Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Surely you're not facile enough to confuse BO with a liberal?
If so, kindly explain his continued support for Honduran fascists who overthrew a democratically elected president?
Why did BO take single payer off the table before beginning the discussions of health care reform?
Independents overwhelmingly support single payer.
Even fascists know this.
I don't have $10,000 or see anything to run from.
Unlike fascists who divide the world into "Worthy" ergo "Rich" and "Unworthy" ergo "Not Rich."
Are you "Rich"?
Liberal AND conservative??I don't have $10,000 or see anything to run from.
Unlike fascists who divide the world into "Worthy" ergo "Rich" and "Unworthy" ergo "Not Rich."
Are you "Rich"?
no BS say if you are liberal and conservative and why!!
Capitalism Seen in Crisis by Investors Citing Inequalities
International investors say capitalism is in crisis, with almost one in three backing radical changes to the system, according to a Bloomberg survey.
As the global financial and business elite gather in Davos for their annual forum, a majority in the Bloomberg Global Poll agree that income inequality hurts the economy and that governments need to do something to address it -- ideas at the heart of “Occupy” protests worldwide. Those surveyed also voice reservations about the financial industry’s role in society, with seven in 10 seeing at least some truth in the argument that banks have too much power over governments.
“Capitalism is in crisis because there is a huge and growing disparity in income/wealth distribution in Western economies, and an equally divisive generational disparity,” poll participant Michael Derks, chief strategist for FXPro Financial Services broker in London, said in an e-mail.
<snip>
"There is a large and growing wealth disparity and I think it is unhealthy,” Steve Morton, a director at Natixis Securities in New York who took part in the survey, said in an e-mail. “The lower levels of the pyramid don’t have enough money to buy things and keep the economy going.”
<snip>
The banking culture has evolved radically, to the point where the perception amongst most members of society is that their actions are driven by the relentless pursuit of earnings with no regard to their potential negative impact on communities,” said Anson Rosewall, a poll participant and sales trader at BBY Ltd., a financial services firm in Sydney, Australia.
“The fact that banks have taken government cash, while the average person has lost his job and house without help, will probably forever tarnish the reputation of these major institutions,” he said in an e-mail.
The gap between rich and poor is widening across most developed economies as executives, bankers and skilled workers reap more rewards, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said last month.
<snip>
The 459 U.S. investors who answered the survey view capitalism more favorably than their counterparts elsewhere, with roughly one in five saying the system needs an overhaul, according to the poll.
Capitalism Seen in Crisis by Investors Citing Inequalities - Bloomberg
The US investors have a more rosey outlook, maybe because Chart 1 leads to Chart 2?
Discuss.
Jefferson was not a Republican. He was a Democratic-Republican, a party that bears very little resemblance to the current Republican party.
Ron Paul is a libertarian. The Republican establishment hates him.
What happened when the Republicans were in control under bush? More debt. More spending. More war. Patriot act. Medicare part D. No child left behind. All examples of government expansion.
No. Both parties are the problem. It is imperative that every American wakes up to that fact so a real debate can occur.
Two things come to mind.
Over the past decades, it was pretty obvious that Microsoft had a technique. Every year, a company like the creators of WordPerfect, would come up with a new and innovative addition to their software. The next year, Microsoft would copy their creation and add it to their software package.
The dominance of Microsoft has not been their marvelous ability at inventiveness. Microsoft has enjoyed what is called a natural monopoly.
When a company, that I was working for, was trying to decide what desktop computers and software to deploy through out the departments, the choice was obvious. The choice was simply the one that had the market dominance. Once Microsoft gained sufficient market share, every company had to use it. Otherwise, they couldn't function in communicating with suppliers and customers.
The second thing that comes to mind is the stock market.
The literal translation for "stock" as in "stock market" is "guessing paper".
The idea of an IPO is to sell partial ownership in a company so that it can raise capital to invest in expansion and leverage into the remaining untapped market demand.
Once beyond the IPO, the purchase and sale of stock has nothing to do with the original company except in the income produced from the dividends or in the returns obtained by selling the stock.
The majority of the gains from the stock market have nothing to do with the functioning of the economy. This is, of course, why the sale and purchase of stock isn't part of the GDP.
The stock market remains little more then a form of gambling. And, in fact, it has been shown repeatedly that stock brokers performance is little more then blind luck, good or bad.
The literal translation of "stock" is "The goods or merchandise kept on the premises of a business or warehouse and available for sale or distribution."
