Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Warren: We're in this mess because Washington has ignored the middle class for a generation   (rawstory.com) divider line 181
    More: Interesting, middleclass, Rachel Maddow  
•       •       •

2088 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Nov 2013 at 12:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



181 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-21 12:52:01 PM  
The "stagnating middle class" claim is misleading.  Factoring in total compensation, middle class earnings have gone up continuously since the 1970s (after adjusting for inflation).  This fact is obscured, though, because all of the gains from labor productivity are going to increased health care benefits instead of income.
 
2013-11-21 12:52:25 PM  

Pinner: DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.

Rapist is ignoring the victim and focusing on their own pleasure.
Wolf is ignoring the sheep, and focusing on other wolves trying to get in on the meal.


Except for when the rapist is holding the victim down...trying to keep them quiet...the rapist doesn't get pleasure from the sexual act, he gets it from the power of being in control.
All of the wolves are focused on the sheep or they would just fight each other and nothing would get eaten. You must not have cable.
 
2013-11-21 12:52:45 PM  
To be fair, it's very difficult to pay attention to something that doesn't exist.
 
2013-11-21 12:52:51 PM  

Tomahawk513: UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?

1. Tax capital gains over x amount (whatever can be agreed upon) as normal income. Agree
2. Vastly reduce the Pentagon operating budget and bolster social safety nets. Agree, but very gradually
3. Raise the minimum wage. Agree
4. End subsidies for industries that don't need them (esp. energy companies)
5. Re-institute Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banks. Agree
6. Heavy fine and penalize companies that employ tax shelters.
7. Create jobs by boosting domestic infrastructure spending. Farking boatloads of this. Bullet-traings everywhere.

Probably many more, but these would be a great start.

I really want someone who will vastly overhaul the Tax System. It should be simple and efficient, and primarily based on income tax. I'd also like to see a corporate revenue (not profit) tax that would be applicable if the sum of all compensation paid to the highest earner is greater than x times the lowest earner.


I like that idea in theory, but in practice I think you'd just see CEO's being payed in stock as a workaround. It only works if you include language in the legislation to count the monetary value of all forms of compensation to calculate the highest earner income.
 
2013-11-21 12:53:10 PM  

llortcM_yllort: After all, the North American Free Trade Association did not play a large role in increased outsourcing to Southeast Asia.


You're right. It wasn't NAFTA, it was GATT, the WTO and extending MFN for China that accomplished that.
 
2013-11-21 12:54:03 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: BMFPitt: No, they are doing quite badly. I want someone who will stop making it worse.

Do you have someone in mind?


Nobody who could even make it to the primary debates.
 
2013-11-21 12:54:04 PM  
Gee wiz this sounds good.

You don't think she is just saying what she thinks people want to hear, do you?

She isn't a politician is she...?
 
2013-11-21 12:54:33 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?

1. Tax capital gains over x amount (whatever can be agreed upon) as normal income. Agree
2. Vastly reduce the Pentagon operating budget and bolster social safety nets. Agree, but very gradually
3. Raise the minimum wage. Agree
4. End subsidies for industries that don't need them (esp. energy companies)
5. Re-institute Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banks. Agree
6. Heavy fine and penalize companies that employ tax shelters.
7. Create jobs by boosting domestic infrastructure spending. Farking boatloads of this. Bullet-traings everywhere.

Probably many more, but these would be a great start.

I really want someone who will vastly overhaul the Tax System. It should be simple and efficient, and primarily based on income tax. I'd also like to see a corporate revenue (not profit) tax that would be applicable if the sum of all compensation paid to the highest earner is greater than x times the lowest earner.

I like that idea in theory, but in practice I think you'd just see CEO's being payed in stock as a workaround. It only works if you include language in the legislation to count the monetary value of all forms of compensation to calculate the highest earner income.


Yes sir, exactly.  The sum of all forms of compensation, whether it's a bonus, stock options, salary, healthcare, the whole package.
 
2013-11-21 12:54:51 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.


That's not a good analogy or assumption.

Sure, there are Randites who actively detest the poor, and would spit on them even after witnessing the extent of their struggle and suffering. However, there are a whole lot more rich people who exist in an epistemic bubble, too insulated from the plight of the poor to begin to empathize. They simply don't know, and only speak with those who confirm their biases or are too frightened of their power to outright tell them they're wrong.

