses

with 25 comments

bombing.jpg
Dollars Away!

The DOW Jones recently reached a new high. A reason to celebrate in the streets and hail the strength of the American economy, new highs in the stock market are always good news, right? Granted, I’m not an economist, but I beg to differ. Back in the twenties about 90% of stocks were owned by the American public, the rest were owned by corporations themselves. Today that proportion is reversed, the public only owns about 10% of the stock in America, the rest is held by corporations. Or to put this in easier to understand terms, 10% of Americans own 90% of the stock in America.

In other words, when the stock market goes up…the rich are getting richer. Not only is America rapidly transforming into one giant company town where everyone is in debt and really owns nothing, we have been so bamboozled that we think the rich getting richer is good news! The stock market going up just means that the money is being vacuumed out of the typical citizen’s pocket even faster! The stock market going up just means the day is drawing ever closer where the last dollar in America will be in an offshore account in the Caribbean.

America’s wealth has been spiralling upwards steadily since the eighties, and if anything the situation is accelerating as Bush strips money from domestic spending to give to the least productive industry on the planet, the armaments industry. An economy based on military spending is a recipe for disaster. The country’s infrastructure is falling apart as Bush plays Cowboys and Indians with our grandchildren’s money. And like a broken record, Bush’s only plan is to pour even more money into the bloody maelstrom he created in the Middle East.

I don’t know when the economy is going to tank, but like the war with Iran and global warming, it sure seems inevitable to me. Soon I’ll blog about how things like ever more Walmarts and Casinos aren’t helping. Fun for all!

For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

1 Timothy 6:10

(The above image is claimed as Fair Use under US copyright law, it is not being used for profit, it is central to illustrating the post, and it is an historically important image.)

Written by unitedcats

February 4, 2007 at 2:46 pm

Posted in Bush, Business, War

25 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I think we need a post about cats…. you’re kinda bumming me out a little…. :P

    krispydixie

    February 5, 2007 at 12:26 am

  2. Bush will attack Iran before April not for the well being of civilization but the well being of the us Dollar. To try stop iran from selling oil in any currency, Euro’s will become the main new oil denominated currency and bush will fail in his attempt to save the Dollar. In any event Billions of Dollars will have flowed into the arms companies such as his old friends Haliburton. At worst Bush and cronies will retreat into his one thousand acre ranch in Paraguay safe in the thought he cannot be taken to trial after managing to persuad his host country to change there law not to prosicute any American soldier regardless of their crimes. This seems similar to what the Nazis achived shortly after world war two.

    john graham

    February 5, 2007 at 3:57 am

  3. Doug,

    The US and Canadian democracies are are owned by Big Corporations. These Corporations control the policies of all elected government which suits them to get richer by keeping us all slaves of the system. We if don’t pay our bills on time, we are screwed, we don’t get the fair mortgage rates, we have to pay very high insurance rates, we have to buy medicines which are very expensive, we have to pay the line charges of our telephone and have to pay additional monthly NETWORK charges if we want to sign up for long distance service. I can keep going but we (common people) are slaves of these corporations and our governments are their loyal puppets.

    Quran Bible

    February 5, 2007 at 8:15 am

  4. The thought of Bush hiding on a ranch in Paraguay is amusing, in his suit and tie chopping trees with his buddy Cheney. I can see the other gauchos now…”Senor Bush, why you no dress like the other gauchos?” hehe

    Yeah, Kuwait has front row seats if Iran blows up, that has to be a bit unsettling. I’ll poke the cats with knitting needles and see if I can get them to do something interesting to blog about.

    But sadly comments on the dismal state of the economy and world will continue as long as the world and the economy are in a dismal state. Arbeit macht frei. Sigh. My posts also reflect my mood, which has to go up soon cause it can’t go much lower. :) JMO —Doug

    unitedcats

    February 5, 2007 at 10:00 am

  5. If Bush starts a war with Iran he will be impeached.

    Otherwise, Cheney will be impeached anyhow.

