Inequality in America - How we arrived where we are / whats your opinion?

[scootrd]

I hate Wells Fargo. Back when I banked with them, I had direct deposit. After my deposit went in, they would only let me use $300 maximum for 3 days, even though the funds had transferred. I finally got so mad I switched to a credit union.....

I switched to Credit unions long long time ago.

Commissions driven incentives have replaced interest generated incentives on bank loans. Banks should not be allowed to sell their loans.  Allowing banks to sell off their debt for a commission only incentivize them to create additional debt.

If banks were required to hold on to the loans they make, Their incentives would be what they should be - insure the loans they make are sound.     


Senator Merkley to JP Morgan scumbag President Dimon: “If you want  to be the head of a hedge fund, be a hedge fund…. Terminate your access  to the Fed’s discount window, terminate your access to deposits, and  then we have no quarrel.”

[45-70.gov]

over the years  i have had  mortgages  sold  5 or 10 times
nothing  changed other than the name on the check  that i NEVER missed  making EVERY MONTH


SURE THERE HAVE BEEN SOME  MISTAKES AND  CRIMES COMMITTED


but for the  most part  people violated their agreement  when they failed to make a payment
[the reason they failed to make the payment  is irrelevant]
people need to be held ''EQUALLY'' accoundable


you  are posting where the bank  violated the aggreement
that is a different topic

[Conan The Librarian]

CDQ,
 
That's hard to believe. If those were typical direct deposit ACH transactions, there should have been no delay like that. There must have been something about the transactions or your employer that caused the delays. ACH is the backbone of the regional banking system. The reliability requirements and penalties related to not meeting those requirements are very severe. Maybe the employer used another form of deposit that allowed them the benefit of float. That's way more likely in a case like this.
 
 

[351 power]

A lot on this thread is sort of off topic but most are symptoms of inequality. We all seem to agree there is are many symptoms of inequality. Why has it come to this?

[Conan The Librarian]

I reject the premise. There never has been equality. And never will be. Anywhere.

[SHOOTALL]

It never came to anything as there have always been those who had little and those who had a lot and many in between. Only the Consitution and Sam Colt tried to make men equal. One at birth and one near death .

[ChungDoQuan]

CDQ,
 
That's hard to believe. If those were typical direct deposit ACH transactions, there should have been no delay like that. There must have been something about the transactions or your employer that caused the delays. ACH is the backbone of the regional banking system. The reliability requirements and penalties related to not meeting those requirements are very severe. Maybe the employer used another form of deposit that allowed them the benefit of float. That's way more likely in a case like this.

Not at all. The day I pulled all my business out of Wells Fargo, all the manager would say is that they were not violating any laws, and that it was their policy to impose a three day period to "clear funds from direct deposits at the bank's discretion." My mortgage was bought by Wells Fargo, so I refinanced with yet another company. Wells Fargo bought it again! I periodically have to tell them where to stick it. My contract says my payment is due on the 15th. They insist it's due on the 1st, because, that's their policy. I've had a legal services plan since 1987. About the only thing I've ever had them do is deal with Wells Fargo. They didn't seem to know that I no longer needed mortgage insurance, they did not seem to know that the refi contract was for 20 years, and they insisted I had to buy homeowner's insurance through them, from their preferred company. I periodically have to ask them if they've ever loaned money before.    Now I look at messing with them as a sort of hobby. 

Every time I've had to deal with any kind of big business---EVERY TIME--- I come away feeling like I should have at least been kissed first. That's why I trust big business even less than the government--- at least the government has never tried to bend me over personally, trying to make a profit!
 

[45-70.gov]

why do you do business with them??

[ChungDoQuan]

They BOUGHT my mortgage... TWICE!

[mcwoodduck]

CDQ,
 
That's hard to believe. If those were typical direct deposit ACH transactions, there should have been no delay like that. There must have been something about the transactions or your employer that caused the delays. ACH is the backbone of the regional banking system. The reliability requirements and penalties related to not meeting those requirements are very severe. Maybe the employer used another form of deposit that allowed them the benefit of float. That's way more likely in a case like this.

Not at all. The day I pulled all my business out of Wells Fargo, all the manager would say is that they were not violating any laws, and that it was their policy to impose a three day period to "clear funds from direct deposits at the bank's discretion." My mortgage was bought by Wells Fargo, so I refinanced with yet another company. Wells Fargo bought it again! I periodically have to tell them where to stick it. My contract says my payment is due on the 15th. They insist it's due on the 1st, because, that's their policy. I've had a legal services plan since 1987. About the only thing I've ever had them do is deal with Wells Fargo. They didn't seem to know that I no longer needed mortgage insurance, they did not seem to know that the refi contract was for 20 years, and they insisted I had to buy homeowner's insurance through them, from their preferred company. I periodically have to ask them if they've ever loaned money before.    Now I look at messing with them as a sort of hobby. 

