Rebane's Ruminations
February 2013
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

Peter Collins on truthout.com (my favorite socialist cum communist website) laments about progressive talk radio not getting any traction over the years.  In ‘An Insider’s View of the Progressive Talk Radio Devolution’ talk show host Collins goes through a litany of liberal radio’s travails during recent years, and concludes –

As someone who took substantial personal risk in syndication and station ownership, I can tell you that progressive talk has not panned out as a viable business. Clinton’s 1996 deregulation of broadcasting and the end of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 didn’t help. I do think the FCC should require some balance of viewpoints on the stations it regulates, through the license renewal process, but there is simply no interest on the part of Obama and his appointees in regulatory reform – even as the president is pilloried by right-wing radio on a daily basis. Air America’s parade of management blunders produced the downward spiral that brought us to this tipping point for progressive talk radio, and most station owners, rightly or wrongly, see that failure as an indication that audiences won’t support liberal talk radio.

LimbaughHis appeal to government diktat to limit the success of conservative radio is indicative of the overall disease that afflicts liberals’ desire to muzzle the right with the power of the government’s gun.  (It appears that the wind is blowing the other way, cf ‘Fairness Doctrine, RIP’.)  But nowhere in his recounting does the light ever go on to illuminate the real problem with liberal radio.  He and other progressive pinheads believe “that audiences won’t support liberal talk radio.”  Sure they do; but the problem is that those audiences are tiny, and correctly reflect the intellectual demographic of our nation’s Left.

To enjoy talk radio beyond the 17 slogans that drive liberal thought on the evening’s sitcoms and lamestream news, you have to have a working ideology, one that is constantly weighed against the daily happenings across the nation that impact the operations of governance.  You can’t promote a leftwing dialectic against the realities of the day’s news, it doesn’t work.  Even people with limited abilities start giggling after being subjected to that kind of ‘rationale’.

Therefore, such large audiences have never existed on the Left.  Look at the idiots who represent them (I know, the Repubs have had a few notable lumps there too lately), all of whom convince their know-nothing constituencies of a few simple class warfare messages, and that about puts a bow on their participation in the national dialogue.  Collins et al don’t have a clue here, or are in understandably deep denial of that reality.

But Collins is one of their heavy thinkers, and he’s not satisfied with the Left’s victories at the polls.  Well he should be.  And there’re more of those voters on the way with new Dem ‘voter rights’ bills that promise to sweep the streets clean of all the residuals who can still make their mark (optional at that) on an instant registration form – no address required, thank you very much.  What would Collins say to these 2x4s with faces painted on them?  most certainly nothing that will satisfy a keen intellect that’s been honed over the years to communicate complex collectivist rationale for bigger government and a more even distribution of wealth across America.

My advice to Collins is to rejoice in the Dems having finally forged a compliant (and growing?) flock of voters that can override any assault which conservative talk radio could ever hope to marshal.  The power of “stash” is beyond intellectual debate – as long as the government checks keep coming, all is well.

Posted in , , , ,

75 responses to “Progressive Radio – the Dangerfield of the airwaves”

  1. MikeL Avatar
    MikeL

    As soon as the hypocritical left adopts the crazy life that they want everyone else to abide by I might start to listen to their ideas. All of the rich, whatever that means, libs would need to step up and voluntarily give away all of their wealth to the pawns that they use to demonize the rich, the pawns being the so called poor, again whatever that means. The libs whose real religion is the belief in human caused glow bull warming would have to cease all use of energy that was generated by any form of fossil fuel, that would be coal, natural gas, oil, hydro power ( most dams are constructed of concrete…concrete is bad since its production generates evil see oh two and dams prevent fish from enjoying their Constitutional rights), wind power might have to go as well since windmills murder birds.
    This Collins fellow is obviously not very bright, the reason that left wing radio failed is because most people do not want to listen to someone telling them that they are Peices of shitte and that America is the problem.