    whig

    February 5, 2007 at 5:18 pm

  6. Iran, for its own part, hasn’t started a war in centuries.

    whig

    February 5, 2007 at 5:20 pm

  7. Bush has started two wars so far without being impeached, I doubt a third war will do the trick. It takes semen stains to get impeached in the US, blood stains don’t count. :( As for Iran, found a blog claiming that Iran was planning to resurrect the Persian Empire of old and conquer the middle east! The mind reels. Centuries of living in peace with their neighbours has just been a trick I guess.
    JMO —Doug

    unitedcats

    February 5, 2007 at 6:30 pm

  8. http://www.jcls.org/infoblog/?p=3

    I am a librarian; and just came across this news in above blog. Perhaps if we keep a majority of the population uneducated and uninformed, we can use more of them as cannon fodder. The money doesn’t seem to trickle down to the right places or most needy and deserving people. :- (
    Jodi

    floatingclouds

    February 5, 2007 at 8:17 pm

  9. Trackback to Jodi: Closing the libraries, now?

    whig

    February 5, 2007 at 11:47 pm

  10. Hi Doug,

    Been very busy–just wanted to offer a technicality on your comment above. Both wars that Bush started are legal–had full (68% house, 77% senate) backing of Congress. The argument that “we were deceived” does not alleviate their culpability either–they had the same intelligence that the Bush Administration had. That’s the reason our new Congress may have a few token Democrats posture about impeachment (to satisfy their anti-war constituents), but will never go through impeachment hearings. To do so, brings the majority of them under the microscope and they don’t want that.

    Btw, I still think perjury is an illegal, impeachable and jailable offense. If it isn’t our entire legal system breaks down. How can that be so easily dismissed?

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 6, 2007 at 8:36 am

  11. Jack, the evidence plainly shows that the administration did not show the congress the intelligence it had, but cherry-picked intelligence and misrepresented the facts.

    This of course is at issue in the trial of Mr. Libby, which implicates the Office of the Vice President in a conspiracy to deceive and commit perjury on behalf of its lies.

    Highly impeachable, sir.

    whig

    February 6, 2007 at 12:13 pm

  12. Hi Whig!

    Congress makes the laws and it was Congress who authorized the use of force based on both intelligence from the current administration, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the past administration. Keep in mind my original point though. Not debating the ins and outs that have been debated over and over again, just that the chance of President Bush being impeached is nil.

    (P.S. W, I didn’t vote for President Bush, nor am I particularly an apologist. Just have lived through quite a few decades of politics and its observation :)

    Take care,

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 6, 2007 at 1:36 pm

  13. Perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury is the charge, Jack.

    whig

    February 6, 2007 at 1:43 pm

  14. Hi,

    One way to enjoy the success of corporations is to invest in them. Buy stock, reap dividends.

    Any reason not to? Investing your money to gain wealth and a comfortable retirement is not the work of the devil.

    Plus, much less whining takes place.

    Does anyone think trickle down economics means when the rich get their dividends, they mail out checks to those who did not?

    Confusing resistance to the war and making life more comfortable for you and your family is a little silly.

    icanplainlysee

    February 6, 2007 at 3:35 pm

  15. icanplainlysee, if you invest morally, then enjoy your return. If you disregard the cost to others, and invest in warmaking enterprise, you reap what you sow.

    whig

    February 6, 2007 at 4:14 pm

  16. Hi Whig,

    I am not sure I understand your connection between Libby and the war in Iraq. The Libby case is about outing a CIA operative, and has recently become one of perjury. If Libby lied under oath before a legal authority then he deserves to be tried for such.

    Are you saying that President Bush perjured himself? I don’t ever recall him making testimony before a tribunal or court of law. How can he be charged with perjury?

    Regards,

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 7, 2007 at 1:28 pm

  17. Doug,

    A quick note. Your first paragraph is a little confusing. Much of today’s stock is owned by managed funds which are retirement investments for many ordinary people. Corporate ownership of stock is again investors and ordinary people who have a stake in whatever company they hold. I think that any time the value of business increases it is a good sign for an economy.

    Also, public ownership of companies brings capital funds into the business in order for the business to grow. Many tremendous things can be linked to public funding of busines–increased R&D, innovation, decreased inflation, and the list could go on and on.

    From the beginning of time, the rich usually do get richer. This should be viewed as a simple economic rule, not an ideological stigma.

    Moving on, I am not sure how you arrive at, because the rich are getting richer, that the poor are getting poorer. Granted, we lose a lot of money to taxation, but when 60%-70% (or less, dependent upon who one talks to) of our federal budget goes to social programs that basically benefit the “poor”, the reality of it is that the top 50% of wage earners pay 96.54% of all income taxes and the top 1% Pay more than a third:( 34.27%). If we all of the sudden wish that the rich become poor, the entire bottow will drop out of our social welfare system. (I’m not an economist, but I did teach it at Penn State :) ha!

    Also, I beg to differ on domestic spending. It has steadily risen. (Doug, budget have to really be viewed at the source and away from the political spinners–for example, if Bush were to increase Medicare spending by 10% the previous year, but cut that percentage to 6% for the current year, political spinmeisters will call that a cut, even though the Medicare budget is increasing by billions of dollars. I posted to this effect over at:

    http://newssnipet.blogspot.com/2007/02/war-tax.html

    and I even referenced you! (you’re famous!)