Every time I've had to deal with any kind of big business---EVERY TIME--- I come away feeling like I should have at least been kissed first. That's why I trust big business even less than the government--- at least the government has never tried to bend me over personally, trying to make a profit!

The IRS said I owed them an extra $1000 one year and then charged me another $1000 in fines and interest.  When I proved that I never owed the original $1000 they went after me for the fines and fees on the money I never owed them.  It took a year, yes a year to get them to admit that they were wrong and all they did was return my fines and the interest with out paying me interest. 

[SHOOTALL]

The fact that there are "ringer" proves the concept of equality is flawed. Trying to force equality on people is limiting socity to the lowest terms. Even equality under the law is flawed as ones ablity to pay for better repsentation can change the outcome. Equality is a great cause to fight for but it will not exist .

[scootrd]

not to contimue on the mortgage tangent however breaking news .  -
my thoughts if they were willing to settle for 9.3 billion you know they cleared more monies than that through their deceitful screwing over of homeowners going through load mods and forclosure processes.

Mar 01, 2013
Thirteen mortgage servicers will pay a total of $9.3 billion to settle federal complaints over foreclosure-processing and loan-servicing methods.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Federal Reserve announced the final settlement Thursday as amendments to enforcement actions against the 13. Covered by the agreement are: Aurora, Bank of America, Citibank, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, MetLife Bank, Morgan Stanley, PNC, Sovereign, SunTrust, U.S. Bank, and Wells Fargo.

Included in the amount are $3.6 billion in cash payments and $5.7 billion in other assistance to borrowers, such as loan modifications and forgiveness of deficiency judgments, OCC and the Fed said.

The mortgage servicers were accused of engaging in improper foreclosure methods in 2009 and 2010, including so-called robo-signing of documents -- submitting them to the courts without having read them. A lengthy investigation of the practices followed, resulting in successful efforts by attorneys general of the 50 states to engineer a national settlement.
Borrowers covered by the amendments include 4.2 million people whose homes were in any stage of foreclosure in 2009 or 2010 and whose mortgages were handled by one of the 13 servicers.

Rust Consulting Inc. of Minneapolis, which specializes in class-action settlement administration, is expected to contact affected borrowers by the end of March. Those borrowers are expected to receive compensation ranging from hundreds of dollars up to $125,000.

The borrowers are not required to take any additional steps to receive the payments, nor will they be required to execute waivers of any legal claims they may have against their servicers as a condition for payment. (For more information, call Rust at 1-888-952-9105.)

In providing the $5.7 billion in assistance, the 13 servicers are expected to undertake loss-mitigation efforts focused on foreclosure prevention, the federal regulators said.

Preference will be given to efforts designed to keep borrowers in their homes "through affordable, sustainable, and meaningful home-preservation actions," according to the regulators.

For GMAC Mortgage, Everbank and OneWest, which did not enter agreements in principle with federal regulators, the independent foreclosure-review process is continuing.

Regulators expect the reviews for those servicers -- which handled 457,000 mortgages that were in some stage of foreclosure in 2009 or 2010 -- to be completed over the coming year.

[SHOOTALL]

Where do you come up with these things ? Never said throw it all away just noted there was little equality really. But you can spin like a dancer if you wish. Consider the traffic laws - equal correct ? well then explain why some tickets get "fixed " others don't why do the police and their families in NY get a card to be shown if they get pulled so no ticket will be issued ? In North Carolina the family of State police are to have a picture or their family member in uniform next to their dri lic so when another trooper pulls them he sees it and gives a warning. The list goes on equal BS.

[45-70.gov]

I reject the premise. There never has been equality. And never will be. Anywhere.

