Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Kend ~ No one judges or hates you for that. We are discussing the elimination of Billionaires. If you need $1+Billion to drive a Lincoln and take 2 months vacation you really aren't capable of managing money and should have someone else take care of it for you.
Actually, I think everyone should be able to afford the perks that you speak of even if their gross worth is far less than $1 Million. Hopefully, by redistributing some of that opulent wealth at the top that will become a reality for all--including minimum wage earners.
Mark you are wrong again. Americans have the biggest interest next to Canadians. Then the Chinese. canada changed its ownership laws after a Chinese company brought the biggest oil company in Canada, Nexen. most of the big players in the oil sands are owned by public companies. you know like your 401 k.
It is true that the Koch brothers have invested hundreds of millions up here. Do you blame them for taking their money out of the country After the bashing they get down there. They are building a huge upgrader about 200 miles north of me. Hundreds and hundreds of jobs. It's not just them investors from all over the world are pouring in here as Alberta is the only place on earth that knows that we need oil still and we welcome development.
It is also very well know that we also have the toughest environmental laws in the world. So the energy business here is ethical and sustainable. That is why we have a plus six employment rate for trades and skills. No any we need help.
Alice, funny thing as I was reading Thoms comments I was thinking the same. "shut up Ken". LOL
i don't what to be a aristocrat. I love where I am. I have a very good Life. But I do think if someone does what to be aristocrat who am I to judge or get in the way of them. Personally I just wanted to drive Linclon instead of a Fusion. I justed wanted to have 8 weeks holidays instead of 2 or 3. I worked hard and it happened. Why do you judge or hate me for that. Why do you want to take that opportunity away from anyone. I will never understand that with Liberals.
Chuck, over the past few decades I think we've forgotten what good government is. Myself included. Just been too long since we've seen it. - AIW
stecoop001 ~ Well said! I agree. MONEY is God in our society; and, it is the main driving motivation of every behavior. Even if you don't particularly agree with that, in order to influence society you have to compete with others who do. Especially if you own a business of any kind; and, as we all know, Thom is a very successful businessman many times over.
However, like Chuck said:
One thing we often forget in this race to the "bottom line" oriented society is that good business means happy customers. Pleasing customers is what we really should focus on. The most successful businesses are the ones with the happiest customers. Thom knows this. He has learned this lesson over, and over, and over through experience. For this reason, he has evolved in the business community to the level of realizing that only by pleasing his demographic is any "MONEY" ever going to be made for his sponsors. Likewise, his various sponsors are also only interested in that "bottom line" and don't really care if Thom sings bird calls for 3 hours to maximize it.
Therefore, both you and chuckle8 are right!
In one word - MONEY! There's money in supporting the left, there's money in supporting the right, and there's money in supporting both sides at the same time, as long as doing so doesn't drive money away. Some broadcasters don 't really care which side the money is coming from, as long as it keeps coming. And, yes, there are many broadcasters that take sides.
AIW -- I should mention the only problem I see with strong labor unions is that "Mother Earth" does not have a seat at the table.
AIW -- Other than the conotation, I do not see the difference between welfare and a stable, permanent, guaranteed income whether a person works or not. We should deal with automation they way we always have until the Taft-Hartley Act. That is, have strong labor unions to say what the length of the work week will be.
Alice -- I responded to this topic somewhere else. The policies of LBJ were driving the poverty level down quickly. Do you know how they measure poverty? The repugs say we do not truthfully report poverty. They say we do not count the welfare they receive as part of their income. I would think we, the left, would count it both ways; that is, with and without welfare.
Chuck, neither Gary nor I are talking about welfare. We're talking about a stable, permanent, guaranteed income whether a person works or not; no social worker to have to answer to, no paperwork, no strings, no qualification except citizenship.
If I understand him correctly, Gary is advocating a piece of equity given every U.S. citizen at birth, to be invested and allowed to grow until each child reaches maturity. Everyone owning a piece of the pie.
I think your point about Buy American and tariffs is a good one. But it still doesn't resolve the problems posed by automation. I'm not convinced that returning to old policies like these, or even the old tax code, would solve such problems completely. Like Gary says, in their quest to cut labor costs, various companies have turned to automation, which inevitably translates to fewer workers hired.