    Like

  2. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    There is a slight breeze blowing indeed. Even progressive talk radio shows are having guests decrying the dangers and expenses of ObamaCare and the predictable exorbitant unaffordable costs to the average family of 4 coupled with declining health care services. But, just as predicable, they are only on there once. Penalties for not buying in aren’t bad the first year, but like everything Obama is doing, they escalate by 3 fold the second year, and escalate the more the 3rd year, to infinity and beyond.
    The problem with liberal talk shows is they lack any semblance of humor. Depressing to say the least.

    Like

  3. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Once again totally off base. It is about infrastructure and media ownership. Not many big businesses want to advertise on programs that call for their break up, their tax loopholes to be closed, or exposing their criminal behavior. So what happens is liberal radio due to economics is stuck on small stations that have very little range. This of course is a very simple version.
    A good independent take on media ownership. I know you will say it is liberal but I am pretty sure the Goodman’s don’t vote for either D’s or R’s. I know they are just as critical to the Obama administration. Examples
    Why Media Ownership Matters
    2005
    http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20050403&slug=sundaygoodman03
    Here is Democracy Now! coverage of what I think is a crime against humanity, suspension of due process and habeas corpus, and violations of the US Constitution in multiple areas.
    http://www.democracynow.org/2013/2/5/kill_list_exposed_leaked_obama_memo

    Like

  4. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Ben, you are touching on a part of the problem but there are some other fundamentals that I think are much more poignant.
    As George has cited here a number of times, liberal and conservative BRAINS ARE DIFFERENT! Basically, the liberal brain has a heavier cerebrum (the thinking part), whereas the conservative brain is weighted more with the cerebellum (lizard part).
    If you have a heavy cerebrum, it is impossible to listen to Hannity or Rush for more than 10 minutes w/o suffering severe ennui. But if you are more gifted in the cerebellum dept., those guys are are like Zoloft.
    Pretty simple, actually.

    Like

  5. Joe Koyote Avatar
    Joe Koyote

    Progressive talk shows? Surely you jest. Railing about progressive talk shows is like complaining about a drop of rain during a hurricane. They don’t exist to any great degree. Depending on the source 95-99 percent of radio talk shows are conservative in nature. That is the danger, a lack of fair and balanced coverage. Remember Senator Al Franken’s Air America? It died not from a lack of listeners, but a lack of advertisers after numerous corporations (through their ad agencies) told media conglomerates that they would drop their ads if the stations continued to run Air America programs. Goodbye Air America. It seems that the corporations do not want the truth to be told, expect when fabricated by their own media goons. When conservative companies like Clearchannel Communications own over a thousand stations it makes your thesis, in the words of Russ Steele, a pile of bovine dung. The free market at work.. if you don’t say things I like, I will take my ball and go home because the truth will hurt my bottom line. What the man in the street conservatives don’t understand is that the big money will lie, steal, and cheat, even to the party faithful, in order to make a buck. That is the purpose of a corporation. Remember that profit comes first, before truth and before human decency.

    Like

  6. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 1002am – Ben, could you please expand your explanation to include why the same lamestream, that is owned by evil corporate interests who will not tolerate otherwise popular progressive radio, is so obviously in the tank for the same progressive causes as they select and report news, and as they deliver their editorial commentaries from the same media outlets?
    MichaelA 1014am – As you note, I have reported on the studies that differentiate brain functioning and attitudes between people of the Right and Left. But I haven’t run across any of the brain component weight differences that you cite. Could you provide a link, I’d like to update that part for RR’s Liberal Mind category? Thanks.
    (BTW, I did delete your farewell and “hand job” comment under another post.)

    Like

  7. George Rebane Avatar

    JoeK 1031am – perhaps again you misunderstand. There is no “railing about progressive talk shows” in my post. On the contrary, I and other capitalists would love to see such shows, explaining the world from the socialist view point, stay on the air. As a conservetarian, I have long maintained that you collectivists describing your ideology can do a much better job driving away adherents, than we can do attracting them.
    And then you suddenly straddle both sides of the argument – 1) progressive radio would attract a substantial audience if their capitalist owners would only let them, and 2) capitalists put profit above all but also mysteriously drive away audiences to whom they could advertize and sell product. Coming from another source, such argumentation would be most puzzling.
    But in your denials you and BenE do throw out Peter Collins’ experience and perspectives on the erstwhile field of progressive talk radio. I wonder why.

