The single most important thing to do to address our current economic problems is:

[leftofthedial]

Poll question: The single most important thing to do to address our current economic problems is:

[leftstreet]

1. Kill Capitalism

[cali]

27. no thanks. I want it regulated. I want a mixed economy

I don't want to kill small "c" capitalism. And I sure as fuck don't want the government running everything.

[leftstreet]

39. "I don't want the govt running everything" is a rightwing talking point

But then you know that

[babylonsister]

2. I don't know. Do you? nt

[leftofthedial]

11. I go with demand-side stimulus

and the hope that the current corrupt banking system burns to the ground.

But do I *know*? :shrug:

I know throwing money at Wall Street is a waste of that money. I believe it will make our problems worse, not better, no matter how many of Geithner's buddies it makes happy.

[silverojo]

3. And give $$ to disabled & retirees on pensions

Not just tax breaks to working people. Because the disabled and retirees are the poorest people, who are always overlooked because they don't make enough (if any) money to file tax returns. These are the people who will spend it on basic necessities, injecting the money into the economy immediately.

And it also reflects well on our society, not forcing seniors to eat Alpo.

[Naturyl]

18. Thanks for remembering the invisible.

This country's obsession with focusing only on the "middle class" and "working people" is leaving millions in poverty - without any realistic hope of change.

[leftofthedial]

34. Those already in poverty (including tens of millions of working poor)

are left out of the American dream altogether.

[NYC_SKP]

4. Distribute the wealth of the top 1 percent to those at the bottom.

Just think of how many families could be lifted from poverty with the AIG bonuses alone.

This, coupled with job creation and defining growth with sustainable metrics and working toward that sustainable definition.

[cali]

28. yeah, fuck that pesky constitution. Just seize the assets of the top 1%

[Redbear]

35. There are constitutional means to accomplish that goal

1. Increase progressivity of income taxes
2. Reduce taxes on income from work and increase them on passive income
3. Maintain the estate tax
4. Vigorously enforce antitrust laws
5. Reform the tax code to eliminate tax shelters and schemes to avoid taxes using off-shore accounts

Over time, these will make a significant dent in wealth inequality.

[NYC_SKP]

38. We could eliminate the bloody loopholes that the top hedge fund operatiors used...

For example, to bring home BILLIONS each last year alone.

:patriot:

[napi21]

5. I agree with Obama. It's a combination of all three things. Jobs,

the banks, & the building of infrastructure & education to build the future. Any one alone is at vest a temporary fix.

[dkf]

6. How's about simply stabilizing the economy and trying to calm

everyone down? For now I'd appreciate it if the goal was a semblance of normalcy. Then we can start on the big ambitious stuff.

Also, these huge swings in the stock market don't help much. We need the uptick rule ASAP simply because it tamps down volatility.

[leftofthedial]

24. simply?

[Skittles]

7. stop offshoring jobs; bring offshore jobs back to America

[leftofthedial]

33. jobs are key.

and the key to jobs is demand-side stimulus.

For thirty years, we've been funneling trillions upon trillions into supply-side stimulus. Now we see the result. We need to move those trillions back into the demand side.

[file83]

8. Let it die a natural death, and all the cancer will go with it.

[cali]

29. and so will hundreds of thousands of the most vulnerable among u.

and the "cancer" is human nature, no just a specific politica./economic system.

[dysfunctional press]

9. single-payer universal healthcare should at least be a part of it.

[ColbertWatcher]

19. I like this idea. We need to start getting rid of privatization in every form it takes. n/t

[The2ndWheel]

23. Would that include the private interests of the few hundred governments around the world?

For example, only a portion of the 300 million people in the US, out of the 6.7 billion people total on the planet, being able to elect the most powerful politician, could be considered a form of privatization.

[Selatius]

10. Stimulate demand, by redistributing wealth from the top 1% to the bottom 99%.

More money in the pocket = more money to spend on products/services.

More products/services demanded = increased production levels to meet demand.