I'm not advocating that we scrap old policies that have served us well. However I question whether they address every single obstacle workers are facing now, in the 21st Century. - Aliceinwonderland
Alice -- My point (and Look magazine) was the tax structure of the 60's would have kept anyone from becoming a billionaire. That is, you do not need a top tax of 100% to stop the creation of billionaires. You should look at poverty rates in the US. When dems are in office the rate continually decreases. I think we on the left undersell how effective a good government is. They stumble around and yet do wonderful things.
stecoop1 -- I think Thom's higher-ups is us; especially on Free Speech TV.
AIW -- Before raygun, didn't welfare take care of one's right to life and life's most basic necessities? At least, LBJ was working towards that goal. I believe the tax structure of 30's, 40's etc to raygun would put a suffiecient number of cards back in the workers hand; that is, tariffs, 96% top tax rate, Buy American Act of 1936 etc. If you, like I, want the 1% begging for our help we could also throw in eVerify. The tax structure and regulations of FDR and LBJ had the 1% so scared that they came up with the Powell memo. What I am saying is that we have a proven policy, so why come up with something new.
Chuck, that seems a fair enough question. What's different is that, as Gary points out, labor is less in demand than in past decades, due to job outsourcing and automation. All the cards are stacked on the employer's side of the table, giving business owners and higher-ups way too much power over people's lives and destinies. Were Gary's ideas to be implemented, one's survival need not be so contingent on the job market. It would also eliminate the issue of what to do for those who can't work, an issue that has never been satisfactorily resolved; particularly for those younger than retirement age. I happen to believe one's right to life and life's most basic necessities should not be dependent upon one's employability, or status in the job market. - AIW
AIW -- This world we live in now seems very much like the 1920's. What do you think is so different? The detail I would want is how does the janitor become invested in the capital of the US? A brief description of the law that would make that happen.
Palindromedary ~ You are right. Lots of people were inconvenienced that day. Many had to take BART to work. Not that being forced to take BART is a bad thing--especially if you are addicted to using the car for that commute. In retrospect, having to get rid of those vehicles was probably a blessing in disguise too. I really didn't have the time back then to deal with them. Neither did my father. They sure would have been nice to have around now though. Nevertheless, the experience felt more like a punch in the nose than any kind of favor.
As far as any other real victims of the tanker accident, that would mostly be local companies who use trucks and depend on that freeway interchange. Since the MacArthur maze is right next to the ports and the railroad I suppose the owners of those establishments were having fits too. No doubt all the companies and Corporations that depend on that little critical piece of infrastructure along with the city also took a big punch in the nose. Oh well, what are you going to do? Accidents happen!
Palindromedary ~ Interesting question. I can't say for sure that Thom or Louise writes anything; however, I'm almost certain that they direct the subject and content. Can't say for sure if they do any proof reading though.
As far as reading our blog posts, you might be right; however, if they ignored them completely I would be shocked and amazed. You see, Thom has 3 hours of air time to fill every day. He appeals strongly to a select audience demographic. Which means he has to both familiarize himself with current events, select what events he wants to target, and then pick the one topic of the day he wants to focus on. That golden topic has to be both relevant and interesting to his demographic. Our blog posts actually help to serve as a valuable tool in narrowing down that decision making process.
Surely you noticed how following our discussions about 9/11 how Thom actually dedicated a show to answering questions that he never before even entertained about the subject? Surely you don't think that was a coincidence? The same could be said about our discussions of the TPP, Social Security, SCOTUS, and Campaign Finance Reform. I've noticed this type of follow up on key discussions on this thread many times. Remember, Thom wants to make a difference in the world, however he needs a successful show to do that. Keeping his show alive means keeping his sponsors well fed. He needs to keep his listeners glued to the radio. The bottom line to doing that is by picking topics that are not only relevant, but have immediate appeal to his listeners.
This blog is something of a sophisticated polling mechanism that provides in depth feedback from his more "informed" and "passionate" audience members. When people like Rush Limpballs and others spend big money generating such input from their misguided, ignorant, and illiterate audience, who in their right mind would ignore such a convenient and totally free tool such as this blog? Thom himself may not read it; however, if he doesn't pay someone to read it, and carefully consider what is being said... it would really boggle my mind.
