The house will be total out of control also, not that it wasnt already.

Some conservative and progresssive thinkers have acknowledged the damaging results of a laissez-faire ideology, which furthers the concentration of productive capital ownership. They are floundering in search of alternative thinking as they acknowledge the negative economic and social realities resulting from greed capitalism. This acknowledgment encompasses the realization that the troubling economic and social trends (global capitalism, free-trade doctrine, tectonic shifts in the technologies of production and the steady off-loading of American manufacturing and jobs) caused by continued concentrated ownership of productive capital will threaten the stability of contemporary liberal democracies and dethrone democratic ideology as it is now understood.

Without a policy shift to broaden productive capital ownership simultaneously with economic growth, further development of technology and globalization will undermine the American middle class and make it impossible for more than a minority of citizens to achieve middle-class status.

Binary economics, whose originator was political economist Louis O. Kelso, and the various credit mechanisms derived from its understanding are not “socialist” or “communist” solutions but are based on the principles and dynamics of a free market economy. When understood, the current system is exposed as a system rigged to continually concentrate the ownership of capital in the 1 to 5 percent of the population. Also exposed are the dire moral implications of the current system, which is presently propelled by greed in our society. A new system that would ensure equal opportunity for every child, woman, and man to acquire productive capital with the earnings of capital and broaden its ownership universally does not require people to be any better than they presently are, but it does enable our society to leverage both greed and generosity in a way that honestly recognizes and harnesses productive capital as the factor that exponentially produces the wealth in a technologically advanced society.

The resulting impact of our current approaches has been plutocratic government and concentration of capital ownership, which denies every citizen his or her pursuit of economic happiness (property). Market-sourced income (through concentrated capital ownership) has concentrated in individuals and families who will not recycle it back through the market as payment for consumer products and services. They already have most of what they want and need so they invest their excess in new productive power, making them richer and richer through greater capital ownership. This is the source of the distributional bottleneck that makes the private property, market economy ever more dysfunctional. The symptoms of dysfunction are capital ownership concentration and inadequate consumer demand, the effects of which translate into poverty and economic insecurity for the 99 percent majority of people who depend entirely on wages from their labor or welfare and cannot survive more than a week or two without a paycheck. The production side of the economy is under-nourished and hobbled as a result.

We need to reevaluate our tax and central banking institutions, as well as, labor and welfare laws. We need to innovate in such ways that we lower the barriers to equal economic opportunity and create a level playing field based on anti-monopoly and anti-greed fairness and balance between production and consumption. In so doing, every citizen can begin to accumulate a viable capital estate without having to take away from those who now own by using the tax system to redistribute the income of capital workers. What the “haves” do lose is the productive capital ownership monopoly they enjoy under the present unjust system. A key descriptor of such innovation is to find the ways in which “have nots” can become “haves” without taking from the “haves.” Thus, the reform of the “system,” as Kelso postulated, “must be structured so that eventually all citizens produce an expanding proportion of their income through their privately owned productive capital and simultaneously generate enough purchasing power to consume the economy’s output.”

Implementing this agenda will effectively meet the challenge set by Pope Francis. It’s time good and well-intentioned people woke up and adopted a Just Third Way paradigm (http://cesj.org/learn/just-third-way/) beyond the greed model of monopoly, “hoggist” capitalism and the envy model of the traditional welfare state. This will promote peace, prosperity, and freedom through harmonious justice.

I love it, Pope Franics, the CEO of the wealthiest corporation in the world, the Catholic Church, telling me I am greedy.

This is about the right and wrong... good and bad

The definitions of which, in current human minds, have been lost

Ethics and morality have disappeared

We are experiencing nihilism, fascism, lack of humanity going down to the level of animal behaviour

Is this where we are at in the West?

Back in 1776, Adam Smith point out that it is GREED that moves the economy forward. Take "REAL LEMON", you know that lemon concentrate that come is a bottle ... they make a point of offering a good product to the public. Why? Becasue they are GREEDY, they want more sales, and they want customers to return. In all business transaction people want to exchange that which has less value to them for that which has more ... both the buyer and seller want to make a "profit" on the transaction. .... Greed makes the world goes round ... a young man wants (greed) the love of a woman, so he trys to offer the young lady what she wants ... it is all base on what the economist call Greed. Some people are dishonest, and that is another issue all together.

I think what Republicans would say is government greed is worse than private greed, since market pressure can reduvce excess profits in the private sector.

I just read an article in Florida Sun Sentinel "Unemployment Benefits Fall out of Reach" stating that only 12% of unemployed in Florida qualify for unemployment benefits because of roadblocks placed in the way of recipients qualifying for it. And of those only 39% ever get a check.

When I see the cost our small business pays into Unemployment insurance, I have to wonder where all that money is going.

Call to the "journalist" said she didn't extend the questions that far (or apparently didn't make the connection).

Call to my state rep didn't have the breakdown available and forwarded me to Jeff Atwater (the state bean-counter) who's number "is not available to my area code."

Curious.

Patti in Ft. Lauderdale

We almost had one -- Kerry. I know of one Priest that wanted to excommunicate him for his being for Pro-Choice. Makes you wonder how many Catholic communities may have been told not to vote for him.

And 18,000-18,500 was the top... as suggested over a year ago...

Guessing the money in political coffers is predeominantly spent on paying

ad agencies to make and air political ads.

This suggests the quickest way to constrict money in politics is to go after the rules

used by the FCC on who gets TV time, and how much time do they get.

The Repubs will scream "thought police" and such FCC rule changes would go to the

supreme court.

So better have a few judge changes on the Supreme Court before trying this plan.

Still, it looks far more doable than a constitutional amendment.

ct

I think more money should be spent .... however, I also think that the air media (TV & Radio) should be required to give a certain amount of free time for the candidates to address issues, perhaps a 3 minutes min. for each candidate, and it has to be on an issue, not just I.m good person and he/she is a bad person..