    Like

  8. TheMikeyMcD Avatar
    TheMikeyMcD

    Ben’s argument would hold water IF the likes of CNN, MNSBC, ABC, etc had trouble finding advertisers… they don’t.
    The radio market has spoken, ‘no one’ wants to hear progressives rattle off emotional/hypocritical/hate based ideology.
    I bought a truck 6 years ago and I have not turned on the radio once.

    Like

  9. Videodrone Avatar
    Videodrone

    the primary job of any talk show host (any commercially supported program) is to sell advertising space to as many listeners as possible
    if progressive talk could gather the ears they would have the sponsors (not getting into Air America’s theft of funds to launch or other shenanigans)
    speaking for only for myself folks like “El Rushbo” lose a lot of creditability when they endorse such nonsense as Homeopathic remedies or “name a star”
    face it folks – its “entertainment” any resemblance to factual content is secondary at best

    Like

  10. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    If it’s larger, wouldn’t it also be heavier?
    “Researchers also noted that Democrats had larger anterior cingulate cortexes, which are associated with tolerance to uncertainty, while Republicans had larger right amygdalas, which are associated with sensitivity to fear.”
    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/09/03/conservatives-and-liberals-have-different-brains-studies-show/

    Like

  11. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Mikey wrote: “I bought a truck 6 years ago and I have not turned on the radio once.”
    Not even to listen to a Giants game?? Sorry Mikey, I’m not buying it.

    Like

  12. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 1155am – perhaps your 1014am conclusions from the ABC piece are too “simple”.

    Like

  13. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Perhaps.

    Like

  14. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Mickey,
    As I have repeatedly said here, none of those media outlets are liberal or progressive outside some individual commentators but over all they are the same as the rest of the corporate media.
    Media Consolidation – The Illusion of Choice
    http://owni.eu/2011/11/25/infographic-media-consolidation-the-illusion-of-choice/
    Let me put it to you this way. What happened to real deep investigative reporting? As advertising and news departments were merged to increase overall profits investigative reporting basically disappeared. It was two major media reform one is what George alluded to in 1987 end then the 1996. These two reforms took the public interest out of the news and allowed for consolidation of the media. In 1980 If a media station wants to get a big name politician on they are not going to ask tough questions or expose the corruption of that politician or political party. Remember it is all about increasing viewers to get big advertising contracts. The same goes for doing a really in depth report on any corporate wrong doing.
    Here is a good story of how it works.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZkDikRLQrw

    Like

  15. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Ignore the “In 1980”, it was supposed to be removed.

    Like

  16. Gregory Avatar

    The organization that fabricated the metastudy to determine Liberals and Conservatives have different brain weights was founded and is controlled by this guy:
    http://www.procon.org/stevencmarkoff.html
    That he is a director of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California (since 1979), whose education consists of an A.A. from LA City College, and a history of Democratic activism doesn’t bode well for the facts mandersonation so uncritically flung into the fan.

    Like

  17. Joe Koyote Avatar
    Joe Koyote

    George – 10:45 You are missing the big picture. Allowing progressive views on the airwaves would kill the bottom line ie, issues like pollution, climate change, etc. would ultimately cost the multi-corps a ton more money that a few missed ads on a radio show with a few million listeners at best.

    Like

  18. Gregory Avatar

    Whoever you are 1:37, the average media conglomerate executive would sell their mama to the devil if it would drive up their advertising revenues.
    Left-liberal voices are a minority on the airwaves because people using radios don’t want to listen to them.