Oops, I forgot to put the word "Chinese" in there, as in "The literal Chinese translation of 'stock' is 'guessing paper'".
Why would anyone use the word "translation" to describe the definition of a word in the same language?
What a steaming pile...... crap. ...Utter bullshit....ignorant shit ..Fucking leftists...Moron....
Oh goody, another "Communism is the only answer" thread...
The first and obvious thing is the use of the words and phrases, "What a steaming pile ", "crap", "ignorant shit", "Fucking leftists". "Moron". None of these have anything to do with the subject of Microsoft and it's dominance in the distributive platform computing market.
They are little more than emotionally based words that convey no information except that your thinking is dominated by emotional bias.
It is interesting what happens when people suffer from a stroke or other brain damage to their cerebral cortex. While they are unable to access words that convey objective information, they can easily say "crap", "fuck", "shit", "moron" and other emotionally based terms. I know someone that had a stroke. He was able to say "fuck" very well, in spite of having 99.9% of his ability to use language.
You have some sort of fixation with bowel movements. Are you constipated these days? You might try a laxative.
is that what he said? i don't see that.
and do you interject that way on all the rightwingnut threads?
just wondering.
Over the past decades, it was pretty obvious that Microsoft had a technique. Every year, a company like the creators of WordPerfect, would come up with a new and innovative addition to their software. The next year, Microsoft would copy their creation and add it to their software package.
First off, WordPerfect didn't come up ... They took the concept that WordStar already had on the market and refined it. WordStar having copied the paradigm from dedicated Wang word processing terminals.
Further, Microsoft didn't "copy" anything, they bought packages that looked promising. PFS Write, which predates WordPerfect by 3 years, is the foundation for MS Word. SuperCalc is what turned into Excel.
Microsoft bought best of breed technology and incorporated it into their own - providing HUGE advantages for the user, such as integration between word processing, spreadsheet and presentation graphics.
The dominance of Microsoft has not been their marvelous ability at inventiveness. Microsoft has enjoyed what is called a natural monopoly.
Gee, they didn't want to use proprietary machines that don't interact with others?
Before Microsoft - ALL platforms were proprietary. It was Microsoft (and IBM) who ushered in the CONCEPT and the era of interoperablity.
Gee, they didn't want to use proprietary machines that don't interact with others?
That Microsoft first purchased WordStar, and Supercalc doesn't preclude that they also copied what they could, purchased what they had to, and entered into licensing agreements when it was the the last option.
That WordStar copied from Wang and that WordPerfect copied from someone else, doesn't preclude Microsoft copying what they could from "the likes of WordPerfect" and other development companies.
The smartest thing Microsoft did, that Apple failed to do, is that they focused on marketing the operating system and let the rest of the market develop application software.
None of it precludes the fact that Microsoft enjoys a natural monopoly as a result of economies of scale and simply a natural lack of a realistic substitute. The Mac was never a serious substitute for business applications.
That they purchased WordStar and Supercalc rather then develop from scratch only adds to the point of it not being as much the result of "inventiveness" as it was gaining dominance due to having the ownership of the underlying operating system and leveraging that to expand vertically. Nor does it say they didn't do inventive things. Still, Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly on being creative and inventive.
Microsoft "providing HUGE advantages for the user" is just as much a part of them having a natural monopoly as anything.
This natural monopoly effect was the same thing that gave Alcoa it's dominance and eventually being "slapped" with an anti-monopoly judgment by the Supreme Court. Alcoa originally owned the patent rights to a far less expensive process for extracting aluminum from ore. As they gained market dominance, they expanded vertically in the market place, burying all competition.
What was really interesting was when Microsoft was called up before Congress on it having a monopolistic dominance. Nothing says that you have achieved success, in capitalism, like being called up before Congress on anti-trust allegations.
None of this speaks badly of Microsoft, or Alcoa. It is what it is.
I mentioned the business decision of being able to best communicate with vendors and suppliers as being the rational reason that gave Microsoft that natural market monopoly. Even if someone had shown that the Apple was better in one way or another, it didn't outweigh the utility of being able to integrate with vendors and suppliers.
What the fuck you think your defending is beyond anyone of rational mind.
Your understanding of the stock market far exceeds my own.
I've had my doubts about its "free market" aspects since the Flash Crash, at least.
Can you speculate on how a market free of rentier influence like the one Smith envisioned would function without stock market bubbles?
What investment alternatives currently exist for retirement funds?