Thom! I use to listen to you on the radio when U talked about the Bush "crime family". I thought that was so challenging... to say a sitting President was a member of a crime family... and so astute!
So I see U R on RT. RT has a lot going for it... including censorship!
What happened to the documentary Filet Oh Fish?! It was CENSORED! Was it due to the discussion of the toxic effects of Russian fish farms?
Aliceinwonderland ~ Thanks for those kind words. I needed that. I had to check my blood pressure while writing that post. The sentiment "I will friggin' DIE before anyone seals our house," is surely shared. Your comment about Crazy Horse and Chief Joseph was both amusing and soooo true.
I missed the live show, but heard part of the replay including a caller named, Steve, that sounded like he wanted to talk about gerrymandering (but didn't us the term). He mentioned the census and redistricting and Thom, you just went flying away to an different place - without letting him make his point.
Which I think, from having listened to the caller, was not why does the Census Bureau collect all that data, but rather why do they provide it to redistricters (since it facillites gerrymandering and is not part of what the Constitution says is needed in order to determine how many representatives a State gets).
What's the point of having real callers (instead of staged shills) if you're not going to field their actual questions? Or only half listen to them because you're trying to read a blog or something else at the same time?
Devaluing people (expecting them to give you their full attention while only returning a portion of one's own) is another way to say "you don't matter".
We expect this from the Kochs et al because we know that's what they think about everyone else - so it doesn't hurt the same as when a more enlightened person does it.
There was a point on Friday's Big Picture Lone Lib segment when there was a graphic of the question being dealt with (equal pay) so when the panel went off topic I was reminded of what the original question was at a glance. Of course, it also afforded the host the opportunity to point to the graphic for emphasis if he chose. Maybe it's just me but changing the subject is an irritating tactic when used by any side of an issue. IMHO, a data graphic is even better in directing attention in a debate.
Before turning in for the night, Marc, I just want to say how horrified I am to read of your ordeal with those lien-mean corporate pirates trying to steal your dad's house. Ohmygod... what are we coming to?!!! I'm so sorry you went through that, my friend.
I will friggin' DIE before anyone steals our house.
I visualize the ghost of someone like Crazy Horse or ole Chief Joseph returning from the spirit world, just for the satisfaction of telling us: "Your turn, whitey!" Yep, tag we're it. Now we're the new "indians"! Time to don some war paint an' git ready to raise hell... maybe even whack the scalps off a few pirates while we're at it. - AIW
All right "stecoop"; point well taken. Then why haven't these "higher-ups" not objected or taken offense to Rush Limpballs' or Glenn Beck's ugly, toxic rants against women, minorities and poor folks?! - AIW
Swell, Mark. Toodle-oo.
Just so happens that David Koch is an occasional visitor here in our humble little coastal town of Coos Bay, schmoozing with the Port authorities over that LNG export facility he and his pals are determined to ram down our throats.
Incidentally, a few weeks ago in Plymouth, Washington near the Oregon/Washington border, there was an explosion at a much smaller LNG facility than the one proposed for Coos Bay. Ain't that special. Five workers were injured, one badly burned; luckily no one died. Hundreds of residents and workers within a two-mile radius of the facility had to be evacuated.
What must we do to be rid of these oilgarchs?!
Meanwhile in the blog following this article in The Oregonian, some guy calling himself "OttomanEmpire" left a post that grabbed my attention. This douchebag says "If Coos Bay blows up, or the whole town becomes nauseated from the fumes, so what? Or when the subduction zone slips and shakes the tanks down, then the tsunami washes away the 'containment' walls, no great loss. Coos Bay is an armpit of a town anyway. It would be a shame about Astoria though…"
Gee how nice. My home town, no great loss... To him. So what if we get sick or die; no big deal. To him. Wow what a prince! Frankly, I don't care how unladylike this sounds; I could knock his fucking block off. - Aliceinwonderland
Hey Alice, I heard Thom say the Kochs own most of the Canadian tar sands oil. Now we know who Kend works (shills) for.
Anyway, I gotta go now. Gotta put in another twelve hour day working through the temp agency in one of several sweat shops to support his lifestyle.
See ya.