SO MUCH WEALTH AND SO MUCH POVERTY

What is the use of creating so much wealth when most of it is absorbed by the 5% rich at the top and nothing reaches the middle and lower classes. Every year our productive powers is increased but what is the use of it for the masses? As long as the CEOs and the rich pay themselves billions of dollars, the mass of people are not going to benefit from this wealth. Reminds me when I was in England. I was always wondering why despite that this nations plundered the whole world for more than 200 years, the average British are so poor and live in much worse situation than even people in Iran, until I noticed that much of that wealth was turned into huge estates and expensive merchandise for the rich and did not reach the people.

It is so much true that "Trickle down economy would have worked miracles, if only we did not have such huge sponges at the top!".

Don't hate the unions, hate the capitalists

I have noticed here in Canada that many people hate and envy the unionized workers for their high salaries and benefits. I have to say bravo capitalists. They have managed to brainwash people to hate unions instead of asking for more unions in workplace.

It is like a person drowning. Instead of asking the few who are in a boat to save him and teach him to have another boat, he wishes for them to lose their boat and drown like him. Instead of wishing them to lose their wages and salaries and benefits and reduce to your level, you have to ask them to help you to unionize to be able to get the same benefits from your employers.

Have we forgotten what the capitalism would be without unions to leash it? Have we forgotten 19th century capitalism? When people had to work 12 hours days 7 days a week without any benefits and with minimum wages and no benefits. Without unions where were 5 day work weeks with 40 hours and all the health and other benefits? Don't think without unions the benefits and salaries will remain the same. The moment the capitalist feels the sword of union removed, he will push us back to 19th century.

The rich need the poor for two reasons

The rick need the poor for two reasons:

1. By charity and helping the poor they feel good about themselves. They rob them by billions and return a few thousand back to the poor and that is enough to feel good about themselves.

2. They need the comparison to know that they are so well off. If everybody lives in a mansion and drives a Ferrari how could the rich know they are rich and enjoy their wealth?

Increase other workers' salaries, don't decrease the 3 giants' salaries

Thanks George Bush. The salvation package for the 3 big auto giants came with strings attached: reduce the salaries of their workers to the level of the salaries foreign owned manufacturers pay their workers. How about asking them to pay their workers Indian or Chinese salaries???

Instead of asking the foreign owned companies to increase their workers salaries to the level of the union workers, the US government expects the big 3 to reduce their workers' salaries. Now that is the government of people for people and by people. How about asking the management class in these big 3 to cut their salaries to the level of their workers' salaries and then distribute the huge amount that is gained through that cut through the workers??? But no, of course, that is sacrilege. The only way to save the big 3 is to cut the meagre salaries of union workers.

Let the big three go bankrupt

I don't believe in capitalism. But in the situation that now the three big auto find themselves, I think the best road to pursue is bankruptcy. Let them go bankrupt. Out of the ashes of these corrupt slow monsters will rise small and efficient and powerful new companies with new ideas for the future of transportation. They should not sustain these giants on their death beds and let them live artificially.

capitalists trying to disband the unions under the guise of fighting the crisis

Capitalists are at it again. So the reason for the falling of the house of cards in the automobile industry is only the unions, not the stupidity and greed of the bosses who awarded themselves multi million dollar bonuses.

Even in the middle of such a huge and devastating crisis, they are still after their nemesis, the proletariat and the wage earners. I say:

1. We have to thank Unions. Without the strong unions in auto industry, that can gain good benefits and salaries for the workers, the other industries will be more aggressive in cutting wages and benefits. At least with these unions, other workers can always point at their benefits and ask for the same from their bosses. That is the reason the whole capitalist class hates the big unions and wants to get rid of the auto workers unions.

2. General public, instead of hating and being jealous of the auto workers salaries and benefits should ask for the same from their own industries. This is the name of the game for the capitalists, make other workers angry about why they are getting that high salaries and push them to demand that "they" should get as low as us. While the rational thing is to ask that "we" have to receive as much as them, not that they have to be like us.

Socialism in Nature

When you look at nature, you notice that every complex living organism is actually a socialist state of cells. Cells gather together and work for each other. Every human body is the perfect ideal of socialism. One for all and all for one. Every cell works for the benefit of others and gives, and every cell benefits from the other cells in the community. It is heavily regulated. If cells become selfish and want to run a capitalist system in our body, we won't last for one minute.

Human societies are large complex organizations of living beings. They can only be at their best efficiency when they are socialist, like any other complex organism, like ants and bees societies.

