In politics, Wall Street ignores history | Christian Science Monitor

[patriotvoice]

Wall street wants - and expects - President Bush to be reelected. And like business in general, the financial industry gives far more campaign funds to Republicans than Democrats.

That's odd, in a way. Looking just at history, Wall Street is backing the wrong horse. The economy has done better under Democratic presidents than Republican ones since the 1940s.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0412/p17s01-cogn.html

[swag]

1. Yes, both the economy and the stock market have fared better

under Dems.

Well documented in several recent studies, including one by Jeremy Siegel in the 3rd Edition of "Stocks for the Long Run."

Still, Siegel is in love with that dividend tax cut, even though it hasn't had the effect he had predicted.

[NuttyFluffers]

3. ahh, but dems don't increase the *gap*

see, they, the democrats, bring economic prosperity for a lot of people, making the nation strong by spreading wealth and ramping up the economy. but what good is being obscenely wealthy if you face the prospects of having competitors? what good is the status of luxuries when they are broadly distributed? what is the point of medium-sized power when you can shoot for life-shattering power?

yes, the democrats (liberals) provide a stronger economy, but the republicans (conservatives) provide a real economic gap that collects and loards over power. that's what is wanted. prosperity is nice to make society better, but if you want control and power and loard it over those weaker than you with haughty arrogance then broad level prosperity is anathema...

[drfemoe]

4. Somebodies and Nobodies

Somebodies and Nobodies : Overcoming the Abuse of Rank
by Robert W. Fuller

From Publishers Weekly
Fuller, former president of Oberlin College, believes there is an insidious force in America that has heretofore gone unrecognized. This "disorder without a name," which he terms "rankism," is discrimination beyond race, gender or educational background. While Fuller observed rankism in action both at Oberlin and as a physics professor at Columbia University, he was only able to fully identify it when he was no longer affiliated with a university. "Lacking the protection of title and status in the years after Oberlin, I experienced what it's like to be taken for a nobody."
...
Somebodies and Nobodies unmasks rankism as The Feminine Mystique unmasked sexism. It demythologizes the prevailing social consensus -- the "Somebody Mystique" -- to demonstrate the pervasiveness and corrosiveness of rankism in our personal lives and social institutions. The book introduces new language and concepts that illuminate the subtle, often dysfunctional workings of power in our social interactions. It presents rankism as the last hurdle on the long road from aristocracy to a true meritocracy, brings into focus a dignitarian revolution that is already taking shape and offers a preview of post-rankist society.
...

Have you read this? I'm considering the purchase.

[mistertrickster]

2. They can't stop believing their own dogma, even though it keeps getting

proven false.

Subsidizing the rich does NOT help the economy. But when you're rich, you really, really want to believe that, don't you?

No point in changing one's opinion, just because the facts keep showing it to be wrong. That's what being a right-winger means.