In a history course I took over 10 years ago, my professor Bill Kaatz outlined the evolution of governments through tribal leaders, land lords, emperors, to the communists and republics of today. He suggested we were moving toward a "corporate government". I just found the following opinion interesting in light of that former statement by Prof Kaatz.

America's Democratic Collapse | Democracy and Elections | AlterNet

Professor Kaatz, by the way, did not suggest that this new form of government was good or bad. He merely took note of it.

__________________
Consumption is indeed important in a free economy: particularly the freedom of consumers to buy their goods in unhampered markets. However, key to long-term economic growth is investment (savings), which is the opposite of consumption. Public policies that promote consumption — such as low interest rates — do so at the expense of savings. Less savings means less investments; an economy that does not save or invest will consume all of its resources and eventually end up bankrupt.-David Saied

Actually, welfare reform was a part of the Contract With America by the republican majorities in Congress. Bill Clinton likes to claim credit for welfare reform, but in all reality is was a conservative idea put into motion by conservatives, and ultimately became a reality because of conservatives.

This professor clearly does not understand the concept of smaller government, and whines and complains about people getting off welfare rolls rather than realizing that they joined the work force and accepted personal responsibility for their own financial welfare.

Slashing entitlement programs decreases the dependency on them by Americans, shrinks the control of the government, and ultimately leads to a greater America because the unemployed are forced to actually earn their living rather than living off other taxpayers hard earned dollars.

So while Mr. Kaatz appears to be compassionate about the poor and needy, he is actually supporting a cause that is to the deteriment of the poor, forcing the poor to remain poor rather than making them independent and prosperous of their own accord.

Oh no, more power to those evil capitalists! RUN!

LOL. I would love to hear some details about this supposed "serfdom".

Really? Is Robert Gates the CEO of Boeing or something?

Corporate power, give me a break.

If it wasn't for the American people, there would be no corporations.

This professor talks about corporations as if they're an extension of the government's hand.

If anyone watched the congressional hearings with oil executives, they would realize that Corporate America and capitalism are furious at the feds.

What is true is it failed the citizens who wages failed to keep up with the ever increasing profit of the wealthy and a class of people who once were on Fortune 500 as millionaires are now listed as billionaires.
Yet how much do you have to put into savings each month? Or the ones on the middle rung of the ladder of life. And these same poor are now sharing the streets with families who once were considered middle class with hope , a home and a future. That some how went away for the profit of the wealthy.
I'm sure your training could make less of what I have said. But the fact is in 2008 we are not doings so well are we?

No, it forced people who didn't need welfare to get off of welfare. By removing that dependency, it encourages people to expand their wealth, and they ultimately are better off than they were with welfare.

Millionaires did become billionaires, but the new middle class is the old upper class now as well.

I personally don't care how much Bill Gates or Warren Buffet rakes in every year.

"That somehow went away for the profit of the wealthy"?

How did welfare reform magically take money from the poor and give it to the rich?

I doubt "middle-class" families were put out on the streets by welfare reform, as if they were truly "middle-class" they wouldn't be on welfare.

I know the dems think that you're rich if you have a family of 5 and make $75,000 a year, but the "middle-class" being put out on the streets by welfare reform? Give me a break.

Just a test, In what ways are "we" not doing so well?

__________________


The Good Ole USS Enterprise.

No. Bill Kaatz is not the author of this article. He was an old prof who suggested the next phase of "governing" would be the business world. He absolutely never took a liberal or conservative stance on history, even went out of his way to present all sides in hot topic issues.
I was merely reminded of his remarks when I read this opinion of Chris Hedges who made these remarks in a keynote address on Wednesday, May 28, at Furman University in South Carolina.
I am terribly sorry if I led readers to believe he (Kaatz) authored this. I merely wanted to give him credit for the prediction. However it plays out, I think that prediction came true. And some will see it as "the death knell for democracy" as this guy Chris Hedges. Others may think it is just another phase of social growth. Still others may welcome the "sensibleness" of putting successful businessmen in charge of social structure. Those views are debatable. And of course whether or not the prediction that business would rule countries instead of communism/democracies etc. is also debatable.
I just wanted to point out my error and clarify any misunderstanding.

__________________
Consumption is indeed important in a free economy: particularly the freedom of consumers to buy their goods in unhampered markets. However, key to long-term economic growth is investment (savings), which is the opposite of consumption. Public policies that promote consumption — such as low interest rates — do so at the expense of savings. Less savings means less investments; an economy that does not save or invest will consume all of its resources and eventually end up bankrupt.-David Saied

No, it was my error in thinking Kaatz authored this. Sorry.

__________________


The Good Ole USS Enterprise.

I agree with this statement.
In my opinion (and I know it's harsh) we should do away with welfare altogether except for aged, orphaned, or disabled persons. I would not qualify an illiterate person for welfare/housing/health care if that was the only disability.
Many would argue we will have a vast underclass out of work. The only problem I can foresee is we need to work on illegal immigration and revamp our worker visa program to become an adjunct to a system of vigilant recruitment of poor/undereducated Americans to work in those industries now filled by aliens.
Not everyone is college material. Not everyone is trade school material. Some would do well to pick fruit or be a maid and earn an honest living.

__________________
Consumption is indeed important in a free economy: particularly the freedom of consumers to buy their goods in unhampered markets. However, key to long-term economic growth is investment (savings), which is the opposite of consumption. Public policies that promote consumption — such as low interest rates — do so at the expense of savings. Less savings means less investments; an economy that does not save or invest will consume all of its resources and eventually end up bankrupt.-David Saied

LOL, yeah. Well, Mr. Obama thinks you're wrong and wants college education for every student that does community service first.

I can't think of any plan that Obama has that doesn't incorporate some kind of blatant socialism in it. "You can go to college at the taxpayer's expense, even though you goofed off in high school, provided you do some social work for the government and community first."

Now, that isn't an actual quote, but that's what he wants.

Obama is effectively taking away the need for students to try hard in high school, as they're getting into college no matter what.

Meanwhile, our education standards drop to another all-time low.

Great plan, Obama, great plan.

__________________


The Good Ole USS Enterprise.

My point is that not evey one on welfare was robbing the system. The govt. needs to stop those who don't deserve it from getting it. And with the removal there are still some who don't deserrve it getting a check, food stamp etc.

Quote: but the new middle class is the old upper class now as well. End Quote: You sure of that? Like evey one who was middle class 10 years ago are now that much better off even with the decline of manufacturing and the out sourcing of thousands of jobs.

Welfare reform didn't put any middle class familes into the streets but the Housing Crisis did. And who was behind that? We will know much more in the near future.
In fact I never mentioned welfare reform did I. Your training did you well. Your the one using that one to pass of our current economy situation, not me!