In other words, a wolf is guaranteed to be seeing and focusing on the food it kills and eats. This is more like a voracious patron of a restaurant demanding "More! More ground meat burgers, please!", chewing and splattering grime over his bib whilst blissfully unaware that the animals being slaughtered in the back to supply his meal are actually people just like him, except when he's sometimes unaware or unbelieving of the fact that there's slaughter at all.

But of course, to preserve this illusion, there have to be Randite leaders in the movement: Restaurant staff and management, in the analogy, who understand the supply and demand for human flesh and heartlessly, intentionally seek to deliver it for profit. But they're not the majority. Just facilitators.
 
2013-11-21 12:55:16 PM  

llortcM_yllort: I disagree.  It was caused by a series of structural, economic changes that were, at most, exacerbated but not caused by politics.  The advancement of automation and technology to the point where many mid-level jobs were destroyed had nothing to do with policy and the rise of outsourcing can, in large part, be traced to the rise of the developing world more so than trade policy.  After all, the North American Free Trade Association did not play a large role in increased outsourcing to Southeast Asia.  These forces will continue to occur and will continue to drag down employment and wages for the foreseeable future.   Combine this with cost disease affecting industries that directly affect quality of life in a huge way (most notably healthcare and education), you get a painful situation for many in the middle class.  This will all eventually sort itself out, the next 15 or 20 years are going to suck balls no matter who is in Washington.


This.


Did I just this a troll account?  why yes I did.
 
2013-11-21 12:56:09 PM  

Captain Dan: The "stagnating middle class" claim is misleading.  Factoring in total compensation, middle class earnings have gone up continuously since the 1970s (after adjusting for inflation).  This fact is obscured, though, because all of the gains from labor productivity are going to increased health care benefits instead of income.


This will continue to happen because of cost disease.  While the ACA does include many reforms that will hopefully slow the growth of healthcare expenses, the aging population and cost disease will cause healthcare to get more and more expensive.  This trend will continue.
 
2013-11-21 12:56:27 PM  
Look at the Netherlands, they employ lots of automation, have a very well educated populace and are urban, very densely populated with a diverse population due to immigration.

They are doing rather well.
 
2013-11-21 12:56:40 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-11-21 12:57:29 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: You must not have cable.


As a matter of fact, I don't.
Gosh, maybe I need to learn more about life from the tv box so I can flail my arms around more in Fark forums.
 
2013-11-21 12:58:18 PM  
It's sad that there is about only 1 politician in DC who seems really to get it.
 
2013-11-21 12:58:40 PM  

EJ25T: [global3.memecdn.com image 720x418]


You say that, but it's something that hasn't been said by politicians even when the rest of us knew all about it.  I'm glad somebody's saying it on a national stage.
 
2013-11-21 12:58:52 PM  
The middle class is totally confused as to what is to blame though.  They have this godforsaken misbegotten belief that it's government taxes or government spending.  Idiots.  It's that their own real wages have fallen through the floor compared to inflation.  The government is in may ways to blame for it, but it's not taxing or spending, it's the rush to "free markets" which was never a benefit to workers - it was a way to hide from them the fact that under their new lower wages they actually couldn't afford that refrigerator or car anymore.
 
2013-11-21 12:58:54 PM  

Tomahawk513: UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?

1. Tax capital gains over x amount (whatever can be agreed upon) as normal income. Agree
2. Vastly reduce the Pentagon operating budget and bolster social safety nets. Agree, but very gradually
3. Raise the minimum wage. Agree
4. End subsidies for industries that don't need them (esp. energy companies)
5. Re-institute Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banks. Agree
6. Heavy fine and penalize companies that employ tax shelters.
7. Create jobs by boosting domestic infrastructure spending. Farking boatloads of this. Bullet-traings everywhere.

Probably many more, but these would be a great start.

I really want someone who will vastly overhaul the Tax System. It should be simple and efficient, and primarily based on income tax. I'd also like to see a corporate revenue (not profit) tax that would be applicable if the sum of all compensation paid to the highest earner is greater than x times the lowest earner.

I like that idea in theory, but in practice I think you'd just see CEO's being payed in stock as a workaround. It only works if you include language in the legislation to count the monetary value of all forms of compensation to calculate the highest earner income.

Yes sir, exactly.  The sum of all forms of compensation, whether it's a bonus, stock options, salary, healthcare, the whole package.


