“It is imperative that the Senate, in a bipartisan way, comes up with crippling sanctions against the ICC — not only to support Israel but to deter any future action against American personnel,” Graham said.
In this time of political division, it’s good to see there is still at least one thing liberals and conservatives agree on, and that is that the US and Israel must be allowed to commit war crimes without consequences.
i’m not about to liquidate my accounts just to stick it to the man.
I didn’t say you should. I am saying that under the current model, investors, including individuals whose retirement accounts are tied to the stock market, need to accept and allow for periodic market corrections, otherwise asset bubbles will form, making much more severe crashes inevitable. The problem is, investors don’t plan for or are willing to accept periodic corrections, they will only accept their accounts going up, at an increasing rate, forever. Needless to say, that is impossible.
But until we come up with a better system, cheering for the collapse of the stock market hurts pretty much everyone
We’d better come up with a better system fast because regardless of who is or is not cheering for what, no asset market goes up in value forever. Market corrections are a natural part of any market cycle and many people believe the stock markets are generally overvalued at present. Some people would even say that the current market “bubble” is being propped up by people who don’t want a correction to occur because it would mean a decrease in their retirement savings, but all that does is all but guarantee that when the inevitable correction does occur, it will be more severe than it needed to be.
I give the Democrats a really hard time (mainly because I have much higher expectations for them, and so I hold them to a much higher standard than the Republicans), but I can’t deny that Democrats, generally, listen to experts and follow their guidance much more than Republicans. I would even say the Democratic party is somewhat of a technocratic party, for better or worse. It is in this light that the apparent “flip flop” regarding unions should be seen. Both parties became anti-union during the neoliberal era because economists were largely anti-union. Their models or formulas were telling them that unions were bad, so that became the orthodox position of mainstream economics, and Democrats trusted in their expertise. Now, many mainstream economists have decided that unions are good, actually, and so Democrats have once again followed the experts. I’m not sure what changed in the economists’ models or formulas that made them rethink their position on unions, but then economics has always been a bit of a mess.
This is America. We’re all in a zero sum, winner take all contest for wealth, status, and power. It’s every man for himself. It’s not just that people don’t want to pay for other kids to get a good education, it’s that they want their kids to have every advantage possible. They will openly admit as much. They don’t just want their kids to get a good education, they want their kids to get a better education than everyone else. Inequality is the goal. Inequality doesn’t happen by accident, it’s completely intentional. When life is a competition, everyone is an opponent. You don’t help your opponent, you try to gain every advantage possible.
Everyone always forgets the “it just works,” easy, normie distributions like Fedora. I guess people figure if you’re looking for an OS like that, you might as well just use Windows, but I’d rather not.
It certainly seems that in the vast majority of cases, shareholders feel their trust is best honored when profits are maximized, and that their trust is violated when profits are insufficient.
What happens when distinctive cultural tradition collides with corporate America?
Corporations have a fiduciary obligation to maximize profit for shareholders. That is the primary reason for their existence. It is not to meet a need, promote well being, or respect cultural traditions, it’s only to maximize profit. If in the pursuit of maximum profits a corporation does end up meeting some need or promoting well being, it is incidental. Popular theory is that the companies that best meet their consumers needs will also be the most profitable, but reality is much more complicated than that and this theory often doesn’t hold up, which is unfortunate because it is the basis for our entire economic system. We have built our entire economic system on the idea that the pursuit of profit should be the highest ideal. I think we can now say conclusively that was a mistake.