HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » yurbud » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 58 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Sun Jul 11, 2004, 07:58 PM
Number of posts: 37,106

Journal Archives

SIROTA: Clinton financier & potential Treas Sec - pushing plan to shift retirees' savings to Wall St

My vote for Hillary will not be a vote for this.

Can someone please debunk this with Hillary's track record on Social Security.

While Hillary Clinton has spent the presidential campaign saying as little as possible about her ties to Wall Street, the executive who some observers say could be her Treasury Secretary has been openly promoting a plan to give financial firms control of hundreds of billions of dollars in retirement savings. The executive is Tony James, president of the Blackstone Group.

The investment colossus is most famous in politics for its Republican CEO likening an Obama tax plan to a Nazi invasion. James, though, is a longtime Democrat — and one of Clinton’s top fundraisers. The billionaire sculpted the retirement initiative with a prominent labor economist whose work is supported by another investment mogul who is a big Clinton donor. The proposal has received bipartisan praise from prominent economic thinkers, and James says that Clinton’s top aides are warming to the idea.

It is a plan that proponents say could help millions of Americans — but could also enrich another constituency: the hedge fund and private equity industries that Blackstone dominates and that have donated millions to support Clinton’s presidential bid.

The proposal would require workers and employers to put a percentage of payroll into individual retirement accounts “to be invested well in pooled plans run by professional investment managers,” as James put it. In other words, individual voluntary 401(k)s would be replaced by a single national system, and much of the mandated savings would flow to Wall Street, where companies like Blackstone could earn big fees off the assets. And because of a gap in federal anti-corruption rules, there would be little to prevent the biggest investment contracts from being awarded to the biggest presidential campaign donors.


IRONIC: if it's as easy for Trump to get laid as he says in that tape...

why did he have to go all the way to some impoverished Eastern European country to find two out of three wives?

Maybe unhappy establishment politicians aren't the only ones who want to "dump Trump."

this was already the strangest election ever, worse than 2000. Now it looks we will have only one

credible major party candidate.

Has that ever happened since George Washington?

How would Trump rate the wives, mothers, and daughters of the guys who plan to vote for him?

and would that average Joe want the women in his life to be treated like that?

Democrats ought to kill the GOP "experience doesn't matter" crap

There is some minimal amount of experience in government someone must have to be president.

Even our last president with no elective experience, Dwight D. Eisenhower, had very comparable experience as supreme allied commander in Europe, wrangling our allies to work together.

A businessman, especially one who starts at or near the top by virtue of birth, does not know how to persuade people who aren't already on his side.

On an unrelated point, as we saw with Baby Bush and Cheney, when you make a businessman president, he won't run the government LIKE a business, he will run it AS an extension of his own business.

You can take that to the bank.

Bush and Cheney did, and Trump certainly will.

Cartoon: The unpersuadable (how Trump could win the election)

Props to Tom Tomorrow

Do any Dem PACs run ads in Red states about governors refused free medicaid $$$?

It seems like that would be a good short and long term investment and maybe put some Republicans who thought they were safe on the defensive.

What's the best short story by known author about death of a loved one?

Can I post polls asking what positions we want Hillary to take on issues without it being locked?

Some of her more centrist supporters might see it as an attack, but my intent is to show if we vote for her, what we want to see done in exchange.

The Broken Chessboard: Brzezinski Gives Up on Empire

In retrospect, Brzezinski's book, THE GRAND CHESSBOARD, reads like the "to do list" of everything that has happened in foreign policy in the last 20 years.

His ideas were also echoed in the Project for a New American Century, that essentially said we should grab all we can before Russia, China, and other emerging powers get their shit together. I'm using "we" very loosely. 99.9999% of us don't benefit from being the world's only superpower anymore than a factory worker in Britain did at the end of the 19th century.

This sounds like the masters announcing through their trusted servant that the smash and grab is over--it's time to make nice before everybody else gets together and fights back.

You know what would have been nice though? If we skipped the last 20 years of killing people in Eurasia, getting our troops killed there, and squandering our wealth making more enemies, and just got to the part where we make nice with the emerging powers and create a stable world together.

But then the very wealthiest Americans wouldn't have been able to stuff their pockets with quite so much of other people's money, most Americans being other people too.

The main architect of Washington’s plan to rule the world has abandoned the scheme and called for the forging of ties with Russia and China. While Zbigniew Brzezinski’s article in The American Interest titled “Towards a Global Realignment” has largely been ignored by the media, it shows that powerful members of the policymaking establishment no longer believe that Washington will prevail in its quest to extent US hegemony across the Middle East and Asia. Brzezinski, who was the main proponent of this idea and who drew up the blueprint for imperial expansion in his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, has done an about-face and called for a dramatic revising of the strategy. Here’s an excerpt from the article in the AI:

“As its era of global dominance ends, the United States needs to take the lead in realigning the global power architecture.

Five basic verities regarding the emerging redistribution of global political power and the violent political awakening in the Middle East are signaling the coming of a new global realignment.

The first of these verities is that the United States is still the world’s politically, economically, and militarily most powerful entity but, given complex geopolitical shifts in regional balances, it is no longer the globally imperial power.” (Toward a Global Realignment, Zbigniew Brzezinski, The American Interest)

Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 58 Next »