Thoughts on the capitalit crisis

The governments all around the world have interfered heavily in the markets to save the system. They have bought shares in banks and effectively nationalized some big financial institutions. The libertarians and Republican right calls it the advent of socialism. Nope, it is not. It is socialism for the fat cats and the rich. Because when things calm down and the good times arrive again, all this nationalized institutes will be returned to the capitalist owners, not the people who paid with their taxes to save them.

Again, the so-called invisible hand of the market was given the invisible finger. Again and again and again it is proved that the markets can’t regulate themselves and lassaiz fair economy does not work.

We regulate driving. We regulate food producing. We regulate construction and building. We regulate health care. We have regulations for how to make chocolate and baby foods and clothes and beds. But when it comes to economics, they say no, we don’t need regulation, we have to deregulate and let the invisible hand take over. Well, sorry, everything needs regulation and without that things run amok. An important affair like economy needs regulation and if it is deregulated the greedy financial institutions will drive it into gutter.

Thoughts on the current caplitalist crisis

The Republicans in US are howling about socialism. As if the American government is turning into a socialist government. Yes, it is true that however they put it, they have effectively NATIONALISED the mortgage firms and the AIG and other firms they are bailing out, but no, this is not socialism, because the moment the markets improve and there is a whiff of profit in the air, they are going to sell them back to the private sector, to the same fat cats that bankrupted these institutions.

What happens is: They socialize when they lose, they privatize when they gain. Socialise to spread the loss to the general public, privatize when the institutions are profiting.

The question is: Why should the average American pay for the mistakes of the fat cats? Let them die over their own mistakes. Why should they be bailed out by the tax payer money? The economy won't get worse if they pay for their own mistakes!

Yes, they want us all to believe that this is the end of civilization, the disaster of the century, etc. And the media are always happy to oblige and make a mountain out of a mole hill. Not only because most of media belongs to them anyway, but also because this is the business of the media, to make mountains out of mole hills, otherwise they won't sell.

If they manage to convince us all that this is the end of the world and the greatest disaster in the human history, yes, then we will ask our politicians and representatives to vote for the bailout. So it is in their interest to paint a really gloomy picture, whilst it is not as bad as they want us to believe it is. I would say, no, let them sink in their stinking ships, they brought it upon themselves, and now they have to pay. They should not be saved by the taxes of the poor people who have not had any responsibility in the this fiasco.

I would say, just for once, don't believe in their lies. Yes, it is bad, but bad for THEM, not bad for us. Let them pay for their greed.

Wall Street Saved by poor taxpayers money, business as usual

Well, well, well, Republicans and Democrats both voted to save Wall Street firms again. Did we expect anything else? Not me. It is business as usual in the heart of capitalist world. Taxpayers money is used as usual to foot the bill for saving the bungling big firms. They are allowed to gamble with other people's money, to lose billions of dollars, to pay themselves hefty bonuses, and whenever they push the firms over the brink and into the abyss because of their intense greed, the government is there to save them. So, why should they care? Why do we expect them not to repeat the same mistakes again and again. When there is no punishment, when there is always government waiting there to be called to save you, why should you care how much money you lose through your greedy acts, especially that it is other people's money, not yours.

Will the American government ever put a penny into public health care or free education in the university? NO, of course not. It is a free market man! Government is not supposed to help the public in a free market, it only helps the fat cats. But when the fat cats need money, yes, we are there to pay you a trillion dollar out of the same poor people's money. So it is only free market for the poor people, who are left to drawn without any help.

The fall of Lehman-Brothers and the stupidity of the so called financian geniuses of Wall Street

Lehman Brothers joined the other giants of wall street falling one after the other after the mortgage crisis, and yet, you think these rocket scientist geniuses of the financial markets will never make a mistake. What is the difference between these and every other Joe in the street then. They were taken by the same market exuberance in the mortgage markets and before that in the tech bubble like any other person. And yet, they keep rewarding themselves with seven figure bonuses and play these risky games with other people's money and each time it is the small shareholder and mortgage taker that has to pay the price.

Wall Street is all a sham, there is not an ounce of brain in that whole corner of the street in New York.

Ugly Billboards

As a city planner I find it abhorring that the cities let all these huge commercial billboards go up anywhere in the city. Just look at the Dundas Square in Toronto. It makes the city really ugly. I believe there should be some regulations limiting the use of billboards in the cities.