Haha, problems solved.

I think Warren is a harbinger of a new breed populist left politician I hope to see a lot more of in the near future. American attitudes are rapidly shifting away from the trickle-down tripe we've been fed the last few decades. Here's hoping.
 
2013-11-21 01:00:06 PM  

deeproy: Obvious tag out working a second job at Walmart?


And a third at McDonald's.
 
2013-11-21 01:01:23 PM  
She should run for office on a pledge of middle class tax cuts.
 
2013-11-21 01:01:38 PM  
Let's force cable television to compete at my wall. Two carriers at my box.
 
2013-11-21 01:02:32 PM  

BlastYoBoots: DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.

That's not a good analogy or assumption.

Sure, there are Randites who actively detest the poor, and would spit on them even after witnessing the extent of their struggle and suffering. However, there are a whole lot more rich people who exist in an epistemic bubble, too insulated from the plight of the poor to begin to empathize. They simply don't know, and only speak with those who confirm their biases or are too frightened of their power to outright tell them they're wrong.

In other words, a wolf is guaranteed to be seeing and focusing on the food it kills and eats. This is more like a voracious patron of a restaurant demanding "More! More ground meat burgers, please!", chewing and splattering grime over his bib whilst blissfully unaware that the animals being slaughtered in the back to supply his meal are actually people just like him, except when he's sometimes unaware or unbelieving of the fact that there's slaughter at all.

But of course, to preserve this illusion, there have to be Randite leaders in the movement: Restaurant staff and management, in the analogy, who understand the supply and demand for human flesh and heartlessly, intentionally seek to deliver it for profit. But they're not the majority. Just facilitators.


I totally disagree. This was not done accidentally. We were just like the carcass of a sheep with rich wolves battling over who got to take the biggest bites out of us. They stole our money by robbing the treasury. No bid contracts to their military interests as they sold us fear. Privitization of entire government functions, including the war. Privatization of the prison system and the push for mandatory sentencing. We had and have entire industries who are picking at our carcass with officials in the government who facilitated it.
 
2013-11-21 01:02:55 PM  
It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.
 
2013-11-21 01:04:09 PM  

Pinner: DROxINxTHExWIND: You must not have cable.

As a matter of fact, I don't.
Gosh, maybe I need to learn more about life from the tv box so I can flail my arms around more in Fark forums.



I figured you for a douche who thinks that he's better than everyone because he watches movies on Netflix instead of TV shows. Point was, you can't get NatGeo Wild. Sucks to be you. It can be pretty educational.
 
2013-11-21 01:04:15 PM  
Politicians do like to talk about the middle class a lot. It's just that "Middle class" in conservative-speak means "Top .01%," just like "small-business owner" means "multinational corporation."
 
2013-11-21 01:04:56 PM  

cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.


The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.
 
2013-11-21 01:06:23 PM  

sweetmelissa31: Politicians do like to talk about the middle class a lot. It's just that "Middle class" in conservative-speak means "Top .01%," just like "small-business owner" means "multinational corporation."


"Middle class" for both parties always means the same thing. Whoever they are talking to at the time.
 
2013-11-21 01:06:33 PM  

Saiga410: llortcM_yllort: I disagree.  It was caused by a series of structural, economic changes that were, at most, exacerbated but not caused by politics.  The advancement of automation and technology to the point where many mid-level jobs were destroyed had nothing to do with policy and the rise of outsourcing can, in large part, be traced to the rise of the developing world more so than trade policy.  After all, the North American Free Trade Association did not play a large role in increased outsourcing to Southeast Asia.  These forces will continue to occur and will continue to drag down employment and wages for the foreseeable future.   Combine this with cost disease affecting industries that directly affect quality of life in a huge way (most notably healthcare and education), you get a painful situation for many in the middle class.  This will all eventually sort itself out, the next 15 or 20 years are going to suck balls no matter who is in Washington.

This.


Did I just this a troll account?  why yes I did.


Well educated populations do well, regardless of automaton
 
2013-11-21 01:06:45 PM  

llortcM_yllort: This will continue to happen because of cost disease.  While the ACA does include many reforms that will hopefully slow the growth of healthcare expenses, the aging population and cost disease will cause healthcare to get more and more expensive.  This trend will continue.


Despite your troll handle, this is on-point.  I wish that Republicans had been responsible about governing in 2009 - they could have negotiated the inclusion of stronger cost control provisions in the ACA.

