Nice chit chat. Some people read the future, some people know it all. Revolutions are NOT on the way. So solution will be found by the same people that run the show before we get there(Revolutions). Sorry folks.

And as much as it seems possible that a few are running everything, this is something beyond our heads and possibilities to influence anyway. But we can still select somebody that will do at least a little for us comparing to the other guy that would not even care. that's why i agree with whoever says that in the long term parties have shown what they do and care about also in practical terms, thus it is still important to keep a political orientation in this sense(it could have a huge impact on your daily live, and not how banks are run, or what/how corporations are eaten up by other)

There are also other places apart form the US that are not so free and democratic and are doing pretty bad economy wise(state run corporations) as well as the recent events show pretty well. But this would wildly go off topic, right? (left? ; )

@Aria

Go back in posts. I asked you for specific charts.

As for now you fixed on one idea and try to find various supporting things. I highly admire it, but it also requires to look at the picture as a whole. This is why I asked to make you other charts.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

Our disputes seem to reach an impasse very quickly, but if you want the argument, it comes down to different understandings about how money is created, and the relationship between the banking system and Federal Reserve.

Economists like James Galbraith claim that there will always be demand among U.S. bank for securities issued in dollars and that this exchange can go on virtually forever, no matter how high the debt goes, without the threat of catastrophic inflation per 1920s Germany.

As these theories have never been tested in the real world (at least, not under the conditions which prevail in the U.S.), I wouldn't pretend to know the truth of the matter, and I can't argue either position with conviction. But it's an alternative view to the one you presented, which also has yet to be tested.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

I won't argue the matter here, but you might be interested in this discussion:

http://www.netrootsmass.net/2011/03/paul-krugman-gets-it-wrong-again/

@Aria

The whole "bankruptcy" claim is, in any event, nonsense. Countries which borrow in their own currencies don't go bankrupt in the technical sense of that word. Such countries may at some point have trouble attracting investors for their debt, or may have to pay higher interest rates, but a country as rich as this one is very far even from that point.

These same alarmist bankruptcy arguments have been made for years by the right-wing, because it can't stand public spending on anything but the military and business subsidies. You notice they don't talk about the "defense" budget as an "unfunded liability" (which in fact it is).

@pundit

Again, your point of view is of a highly privileged person, for whom policy differences have no consequences. Look at the long term, and there are very clear differences between the two parties. These differences have been felt in the daily lives of the poor and the middle-class for many years.

Without the Democratic party, there would be no social security, no Medicare, no civil rights' legislation, no environmental regulation, no public university system, etc. If the U.S. had been left to the Republicans, we would look, today, far more like China (without the economic growth) or the plantation South.

And though it's true that the differences between the two parties are growing more and more trivial, and in the end, government will always represent the interests of the powerful, there's no reason to suppose that, with pressure, the Democratic party couldn't be forced into being more representative of the public interest, as it once was.

@Bueller Is the thesis statement here that it is inevitable that the US will become bankrupt?

No. The US will not become bankrupt, the US IS bankrupt!

@Aria You're still caught up in the left/right paradigm. I'm not suggesting the Republicans are good, I'm saying both side are as bad as each other because they are controlled by the same 'men behind the curtain'. It is the Neo-Conservatives that promotes US hegemony around the globe. Most have made millions/billions from the wars they start and continue to wage. Don't doubt that there are those within the current administration with hidden Neo-Conservative agendas. The Neo-Conservatives, Israel and the Military Industrial Complex lobbyists continue to dictate US Military policy even when not in government... I won't call it US 'defense' policy because it rarely is.

As for the economic situation don't forget that the Glass-Steagall Act was dismantled during Bill Clinton's tenure. Not because he was a Democrat but because he was simply following orders. Clinton's mentor was Professor Carroll Quigley who wrote 'Tragedy and Hope'. Quigley was an 'insider' and privy to the inner workings of the elite establishment.

QUOTE: "The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland; a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank... sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world." - Carroll Quigley - 'Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time' (1966)

All I can say is do we really want the Conservatives running this country again? Do we really want to give them the keys to the car and again run us into a ditch? It amazes me how quickly people forget what got us here and who was crafting lies to get us into Iraq and who wants to keep the Wall Street regulations weak. Who wants to kill off the last of the Unions left in the US. Who wants to privatize everything in our society. Who wants to roll back womens rights. It just never stops.

Why? Is Obama calling for prosecutions for the rampant mortgage fraud they perpetrated in the lead up to the GFC?... I think not. Same with the political threats of financial regulation. Don't let the hollow rhetoric fool you. It's just hollow rhetoric. Wall Street is used to it. They bankroll the politicians. They call the shots. It's part of the game. It's business as usual. Obama reappointed most of the financial terrorists that blew up the economy under Bush. Bernanke, Geithner, Summers, etc etc. Talk about the foxes guarding the hen house! Like the Eurozone the US has a Goldman Sachs government!

For 70 years the Military Industrial Complex (the phrase coined by Eisenhower) and Wall Streets global attack dog, the CIA, have made many in the US extremely wealthy at the expense of much of the rest of the world. Don't forget it was WW2 that dragged the US out of the Great Depression and created the modern consumer society that is now being crushed under unsustainable debt.

Did you hear about the dog chewing on the bone? It got up to walk away to discover it had only three legs. This is America now.

Obama's biggest campaign contributors in 2008 were JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. How many Wall Street banksters are in jail? Would it be any different under the Republicans? No. Corporate fascism is the model irrespective of the guy in the White House. Both parties are simply two heads of the same snake.

The last President who challenged the establishment was JFK. No President has dared to since.

People are slowly waking to discover their American Dream is actually turning into a nightmare. Why do you think the Government is now turning its surveillance network and Police state against it's own people?

Labelling Occupy Wall Street protesters as 'domestic terrorists' may work in the short term but what scares the establishment is a mass awakening when millions take to the streets after they find their retirement savings are gone along with their homes and their children's future.

@pundit

Come on. It's the same old tired left versus right shell game.

It's certainly true that both parties are bought and paid for, and that Obama has been a disappointment in so many respects -- even worse than Bush, in some ways -- but your notion is one which only the privileged have the luxury of indulging.

There are, over time, very significant policy differences between the true parties -- life and death differences, revealed over many years. At least, that was our experience in the 20th century. We have at least some vestige of a decent welfare state and basic civil liberties, instead of third-world or feudal economics, because Democractic ideology prevailed over the Republicans, at least until the early 80s.

So there are differences, or at least, a possibility of differences. Giving up is an option only for the suicidal or the pampered. It's a pity there's no such thing as class consciousness in the U.S.

Come on. It's the same old tired left versus right shell game. It makes no difference who is is power. The main agendas continue regardless. Wars for profit, Corporatism, Bankster bailouts, Wall Street wealth transfers, Eco Fascism, Expansion of the police state, Loss of civil liberties etc. Politics, especially in America, is like wrestling. It's a big show full of lots of grunting and chest pounding and the fans wave their flags and cheer for their plastic teleprompting reading heros. But that's just a distraction. The script was already written prior to the opening round and the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Still the fans drink the Koolaid, buy their tickets, wave their flags... and learn absolutely nothing!

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy." - Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (Ask Bill Clinton about Carroll Quigley)