.
We're not talking about equality of material ownership in the consumerism republic.....we're talking about fairness on the playing field.  That's why there's rules in sports competitions_ _to create fair and earnest play and competitions.   Of course, people try to beat the rules by bringing in ringers or flaunting escape exceptions in the rules, or just cheating.
.
 That's what CDQ was describing with renegade bank Wells Fargo who is in close competiton with BoA for Scum of the Earth title....see his link above on the banksters and watch the 10 minute short course on '"Gotcha ya Capitalism" and how to wreck a country.
.
Same with MCWD and his tax problem....more gotcha capitalism...this time from the gov.
.
The opposite of fairness and equality is corruption.  Any system, be it capitalisticly inclined or socialistically inclined can not survive corruption.  The brand of Capitalism now prevelalent in the USA is far from Free Enterprise, and is a perversion of Capitalism....Its influence based corruption.
.
 I am still waiting for the so-called conservatives here to post links or articles on how runaway inequality makes Capitalism and Free Enetrprise better and makes the USA a better place....The Founders knew this and tried to prevent what we now have digressed to..
.
.
..TM7

compareing life to a sport with a level playing field
is  to say EVERY ONE  MUST PLAY THE SAME GAME
  to me  your discribing socialism.......not freedom to play your own game

[45-70.gov]

They BOUGHT my mortgage... TWICE!

they could not buy your  loan  UNLESS the bank you borrowed from  SOLD your loan


WHY DID YOU DO BISINESS  WITH ANY OF THEM?


or have it in the contract  not to seel your  loan?


or did YOU SIGN a contract with it in the fine print they could seel your dept??

[SHOOTALL]

I doubt you could get a loan at a reasonable rate if it could not be sold.

[ironglow]

can  some one tell  me  how equality  and fre choice are compatable

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
  Let's face it "free choice" is just another term for "freedom"...   Forced "equality" and "freedom" are as incompatible as oil and water..
 
  This entire failed real estate scheme by the federal government is the cause of  the many defaulted home loans... which drove us into this long recession.  When the liberals came up with a scheme to allow just anybody to by a home with a "no money down and a dollar when I catch you" plan..it was virtually guaranteed to fail!
  The feds told the banks they MUST sell to bad risks..  When the banks complained about being forced to sell to bad risks.. the feds assured them the government would back the loans.  Well... DUH!
   
     No;  Wells Fargo was NOT the culprit..the federal government was the culprit!!
       
       Before that, banks required 20% down to purchase a home, which is a common sense and a prudent expectation.  With 20% down, the property is much less likely to fall into arears and the buyer has some "skin in the game" where they won't be so quick abandon the property.
       You guys may condemn the banks..who were told by the feds that they must loan to people to whom they normally would not loan a $10 dollar.
  ...But then, doesn't anyone who has the temerity to buy a $250,000 residence without enough money or self-control to properly pay the debt, have a responsibility to realize when they are getting into a losing deal?
     
    Sure, the bankers were greedy, but don't lose sight of the fact that they were forced by the feds to make these unwise loans..

[Conan The Librarian]

Just putting a finer point on a previous post: I think it would be clearer to say that equality is more like everyone playing different games and expecting to get the same results.
 
For example, you are working 70 hours a week on your business or demanding job. Your neighbor is a bum. You both have the same life style.
 
That's equality. Or to put it in a more historical form "From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs."

[mcwoodduck]

I reject the premise. There never has been equality. And never will be. Anywhere.

.
We're not talking about equality of material ownership in the consumerism republic.....we're talking about fairness on the playing field.  That's why there's rules in sports competitions_ _to create fair and earnest play and competitions.   Of course, people try to beat the rules by bringing in ringers or flaunting escape exceptions in the rules, or just cheating.
.
 That's what CDQ was describing with renegade bank Wells Fargo who is in close competiton with BoA for Scum of the Earth title....see his link above on the banksters and watch the 10 minute short course on '"Gotcha ya Capitalism" and how to wreck a country.
.
Same with MCWD and his tax problem....more gotcha capitalism...this time from the gov.
.
The opposite of fairness and equality is corruption.  Any system, be it capitalisticly inclined or socialistically inclined can not survive corruption.  The brand of Capitalism now prevelalent in the USA is far from Free Enterprise, and is a perversion of Capitalism....Its influence based corruption.
.
 I am still waiting for the so-called conservatives here to post links or articles on how runaway inequality makes Capitalism and Free Enetrprise better and makes the USA a better place....The Founders knew this and tried to prevent what we now have digressed to..
.
.
..TM7

If everything were supose to be equal ten we would all have e sam IQ, we would all be 5' 10" and weigh 160 pounds.
and with that we would not have have sports heros, we would not have Doctors, inventors, manufactures, artists, or engineers.
we would all have the same tallents, the same knowledge, the same of everything. 
Clearly we all have different abilities and different experiences that are going to change our out come and the way we look at things.  I think they call it the butter fly effect or Chaos theory.
That a teacher could have inspired you or discouraged you.  An after school job may have inspired you to do something that creates something, starts a new business, or go to higher education.
I know a few people that started with nothing and are multi millionaires now due to hard work and drive as well as smarts. 
I also know a few people that were born into wealth that are not doing well.  Again smarts, work ethic and drive all play a part in their success or lack of it.
If you want everything to be equal, would you hire someone that can not make simple change to do your taxes?   Would you hire someone that is not mechanically inclined (like me) to work on your car?  If so I have good news and bad news for you.
I only charge $8 an hour to fix your car but it will take me a thousand hours to make it work, and yes I know it only has a flat tire.  I can not carry a tune in a bucket, but do you want ot hire me to sing at your daughters wedding? 
Everyone has tallents and experiences that turn people one way or the other and there is no way we cna make everything equal as a playing field. 