    Like

  19. TheMikeyMcD Avatar

    Ben, I understand the importance of the media monopoly in the US. As a libertarian I know the solution is a free market (yes, even airwaves) and not more government corrupton. As a student of Taleb (Antifragile, Black Swan, etc) I believe a more robust media system is a decentralized system, again, best attained via free markets and competition.
    Again, I know the fact that liberal talk shows fail is because they are pushing a failed ideology.
    A comical representation of the failed ideology (hypocritical/hateful) here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/things-democrats-would-have-freaked-out-about-if-bush-had-do

    Like

  20. George Rebane Avatar

    JoeK 137pm – Ah yes, the big picture. Do you have any evidence for that grand accounting made by the greedy corporations. Given the history and evidence of progressive talk radio audiences, the existence of an active lamestream, and recountings like that of Peter Collins, the most straightforward explanation is what I have given in the post and what commenters like Greg (152pm) also conclude.
    However, what really puts the ribbon on it is that socialist ideology does not sell, does not convince even the simpler minds (cf socialist Upton Sinclair’s famous statement on socialism). Yale’s liberal Dr Beverly Gage has also studied this phenomenon and has recently produced an extensive write-up on this.
    http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/08/the-liberals-intellectually-baseless-ideology.html
    In any event, today there is plenty of opportunity to espouse collectivist ideology directly to media audiences, and relate them to historical achievements and current policies (as do their conservative/libertarians), but no progressive pundit dares profess such ideas on the airwaves. Instead, such pundits appeal to “issue-oriented activism” that deals in narrowly framed topical presentations – essentially ideology-free current events with the proper spin.
    Given reality, all of that makes sense for explaining the behavior of the Left without ever having to bring in evidence-free descriptions of convoluted capitalist conspiracies. Keep it simple, Occam demands it.

    Like

  21. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Think the big picture here is the the usual cry from the liberal elite: “Punish the successful. Please Great White Father in Washington, please make them stop. Me need Mama’s milk. Me need Great White Father’s tit to survive. Make them stop. Call them evil and greedy. I will die without you.” No different with the Fairness Doctrine. My fairness doctrine is this: The customer is always right.

    Like

  22. Joe Koyote Avatar
    Joe Koyote

    The biggest tit suckers are large corporations that get subsidies like the oil and agriculture industries and put their money off shore to avoid taxes. What if your customer is poisoning, defrauding, or otherwise causing harm to other people, are they still right? Somewhere in the discussion of money must come some kind of moral compass besides the bottom line. Personally, I find it despicable that the one hundred wealthiest people on earth could eliminate extreme hunger on the planet four times over, and don’t. I find it horrendous that while one person has multiple vacation homes that sit empty another person starves to death. In some of the bazaars in Africa the vendors sell mud cookies, a concoction of lard, salt, and dirt… because some people can’t afford to buy anything else. Oh your just bashing the makers again. No, I am bashing greed, there is a difference.
    So the correct model of behavior should to be to just turn our backs on the starving and accumulate as much wealth as we can? Is the quality of our life to be judged by the size of our stash our compassion for others less fortunate.

    Like

  23. George Rebane Avatar

    JoeK 530pm – Bravo! With one side of the mouth we don’t want to turn our backs on the world’s poor and keep them from growing their economies and increasing their quality of life by having them be able to sell the only one thing they have – cheap labor. And with the other side, we vilify the same job creators who want their product produced by the poor and sold to the greatest number at the lowest cost.
    And you are also among the anointed who can reliably tell the difference between productive enterprise and greed. How many of those self-righteous mavens have passed the world’s stage, each being more dangerous than the last with the more guns they could command.
    ” I find it despicable that the one hundred wealthiest people on earth could eliminate extreme hunger on the planet four times over, and don’t.” There is a difference between feeding every hungry person supper on a given evening, and putting in place the sustainable means that will produce suppers tomorrow night and the day after. But it is always the worthies who have never created a job in their life who know best about how everyone else should go about doing just that.

    Like

  24. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    re Joe the K’s 5:30 – ‘I find it horrendous that while one person has multiple vacation homes that sit empty another person starves to death.’ What on earth has one to do with the other? People starve to death for many reasons, Joe. Empty homes aren’t any of those reasons. Even better – ‘I find it despicable that the one hundred wealthiest people on earth could eliminate extreme hunger on the planet four times over, and don’t.’
    Amazingly, all of the millions of lefties like Joe don’t find it despicable that they could eliminate hunger and don’t. It’s only despicable when some one they don’t happen to like doesn’t do it.
    Next Joe will complain that Bush won’t let him pay enough taxes. Keep it coming, Joe.

    Like

  25. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Scott,
    “I find it horrendous that while one person has multiple vacation homes that sit empty another person starves to death.’ What on earth has one to do with the other? People starve to death for many reasons, Joe. Empty homes aren’t any of those reasons.”
    They have everything to do with each other. It has to do with a global economic system that promotes inequality, resource theft, and plunder. The entire system is violent. Can you please explain to me what starving to death actually means, what is happening in the body that causes it to just stop working? Can you then tell me why any person should have billions of dollars of wealth? Is there any job on the planet that can justify such wealth accumulation?

    Like

  26. TheMikeyMcD Avatar

    IF the global economic system promotes inequality, resource theft and plunder it does so thanks to government force.
    A society is as ‘good/bad’ as the morals/value structure of said society.
    We are seeing the ills of a society based on government as diety.
    Progressive radio can’t succeed because the ideology is morally and logically bankrupt. Progressives need government force, sacrifice of the individual, a stagnation of quality of life… shared misery with elitists enslaving the masses.

    Like

  27. L Avatar
    L

    People, it’s simple. Rush is the $400 million gorrila in the room for one reason: he is hilarious. His most powerful weapon is ridicule of people and things that make no sense whatever to a normal, thinking human being.
    Lefties preaching Marx to a crowd that already believes in Marxism without recognizing that they are displaying a conditioned response is an exercise in entertainment futility. George had it right in the original post: the left has positioned itself in a world view where there’s nothing to talk about.
    All you lefties should go spend a few hours with Mr. Limbaugh and really hear what he is saying and all your right-wing media theories will evaporate before your disbelieving ears. Try it, you’ll like it- and you may even be able to reclaim your lost humanity. L

    Like

  28. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Ben you are talking human nature and its pitfalls which never changed, never will. For capitalism to work, morality must be at its central core. That is why seasoned capitalists are leery to do business in Russia. They change the rules, are corrupt, and play with marked cards. Give millions or billions to any 3rd world country and 1% will end up with 99% of the wealth within a year from Jamaica to Africa. Human nature.
    Capitalism works in the USA because one offers a good product at a fair price. No one likes to get ripped off and no one likes an inferior product. Capitalism (without gov’t interference) weeds out its own. Capitalism shakes the tree and the rotten fruit falls to the ground. Survival of the fitness. Survival of those that make a good product that people WANT/NEED at a fair price and have the morality to stand by their product.
    I don’t care if someone, even you, makes a billion or trillion dollars a month. Looking envious at someone else’s skill, ingenuity, and good fortune and deciding how much is enough for someone else to have is downright immoral, IMHO. Control freaks and those who sit in judgement of everyone else think that way. They should do this, she should do that, he has enough, he does not need that, ad infinitum.
    Of course anyone with a heart cares about his fellow man and their plight. That is why people like Bill Gates and hip-hop music mongols donate so much money to their own foundations. They know government will just take the money and toss it in the air. Steve Jobs cared about his employees. I know a custodian who was worked hard at Apple, yet retired at age 50 with 2 million in company stock and pension. Should that mop pusher be denied his good fortune, good timing, and the fruits of his labor?
    Steve Jobs was once approached by the city leaders where his company is. They asked him to pay for a new community center. Jobs told them to go pound stand. He said that is why I pay taxes, for you to build roads and parks and community centers. I suppose you would back Solyndra to the max and say Jobs starved little orphans to death after ripping off their prosthetic arms.
    I have been over 4 days without a single bite to eat. I did not starve to death. Nor have I known anyone who has starved to death. Nor anyone who knows anyone who starved to death. Takes over 2 weeks plus to really starve to death, maybe 3-4 weeks. Happens in dictatorships, not South Africa or Chile or South Korea.
    Fairness Doctrine? What is fair about that? Yes, government owns the airwaves. Let the government give some Latinos or Hindus of Liberals or Asians or Dirt Worshipers their own slice of the pie, their little piece of the airwaves. Government will do what government does. But, like all things, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.