Internal Opposition, US and Rome

Christianity was the internal opposition against Imperial Rome's excesses and corruption. Not all Romans approved and supported the imperial order. There was always a great opposition inside Rome and by some Romans against the imperial order. Christianity was one form this opposition expressed itself. Gradually, when the Imperial power was waning, this internal opposition helped to collapse Rome. We see the same thing now in US. It is not that all Americans support the vehement capitalist-imperialist policies of their country. A great number of open minded and intellectual Americans oppose their government's policies. Blacks, university intellectuals, writers, artists, many Hollywood celebrities, and many other groups are among the opposition. They are not yet strong enough to challenge the powers to be, but sooner or later, the story of Christianity and Rome will be repeated in US.

Stalin, a product of Lenin! Lenin, a product of the Tsars!

I am reading a book titled "Young Stalin". It is by Simon Sebag Montefiore. I have found within the book's pages a totally different man from whom I thought Stalin was. On the one hand most biographies of Stalin are written by his enemies in exile, so can't be impartial. On the other hand, the only biographies with a positive attitude towards this dictator were written only in his lifetime in Russia and are wildly partial and off the mark. We should not forget that after his death Stalin was denounced by his own party so there were no biographies about him published later in Russia. Therefore it is hard to find an impartial book about him. Fortunately this book tries to be that, although it is more negative than positive. The author exhibits all the symptoms of a person who has not lived through similar times and is writing about a man and a time he can't FEEL anything about. I can, however, understand every word, since I have lived through similar times and can feel every moment of the young Stalin's life. I can understand why he did what he did, at least before he became the blood-thirsty dictator he was.

It is fascinating to think what would have happened to Stalin if he had lived in a different time. I try to imagine him in Canada in our time. At most, he would have been a Jack Layton, leader of the NDP. If the Bolshevik coup had been crushed and defeated, he would have been a martyr, or at least an old revolutionary émigré with lots of stories to tell about his adventurous life. He would never have become the Stalin we know now. His life would not have been much different than the life of all the Russian revolutionaries deported after October, or the life of Spanish Civil War heroes after the defeat of the Spanish government by Franco.

What made him STALIN, the worst dictator in history, was the October Revolution. Without Lenin, there could not be a Stalin. Stalin is the natural product of Lenninism. He is the legitimate son of Lenin's brutal Civil War and dictatorship. But we can't understand Lenin without understanding the suffocating dictatorship of the Romanovs and Tsarist Russia. Without that dictatorship, Lenin could not have succeeded in bringing about the October coup. The population would not be ready to tolerate so much brutality. Other parties have tried, after the October, to copy it in other countries, but where the situation was not ready, they were all defeated. German communists tried hard to have their own revolution in 1918 and 1919 but were defeated because German society was more advanced and less brutal at the time. Even British communists tried their hand at revolution in the 1920s, but it was a farce because people would just not accept a bloody revolution.

So, I believe, if we trace the roots of Stalinism, at the end of the day the blame rests with the Tsars and their stupid, backward regime. The same thing can be said about the Islamic Republic in Iran. Yes, they are brutal. But you can't blame it all on them only. Without the brutal, murderous dictatorship of the Shah, Khomeini could not have achieved success and come to power.

==================================================================

I agree that Stalin could not do what he did without Lenin, but I also believe it was not necessary to be so brutal. There is no logical reason for the necessity of Stalin's extreme brutality. Russia would still become an industrial country, no matter what political system it had. Many other countries went through the same phase without any blood. IT WAS NOT NECESSARY. It was illogical and evil. It can only be explained by Stalin's personality. I believe if other members of the Bolshevik party had ruled Russia instead of Stalin there would not have been such blood bath. Even if Lenin had survived and ruled, he would not expose his fellow contrymen to such a brutality and at least not killed his own party members. Mao was a brutal communist, but he killed much less of his own party members than Stalin did, in a much larger and more populous country.

.

CAPITALISM, OR GOVERNMENTAL CORPORATE WELFARE SYSTEM

Bear Stearns downfall and purchase by JP Morgan proves again the hollow claims of capitalists about Laissez-faire economy and the rule of government in it. At times of prosperity when the greed rules supreme, their economists claim that the government should be as small as possible. It should not interfere in the affairs of the market and must let capitalists shave the public as much as they want to fill up their pockets and own 10 estates instead of only 1. Any attempt at wealth redistribution is faced by hollers of interference. NO, it is not good for economy. NO, the government should not interfere at all and should let the economy run its course.