Increased production levels = more and more people hired to ramp meet those production levels.

Everybody wins. People have more money and more jobs, and the rich are still rich.

[leftofthedial]

12. I agree.

the root, unsustainable problem is the criminal concentration of wealth.

[Selatius]

13. I agree, but I fear that's a war I will not live long enough to see won.

This country is deeply corrupt on many levels, and they are powerful. I'm frankly surprised Bush Jr. didn't signal the "crossing of the Rubicon" as far as this Republic goes. He was not far from imposing a permanent corporatist dictatorship in the name of "national security."

[Lindsey]

15. I'm pretty down on Capitalism these days but I don't know where

Socialism works. Switzerland? Lately, I've been really bummed about money and greed. I work my ass off every day to pay my bills and we all get so stressed out at work. Something just doesn't seem right. All I really want is peace of mind. I have very simple tastes.

[Selatius]

16. There's no pure socialist economy out there.

An economy with something like single-payer health insurance, public works programs, public ownership of roads, rail, and communication lines would be considered a mixed economy if it also came with private ownership of capital. What a lot of people are saying is maybe the US could use a bigger dose of socialism than what it currently has.

If the federal government established an SBA-like entity to promote and support the spread and development of labor co-ops throughout the land, I think workers would be better off in the long-run. At least they would have a real choice to either work for each other or work for an employer who may or may not care about their well-being. For too many workers, they have no choice. They should have a right to choose.

[kentuck]

14. I say create jobs but...

I do not see a private sector creating jobs. I see a private sector cutting jobs.

[leftofthedial]

32. Give stimulus to those who create demand (us).

We've been methodically starved for a generation, so it may take awhile.

But until we start participating in our own economy again, nothing else will succeed. My family is about $100K and a meaningful job away from buying a new car, for example.

[Grey]

17. Stop the wars and

Cut military spending.

[leftofthedial]

25. That would save loads o'dough

[Prometheus Bound]

20. Aren't 3 and 5 the same -- Let the system sort itself out?

I see no alternative. What good is stimulation when that's what caused the problem. Just let it fail. Provide a safety net for the unemployed and medically uninsured with the money that is currently being used to bail out failed banks and insurance companies. There's no use propping up something that has failed. Doing that for the last decade is what caused the problem. It just puts off the inevitable.

[GeorgeGist]

21. Let capitalism die ...

it's the brain-dead product of greed.

[tabbycat31]

22. put people (like me) back to work

[leftofthedial]

31. Hear hear!

We need to rebuild our economy from the bottom up, and not allow the same old failed mindset to try to rebuild it from the top down.

[lunatica]

26. First you stop the bleeding

if AIG fails it translates into many hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost, and it pulls down many other institutions and businesses which could otherwise survive. That's what Obama says when he says that the first thing we need to do is stabilize the economy. So his idea is to stop the bleeding in one place while creating jobs in the other. Then he will go to step 2. That might be regulating the corporations and breaking them up. AIG can easily be broken up because there are parts of it that are viable right now, but which would go under if AIG fails.

[leftofthedial]

30. Really?

Do you have evidence for your claim beyond a regurgitated talking point?

Define "fail." If parts of AIG are viable, they will be spun off and will survive any bankruptcy process.

If regulation is step 2, we will NEVER accomplish step 1.

"Too big to fail" is rhetoric of fear every bit as reprehensible as "axis of evil."

[lunatica]

36. back your own claims, if you even have any

[Hannah Bell]

37. bailout $$$ to aig alone would buy 2 million people a $50K/yr job.

so the "saving jobs" argument doesn't quite cut it.

saving banksters' profits.

[lunatica]

41. I'm talking about the jobs which would end because of the domino effect

Jobs which are only tangentially related to AIG. AIG wouldn't just take itself down if it fell. That was my point. Any business related to it would fall, and any businesses related to them would fall. The domino effect.

[OhioChick]

40. Bottom line: JOBS. n/t