    Like

  29. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 807pm – It reappears that you and yours believe that the amount of wealth on earth is fixed, and humans live to just redistribute that wealth in a grim zero sum contest with the winners being those who can unjustly take it from the losers. You don’t see ‘jobs’ which can add enormously to man’s aggregate wealth, in the process increasing the QoL for millions (billions?), and then taking a small fraction of that for themselves. That small fraction will still cause great inequality, and that to you is the injustice that we cannot countenance while some in the world are still suffering. It is better that no such new wealth is created, it is better that we all stay at some previous lower but more equal QoL level. That is probably what you all call ‘social justice’.
    Under this (to me horrible) ideology one person here, who creates nothing, should be empowered to define what is the proper level of risk and reward for another person there, one who wants to create wealth and a better life on earth for all in reach of that new creation. And if all cannot share equally in the new creation, then none should share in it.
    Does this understanding provide you with an inkling of why we are so polarized, and why the likelihood of a Great Divide increases by the day?

    Like

  30. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    This is great stuff – ‘It has to do with a global economic system that promotes inequality, resource theft, and plunder. The entire system is violent.’
    So, if I build a home that would be OK, but if I build another vacation home then I’m suddenly violently stealing from some poor waif in Africa? Both structures are products of the same ‘system’, but one is okey dokey and the other is (say it in a spooky voice) EVIL! Or, are all homes that are built evil? Or just some that are built by Republicans? Ben, can you or Joe take me on a tour and point out the evil homes that cause certain children to starve? This is just ludicrous. There is no reason, logic or rational thought here.
    And Ben E and Joe the K still won’t explain why the richest 100 folks are evil for not eliminating hunger, but Joe K and Ben E, along with their leftist pals are exempt.

    Like

  31. bill tozer Avatar
    bill tozer

    Good timing. This came out today
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stars-nerd-philanthropy-dominate-top-174207856.html
    In other news, a company lost its battle with the IRS, another Ponsi scheme dude arrested, one business suing another business and going to court, etc. Yes, capitalism has morality and those who do not play by the rules are taken to task sooner or later. Ain’t perfect, but capitalism is the greatest wealth generator for great and small known to man.

    Like

  32. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Scott,
    Its not necessarily the rich folks that are evil it is the system that promotes such huge disparity. The rich folks would be evil if they use their wealth to keep the system in place to secure their wealth.

    Like

  33. Steve Frisch Avatar
    Steve Frisch

    I am with Bill Tozer on this one…capitalism is not perfect (nor would it be under a laissez faire system), however, it is the best system we have, is responsible for lifting more people out of poverty, want, and ignorance than any system yet devised; the task is to reform capitalism so it values social and environmental benefits.

    Like

  34. TheMikeyMcD Avatar

    Ah, how to ‘reform capitalism so it values social and environmental benefits’?
    Through government force? Propoganda via public schools/media? Through the promotion of enlighted self interest?
    The value system of a society determines the course of society.

    Like

  35. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Capitalism is just fine it is the specific form of capitalism that has become so destructive. I think we are on the brink of new form of economic system with capitalism as its base but a recalibration of the profit motive, compensation distribution, and a built in balance between labor and management. The monetary system is about to crash again and when it happens this time it will send the entire global economy into a reboot mode instead of the bail out mode.
    Scott,
    Please walk me through the process of a human being starving to death. I will give you a hint, it takes a really long time for it to happen.

    Like

  36. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Ben – Poor, starving folks have been around forever. Long before there was any kind of capitalist system. And there have always been the few elite at the top who took from the masses to stay in power and live in luxury. The people at the bottom can’t sink any lower as they have nothing. On the other hand, the capitalist system has raised the standard of living for so many people to such a degree that we now see the largest number of folks that have far more than ever. This increases the amount of inequality in wealth, but not at the expense of the poor. They never had anything to begin with, so it’s hard to see how anything was taken from them. Most of the rich came by their wealth honestly. Bill Gates and Henry Ford didn’t take anything from anybody on their way to acquiring immense fortunes. In fact, they helped everyone around them. Most of the starving masses are living in areas that have little or no resources and anyone living there would starve. But they are either kept there by autocratic (no American Constitution for them) govts or just plain stubborn behaviour. Capitalism has nothing to do with it. Let’s get back to the nonsense spouted about folks that have vacation homes causing starvation. People have the right to make all of the money they want and own all of the homes they want. If you are concerned about starving people, then do something positive about it and stop throwing rocks at folks you don’t like. Hating people and calling them names doesn’t do the poor any good. Instead, teach the poor how to better themselves on their own and everyone benefits.

    Like

  37. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Scott,
    Can you please tell me the process of a human being starving to death?
    I will address the rest of you post after you educate me on how the body shuts down until it no longer can sustain itself.

    Like

  38. George Rebane Avatar

    We note again that BenE has systematically ignored my 909pm response to his audacious claims about wealth creation, ownership, and distribution. When a socialist wants to “recalibrate the profit motive”, batten the hatches for it portends that wholesale misery will follow. Never mind communism, even in its milder forms, such socialistic recalibration produced almost 40 years of totally unnecessary austerity in Great Britain until the Iron Lady brought some sanity to the land. But such discussion with leftwingers only invites the sound of crickets.

    Like

  39. Joe Koyote Avatar
    Joe Koyote

    The value system of a society determines the course of society.–
    Yes it does. since 1979 the average CEO pay has gone up 725% while the workers who produce the goods and services (whose only capital is their labor) saw their compensation go up 5.7%. For example, the execs at Hostess gave themselves several million in bonuses (while raiding employee retirement funds) to oversee the dismantling of a company their policies destroyed. This “give ourselves bonuses while the comp[any goes in the tank” seems to be a recurring theme among the corporate elite. Our society champions the accumulation of wealth at whatever cost to the rest of the people and the planet. So I guess the value system has greed at its base. Wouldn’t our consumer based economy do better if the people in the middle and at the bottom had more money to spend? I don’t understand how monetarily crippling the working class’s ability to consume helps? Perhaps denigrating the American worker is part of the global plan to suppress workers’ rights and wages everywhere, and (you guessed it) increase profit. So the course of our society seems to be the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and that’s the way the ball bounces. How is this any different than the feudal societies of medieval Europe? I think basically the problem is that we are divided between those that think greed is the problem and those that think greed is the answer.

    Like

  40. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    George,
    I didn’t see the comment. Let me read it now and get back to you.

    Like

  41. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Gregory wrote: “..whose education consists of an A.A. from LA City College, and a history of Democratic activism doesn’t bode well for the facts mandersonation so uncritically flung into the fan.”
    Nice smear. Want to try to smear this guy too? http://www.icn.ucl.ac.uk/Research-Groups/awareness-group/group-members/MemberDetails.php?Title=Dr&FirstName=Ryota&LastName=Kanai
    It appears Dr. Kanai has a pretty good resume, and performed a similar study. Are you completely discounting any and all of this type of research? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_orientation
    BTW, my name is Micheal Anderson, not mandersonation. I’ve asked you politely numerous times to knock it off, but I know you continue to use it because that is what disagreeable people do.
    Perhaps we could politely ask Dr. Kanai to examine your brain to find out what is wrong with it?

    Like

  42. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Oh Wow, I posted a long response for you 9:09 comment George and it has vanished. Is there a way for you to try and retrieve in the internet black hole.

    Like

  43. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 1153am – Damn Ben, I am sorry to hear that. I have no way of retrieving ‘it’, since the information TypePad lets me access is only on comments that have been posted. You may recall that I warned commenters about composing in the provided text box, and doing so in a browser tab that has aged sufficiently to trigger TypePad’s timeout for a user session. Apparently TypePad does not keep comments posted in a timed out session.
    The solution for not losing one’s lengthy prose or pearls of wisdom is to always compose in a separate text editor (e.g. MS Word), and then copy into the comment text box before posting. Also, if the browser tab for your last access to a comment stream has grown a beard, then it’s always good to hit the refresh button on your browser, that starts the TypePad clock on a new user session.
    Please try to reconstruct your response, since it forms a major link in the thread on wealth creation and distribution. Thanks.