But look at Bear Stearns comedy now. The moment the excess greed turns into the economic storm and the ships start sinking left and right and centre, then the same capitalists turn to the government, with caps in hands, for survival. The same government which was "BAD" and was not supposed to touch their pockets, now has to save them out with "tax payer's" money. The same people, who were not worthy enough as human beings to share in the prosperous times, are now expected to pay out of their pockets and through their taxes to save out the capitalist's companies and corporations.

HUGE MARKETS BEGET DICTATORSHIP AND CORRUPTION

In a country with a huge population, the market is huge. In such a country, the capitalist system can reach the height of its power because of the size of the market. The money and consequently power tends to concentrate in fewer and fewer hands and in the long-run the political system becomes a corrupt plutocracy and democracy dies. In Such a society the gap between rich and poor becomes wider and wider until the system collapses from within. A very good example of such a system is ancient Rome, or the successive empires in China built on the back of millions of peasants. Each empire ruled for a few hundred years and was thrown into anarchy and chaos and fell in a peasant revolution. A modern version is US, where the capitalist and corporation lobby has become so powerful that the legislature just can't pass any laws to narrow the gap and the poor become poorer everyday despite the huge wealth of the country.

If a country is small and has smaller population, the market in not large. As a result, the capitalists in that country can never gather enough money to be able to influence the political system at will. An example of such a country is Canada, or Scandinavian countries, or Switzerland. Democracy in such countries lasts longer and is more vibrant because there is not enough concentrated money to influence it. The lobby power of small capitalists can never compete against the will of the people. These countries tend to have a more just and socialist system and the gap between rich and poor is smaller.

McCaine Killing Innocent Vietnamese

Everyone these days mentions Senator McCain and his heroic spell in Vietnamese jails. But nobody, not even one person that I know, not even one journalist, asks the very simple question: ‘Senator, why did you end up in Vietnamese prisons in the first place????’

Did they come to the US and snatch you from your cozy big house? Did they invade your country and arrest you while you were fighting against their invasion? Did they kidnap you from your military base? Or were you bombarding innocent civilians—Vietnamese children, women and men, when they shot your plane down and captured you as a war criminal? What were you doing over Hanoi? Were you defending democracy and human rights against fascism, or were you expanding American imperialism by bombarding the civilian population in Hanoi?

If I were present at one of the campaign speeches, I would stand up and ask these questions, instead of asking about what happened to McCain in the Hanoi Hilton.

I would pick up the mike and ask him, ‘Senator McCain, would you please explain to me what you were doing at the time they shot you down? Senator McCain, what were your feelings when your bombs burnt, maimed and killed innocent children and civilians? Senator McCain, as a practicing Christian, have you ever asked for God's forgiveness for the crime of killing these people? Senator McCain, have you ever, even once in your life, woken up at night sweating and thinking of the innocent people who were killed with your bombs? People who had not attacked US, who were sleeping and working in their own country, while you had invaded theirs!

Buy, Buy, Buy ... to save the capitalist system

A recession is looming, and what does Mr. McGunity tell us to do? To buy! Two days ago he advised all Ontarians to go to malls and buy, buy cars, buy houses, buy stuff.

This is capitalist system. Pure and simple. A system based on consumption, not on taking care of real human needs. Buy, buy, buy until you consume the whole planet, and turn it into plastics and metals and junk. Like a virus that attacks the body of its host and destroys it. This is a system that is based on planned obsolescence, a system that loathes merchandise that last for a long time. Any product in this system should not last more than a few years, otherwise the whole system will crash. They have the "Fashion" in everything, in clothes and cars and computers, etc. They change it every year so that the last year's merchandise is ugly this year and you have to replace them.

Is a system that will collapse if people stop heavy consumption a reasonable and rational system? Of course not. The production system should not be based on greed, but on real human needs, without excesses of totally unnecessary consumption.

And remember: George Bush told Americans the same thing after 9/11. People were scared and not shopping, and he told them to go and shop, otherwise the system will collapse, and right now he is going to legislate laws to pay every American some money to go to the store and buy stuff.

Don't they see how crooked and unstable the system is? Of course they see it, but greed is a stronger motive than reason in human beings.

EUROPEAN SOCIAL DEMOCRACY PAYS

Linda McQuaig article in Toronto Star about the benefits of social democracy

Warning by Warren Buffet about low taxes for the rich

Warren Buffet, one of the richest men in the world, has warned against repealing estate-tax in US. Tax cutting by Bush and cronies has reached to a point that even the rich are complaining:

Read the article here