Paul Krugman and I don't always see eye-to-eye, but he's probably right that the eventual resolution of the deficit problem will be a combination of sales taxes and "death panels."
 
2013-11-21 01:08:49 PM  
I may have to agree with this woman and admit that more middle class tax cuts are needed !

You go girl !
 
2013-11-21 01:09:00 PM  
Ignore the middle class? Malarkey! The republicans have been trying to destroy he middle class since reagonomics became their holy grail.
 
2013-11-21 01:09:13 PM  
so does she want to be Hilary's VP or the other way around
 
2013-11-21 01:10:40 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: Pinner: DROxINxTHExWIND: You must not have cable.

As a matter of fact, I don't.
Gosh, maybe I need to learn more about life from the tv box so I can flail my arms around more in Fark forums.


I figured you for a douche who thinks that he's better than everyone because he watches movies on Netflix instead of TV shows. Point was, you can't get NatGeo Wild. Sucks to be you. It can be pretty educational.


Ahhh here's your quote from above.."We were just like the carcass of a sheep with rich wolves battling over who got to take the biggest bites out of us."
Rich wolves battling... I think I said something about the wolf focusing on the other wolves trying to get in on the meal.
Thanks for changing your tune and agreeing with my non-cable educated statement.
Now, maybe you can go watch NatGeo some more to find a better political analogy.

You assume too much about others as well. Why you mad?
 
2013-11-21 01:10:43 PM  

cefm: The middle class is totally confused as to what is to blame though.  They have this godforsaken misbegotten belief that it's government taxes or government spending.  Idiots.  It's that their own real wages have fallen through the floor compared to inflation.  The government is in many ways to blame for it, but it's not taxing or spending, it's the rush to "free markets" which was never a benefit to workers - it was a way to hide from them the fact that under their new lower wages they actually couldn't afford that refrigerator or car anymore.


Yeah, it's really just a crappy cycle.  No one seems to advocate for the interests of the middle and lower class.  If you can barely keep the lights on, you're not exactly sending hundred-thousand dollar checks to your candidate.  And if you're working hard just to feed your family, it's not likely you have time to educate yourself on your candidates or what would be in your best interests.  Instead, you just vote for the guy or gal with the familiar letter and hope for the best.
 
2013-11-21 01:11:29 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.


I still don't remember anybody actually having "disposable income".

Nobody had credit cards either. Just the Sears card.

Everybody getting credit cards, all the women going to work, and college for everyone at skyrocketing prices ended that era.
 
2013-11-21 01:12:44 PM  

EJ25T: BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.

[twinkletoesforall.files.wordpress.com image 425x275]

"Hey, guys... get a load of this. This guy thinks he knows what widespread poverty is!"


^^ Thank you ^^

Most of us farkers are the 1% and we don't even acknowledge it. Sure times are tough...but take a proportional look around, and you might be just thankful for water and food.


http://www.globalrichlist.com/
 
2013-11-21 01:13:14 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.


Food, shelter, transportation, and clothing at 1970s quality are cheaper in real dollars than they were 40 years ago.

Can you tell me what year was better than now for a median American all things considered?
 
2013-11-21 01:15:46 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: They stole our money by robbing the treasury. No bid contracts to their military interests as they sold us fear. Privitization of entire government functions, including the war. Privatization of the prison system and the push for mandatory sentencing. We had and have entire industries who are picking at our carcass with officials in the government who facilitated it.


site.despair.com
 
2013-11-21 01:15:57 PM  

cchris_39: UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.

I still don't remember anybody actually having "disposable income".

Nobody had credit cards either. Just the Sears card.

Everybody getting credit cards, all the women going to work, and college for everyone at skyrocketing prices ended that era.


The whole culture surrounding credit cards has changed drastically too.  At one point, society viewed credit cards as things poor people used because they didn't actually have any real money, so they'd buy it now and put off paying for it until later.  Now, however, credit cards are viewed as good investments.  Regularly paying your bill results in a higher credit score, which makes it easier and cheaper to borrow money in the future.
 
2013-11-21 01:16:07 PM  
Obvious tag sighs, rolls eyes, refuses to get up from couch.
 
2013-11-21 01:19:43 PM  

BMFPitt: UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.