    Until the last two decades, infrastructure has largely been the domain of local government planning. In the last two decades it has become a federal pork game where anything from an indoor rainforest in Iowa to the bridges to nowhere to the Boston Dig have become the name of the day. I think infrastructure is suffering from local mismanagement more than funds going to Iraq, etc. If you have time, look at what federal pork is spent on at: http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=homepage

    Look forward to your Walmart post.

    Take care,

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 7, 2007 at 1:55 pm

  18. Btw, Doug,

    When I get a chance I’ll drop back in an discuss what is commonly called T&I in accounting. (Taxes and Insurance). It is an interesting ratio, and often has a direct link to things like solvency, prosperity, etc. It is along the line of your discussion above.

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 7, 2007 at 1:57 pm

  19. Bereans, do you actually follow the news or just Rush Limbaugh? Libby was never indicted for leaking, though the leak is what triggered the investigation. Just like the Clinton investigation began with Whitewater and a lot of things involving Paula Jones and Gennifer Flowers and the rest of the cast and crew before it became a matter of perjury.

    Surely you don’t believe that Bill Clinton deserved to be impeached for a blow-job, do you? No, it was because he lied under oath, those were the charges, were they not?

    Libby lied to investigators, repeatedly and under oath, very possibly under direction from Dick Cheney. Whether he implicates Bush is irrelevant to the impeachment of Dick Cheney.

    whig

    February 7, 2007 at 5:07 pm

  20. Hi Whig,

    I was just a little confused–I thought you were saying that President Bush would be impeached because of something having to do with the Libby case.

    I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh, and get most of my news from the internet. I wasn’t indicating that Libby was indicted for leaking–I believe it was for perjury and obstruction of justice wasn’t it?

    No, I defended President Clinton during that time, but I DO think that President Clinton should not have only been impeached for breaking the law and committing perjury, he should have served the same prison sentence you or I would have had to. Whig, I believe in equal justice for all, and I don’t think that our politicians should be above our laws. President Clinton should have suffered the same fate and black person like me would have suffered for the terrible crime of perjury. Keep in mind, that the WHOLE justice system we have is based on one thing–factual truth. If we dismiss perjury inconsequential the integrity of our system crumbles. In President Clinton’s case, the man who held the highest position in our nation demonstrated his contempt for what we supposedly stand for in this nation–and yes, all just to hide his affair with an intern.

    But I still don’t know how you are able to connect the Libby case to Iraq and say that President Bush will be impeached for perjury? Is that what you are saying?

    Keep in mind, Whig, that I am not particularly defending President Bush–just stating a political reality. I also predict that the whole Libby trial will fizzle and come to naught–Don’t be surprised if the charges are even dropped. If the perjury case is prosecuted, then it won’t go any further than that. I know that there is a lot of wishful thinking and conspiratorial thought out there, but its just not a realistic view to think that Cheney will be impeached if Libby is convicted of perjury. Again, not defending, just trying to provide a realistic perspective.

    Of course I’ve been wrong before… :)

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 7, 2007 at 7:54 pm

  21. Jack, I think you’re not seeing what I wrote above. I believe George Bush won’t be impeached unless he starts a war with Iran or something else happens that we don’t know yet.

    I do believe Dick Cheney, the vice president, will be impeached, for obstruction of justice, perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury among other possible charges.

    I did favor the impeachment of Bill Clinton, and agree that nobody should be above the law. He was subject to prosecution after leaving office, but I believe he made a plea bargain of some kind and gave up his license to practice law as part of it.

    whig

    February 7, 2007 at 8:36 pm

  22. Also, as far as the Libby trial coming to naught, I’ve been following it a bit, and it’s quite the opposite, explosive even. Be quite sure of this, there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Libby’s guilt to the charges of committing perjury to the FBI and the grand jury. He will be convicted unless he pleads guilty first.

    whig

    February 7, 2007 at 8:39 pm

  23. It is of course up to the jury to so decide, and I could be wrong, but it would take a miracle.

    whig

    February 7, 2007 at 8:40 pm

  24. Hi Whig!

    Sorry about that! I misread what you were saying. That was the reason I was a bit confused.

    Take care,

    -Jack

    bereans

    February 8, 2007 at 7:03 am

  25. Cool Site! kabababrubarta

    kabababrubarta

    March 26, 2007 at 4:10 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: