SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Paul Buchheit reports via AlterNet
While Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning and John Kiriakou are vilified for revealing vital information about spying and bombing and torture, a man who conspired with Goldman Sachs to make billions of dollars on the planned failure of subprime mortgages was honored by New York University for his "Outstanding Contributions to Society".
This is one example of the distorted thinking leading to the demise of a once-vibrant American society. There are other signs of decay:
- A House Bill Would View Corporate Crimes as "Honest Mistakes"
- Almost 2/3 of American Families Couldn't Afford a Single Pill of a Life-Saving Drug
- Violent Crime Down; Prison Population Doubles
- One in Four Americans Suffer Mental Illness; Mental Health Facilities Cut by 90 Percent
- The Unpaid Taxes of 500 Companies Could Pay for a Job for Every Unemployed American ...for two years ...at the nation's median salary of $36,000 ...for all 8 million unemployed.
Citizens for Tax Justice reports that Fortune 500 companies are holding over $2 trillion in profits offshore to avoid taxes that would amount to over $600 billion. Our society desperately needs infrastructure repair, but 8 million potential jobs are being held hostage beyond our borders.
Previous: Cost of Daraprim Medication Raised by Over 50 Times
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 08 2015, @04:09PM
He gambled many people's money to enrich himself. Fuck him. That's whats not to like. I can waste my money on my own.
(Score: 3, Touché) by isostatic on Tuesday December 08 2015, @04:34PM
Even better, that's just what a good capitalist does, minimal risk, maximum profits. America! Fuck Yeah!
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday December 08 2015, @05:33PM
And what's wrong with that? If he can convince people to invest in his ideas (as long as there's no deception involved), then he deserves the profit he negotiated. Just because one party gets a larger share of the profit doesn't mean that all parties aren't better off or those that got less were slighted.
The thing that's a real disservice to those who start with minimal capital is the marketing and social pressure to spend beyond your means. If we valued sound financial planning rather than who can accumulate the most flashy crap, then there wouldn't be so many people living paycheck to paycheck just to keep up with rent and the minimum payments on their seven maxed out credit cards. Heck, just teach people how to use debt effectively and how/why to avoid it otherwise and we'd be much better off. But Home Economics classes are sexist, so we can't teach those anymore. :eyeroll:
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday December 08 2015, @05:51PM
There's nothing wrong with it, that's my point. It's the american dream in action. Not everyone wins, in fact most will lose, but everyone has a chance.
Home Economics classes are sexist, so we can't teach those anymore.
They were renamed to "Family and consumer science" [aafcs.org] in one of those bullshit left-wing feel-good policies.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday December 08 2015, @06:17PM
They were renamed to "Family and consumer science" in one of those bullshit left-wing feel-good policies.
Except they forgot to actually include anything about how to manage your personal finances in the curriculum. Instead you can learn about how self-esteem is the most important thing in child development and how any form of corporal punishment is child abuse which should be reported to the police immediately.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday December 08 2015, @06:43PM
Were those facets ever in home economoics? In the past you had a job, earned a wage, and spent it on things you needed. Simples.
Nowadays you're supposed to have investment portfoilos.
As a rich capitalist, in order to make more money, I need the rest of the world to buy shiny things which give me a hugh markup for little risk.
Why would I fund a government that teaches people they don't need to buy new trinkets?
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday December 08 2015, @07:02PM
If the government teaches them how to earn more money and then use that money to acquire even more money, after a while they can afford many more or higher cost trinkets. I don't think sales of shiny things would stop, just slow temporarily until the purchasing power caught back up and then would accelerate faster and faster after that. Everyone likes shiny things and they'd definitely buy more if they had the money. A bit of collective delayed gratification would go a long way to fixing the economy.