    Like

  44. Russ Steele Avatar

    BenE@11:53AM
    You should use a text editor and paste in the text. Not a word processor like Word, but a true ASCI text editor, unless you save the Word file as plain text. Typepad has a time out function. If you type a long message, the time can expired and the message goes in the bit bucket in the sky, lost for ever.

    Like

  45. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Thanks guys. I know better but my time on RR or the internet in general are comprised of a few minutes here and there throughout the day. I get voice mail via email or evoice and I need to check it periodically throughout the day and that is when I get a chance to make my social media rounds. Writing it the way suggested would probably eliminate 90% of my typo’s and grammatical errors but as I have said before I am typing conversation not writing an academic paper.
    It will have to wait until later tonight I have a softball practice and basketball practice to go coach and then go celebrate 6 Nevada Union graduating basketball Seniors high school athletic careers tonight that I have either coached in basketball or softball over the years.

    Like

  46. TheMikeyMcD Avatar

    Ben, I am sad to miss Senior Night tonight. The girls finished 1st place in league! #congratsLadyMiners

    Like

  47. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    re: Ben E at 9:51 – ‘Can you please tell me the process of a human being starving to death?’
    Joe the K already explained that. ‘ I find it horrendous that while one person has multiple vacation homes that sit empty another person starves to death.’
    Apparently there is some sort of direct relationship between the number of empty vacation homes and human starvation. You will note that I’ve tried to get an explanation of how this works, but per usual, I just get more questions. How there was starvation in the world prior to the existence of vacation homes is also a mystery that has yet to be explained. Since you’re not going to answer my questions, you can also not comment on my wonderment as to how only money from the world’s richest men helps the starving masses, but money from the lefties of the world has no effect. Same amount of money going to the same magical account that will stop all starvation, (4 times over, to boot) but it just doesn’t seem to work. Gee, that means you lefties can go on about your business as usual, while the world’s wealthiest are still on the hook as the only ones in the world that can spend their magic money in the magic way that will stop starvation.

    Like

  48. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Scott,
    Have you ever held a baby?
    I’ve asked for a simple request and you refuse to do it. Can you please explain the process of a person starving to death? What is happening to the body that makes it shut down?

    Like

  49. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Mickey,
    I sat behind your parents and possibly your kids or nieces. Not even a close game for the girls and the boys pulled one out at the wire. Nice to be part of so many young people lives and getting to watch them grow up. It was a special night for Pleasant Valley families. A group of girls that have been playing together since Williams Ranch Days played their last league game at the high school level together tonight. At least the first playoff game will be at home next week. Opponent will be announced tomorrow. The second game will be at NU as well but first lets get through Tuesday before we start talking about another game.

    Like

  50. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Ben – This exchange is done. Adults having a discussion will allow some leeway but, but it seems that when ever you lefties post an nonsensical statement and I ask for clarification, all I receive are more questions that you demand that I answer. We can have some fun here and learn things from each other, but this has become a one way street. The starting point of all of this was that lefties are allowed to have some sort of trumped up indignation about social ills that they hold to be theirs alone. The solution is always that some other economic group must start acting in a certain way to alleviate the problem, while the holy and agitated left feel they have done their part by merely feeling a certain way. Others that don’t agree to the non-solution are then castigated as uneducated, uncaring, racist, hateful etc. Humans that die due to lack of food and water as an on-going tragedy of life is a serious problem in many parts of the world. The root causes are manifold and can be dealt with in time. Viable solutions, however will involve concerted action by a variety of countries and it will involve at some point considerable military action. Also, some ethnic and tribal groups will have to be instructed that they will no longer be allowed to act as they want. But this isn’t likely to occur any time soon, so small scale attempts here and there by various relief agencies will have to suffice. If you would like to involve yourself in such efforts, fine. Trying to transfer the blame to people that own vacation homes as a cause of human starvation, is a childish and nonsensical exercise.

    Like

Leave a comment