Food, shelter, transportation, and clothing at 1970s quality are cheaper in real dollars than they were 40 years ago.

Can you tell me what year was better than now for a median American all things considered?


From what I can tell with a quick google, it looks like the late 90's early 00's were the peak of American household wealth. The data gets distorted a lot by the skyrocketing wealth of the extreme upper crust coupled with the increase in debt held by more middle and lower-class households.
 
2013-11-21 01:20:03 PM  

HeartBurnKid: EJ25T: [global3.memecdn.com image 720x418]

You say that, but it's something that hasn't been said by politicians even when the rest of us knew all about it.  I'm glad somebody's saying it on a national stage.


I almost qualified that pic with exactly what you just said. I like Warren.
 
2013-11-21 01:21:30 PM  
Those who create demand, the consumers, are the actual job creators. Those who are very good and very efficient at siphoning off more from the economy than they put in are not.
 
2013-11-21 01:23:13 PM  

mcgreggers99: EJ25T: BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.

[twinkletoesforall.files.wordpress.com image 425x275]

"Hey, guys... get a load of this. This guy thinks he knows what widespread poverty is!"

^^ Thank you ^^

Most of us farkers are the 1% and we don't even acknowledge it. Sure times are tough...but take a proportional look around, and you might be just thankful for water and food.


http://www.globalrichlist.com/


I almost blame that on the dwindling population of people over here who actually lived during the Great Depression. My grandparents' stories kept me pretty grounded as a kid.
 
2013-11-21 01:24:31 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: BMFPitt: UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.

Food, shelter, transportation, and clothing at 1970s quality are cheaper in real dollars than they were 40 years ago.

Can you tell me what year was better than now for a median American all things considered?

From what I can tell with a quick google, it looks like the late 90's early 00's were the peak of American household wealth. The data gets distorted a lot by the skyrocketing wealth of the extreme upper crust coupled with the increase in debt held by more middle and lower-class households.


So would you give up the technological advances since then for a few percent higher income?
 
2013-11-21 01:24:32 PM  
You know who else rode a populist message of change into the White House and expected the rest of their party to fall in line lockstep?

/No, not HIM...
 
2013-11-21 01:26:42 PM  

cchris_39: UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.

I still don't remember anybody actually having "disposable income".

Nobody had credit cards either. Just the Sears card.

Everybody getting credit cards, all the women going to work, and college for everyone at skyrocketing prices ended that era.


You are wrong.  When I grew up my parrents both had middle class jobs and every year we took vacations and we always had food on the table.

Then when I grew up and had a family of my own, I am scraping trying to find funds to have a vacation... a few times a year I am fearful that I will be unable to feed the family.  I mentioned to my dad how easy he had it and for some strange reason he couldnt stop laughing.
 
2013-11-21 01:27:04 PM  

BMFPitt: UrukHaiGuyz: BMFPitt: UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.

Food, shelter, transportation, and clothing at 1970s quality are cheaper in real dollars than they were 40 years ago.

Can you tell me what year was better than now for a median American all things considered?

From what I can tell with a quick google, it looks like the late 90's early 00's were the peak of American household wealth. The data gets distorted a lot by the skyrocketing wealth of the extreme upper crust coupled with the increase in debt held by more middle and lower-class households.

So would you give up the technological advances since then for a few percent higher income?


I can't speak for him/her, but I don't think I should have to.
 
2013-11-21 01:30:29 PM  

Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?


How about requiring businesses to treat all employees the same in regards to employment 'contracts'. If you run a business where you just 'need' to have an employment contract to get that CEO candidate you are swooning over that includes a massive golden parachute clause regardless of how the company performs, require all employees have employment contracts that offer some sort of compensation upon 'separation' (regardless of cause of course, just like the CEOs)... yea, sure, we don't expect the peons to get millions, but if they can get a few months salary (and collect unemployment of course), they may not be as completely screwed as they are today.  Or maybe companies won't want to give those kinds of contracts to the minions... so, sorry execs, no golden parachutes for you. Maybe they'll try running the companies a little better and since they won't have to pay out millions when execs leave, the companies might have enough money to retain some of the serfs.

/meh, just spit-ballin' here
 
2013-11-21 01:31:11 PM  

GoldSpider: You know who else rode a populist message of change into the White House and expected the rest of their party to fall in line lockstep?


Theodore Roosevelt?
 
Displayed 50 of 181 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report