[ironglow]

 
   "From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs."
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx
 
   Fellows, you just read what is called "the communist dialectic"..     
         However, a free and just system such as our progenitors handed to us, strives to give each citizen "equal opportunity".. never does freedom ever promise " equality of outcome".   That would be a fool's errand.

[45-70.gov]

some one pointed  out a home i own  they found online was worth $14K
i paid  $50K....should  i whine  or blame some one else
i  paid  CASH .......  so there  is no selling  of my loan...i didn't do business with  ''THEM''
if  i wanted to sell....that would mean a loss.........
..other than the fact this  home has paid for itself awhile back
i get  approx  30% return  on my money
the  money was  not  smoked  or drunk up...it was used to buy more homes


people  are FREE to choose to rent my homes OR BUY THIER OWN
i try to keep my prices competitive.........................or else they are free to move


because  i chose to invest my money rather than drink or smoke it
why is some one  making bad choices entitled to part of my profit??

[ChungDoQuan]

can  some one tell  me  how equality  and fre choice are compatable

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
  Let's face it "free choice" is just another term for "freedom"...   Forced "equality" and "freedom" are as incompatible as oil and water..
 
  This entire failed real estate scheme by the federal government is the cause of  the many defaulted home loans... which drove us into this long recession.  When the liberals came up with a scheme to allow just anybody to by a home with a "no money down and a dollar when I catch you" plan..it was virtually guaranteed to fail!
  The feds told the banks they MUST sell to bad risks..  When the banks complained about being forced to sell to bad risks.. the feds assured them the government would back the loans.  Well... DUH!
   
     No;  Wells Fargo was NOT the culprit..the federal government was the culprit!!
       
       Before that, banks required 20% down to purchase a home, which is a common sense and a prudent expectation.  With 20% down, the property is much less likely to fall into arears and the buyer has some "skin in the game" where they won't be so quick abandon the property.
       You guys may condemn the banks..who were told by the feds that they must loan to people to whom they normally would not loan a $10 dollar.
  ...But then, doesn't anyone who has the temerity to buy a $250,000 residence without enough money or self-control to properly pay the debt, have a responsibility to realize when they are getting into a losing deal?
     
    Sure, the bankers were greedy, but don't lose sight of the fact that they were forced by the feds to make these unwise loans..

Once again, show me the law that FORCED the banks to loan anything to anyone. IT DOES NOT EXIST! That is a right wing MYTH, nothing more. There is no such law.

[ironglow]

some one pointed  out a home i own  they found online was worth $14K
i paid  $50K....should  i whine  or blame some one else
i  paid  CASH .......  so there  is no selling  of my loan...i didn't do business with  ''THEM''
if  i wanted to sell....that would mean a loss.........
..other than the fact this  home has paid for itself awhile back
i get  approx  30% return  on my money
the  money was  not  smoked  or drunk up...it was used to buy more homes


people  are FREE to choose to rent my homes OR BUY THIER OWN
i try to keep my prices competitive.........................or else they are free to move


because  i chose to invest my money rather than drink or smoke it
why is some one  making bad choices entitled to part of my profit? ?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
  Right on 45/70 !    You sound much like myself..pay as you go..   And much of what I pay with is money that hasn't been eaten up, drunk away, or smoked up!
   Even though none of my property has lost value but gained in dollars..but of course, dollars have lost their value.. 
 
   A number of politicians seem to have trouble understanding that some folks aren't really fit to own real estate!  These people can be spotted nearly everywhere.  They just live in a house..never doing proper maintenence... not even keeping it painted and repaired, say nothing about occasional updating.

[Conan The Librarian]

ChungDoQuan:
 
That idea is not helping you understand how the situation worked. Here's some background that is well written. The pressure was there, and it was applied over a 30 year period in a variety of ways.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis

[ironglow]

From Chung;
  " Once again, show me the law that FORCED the banks to loan anything to anyone. IT DOES NOT EXIST! That is a right wing MYTH, nothing more. There is no such law".
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
   Chung;
   In return, show me the law which required anyone to sign for a home loan they were neither.. ready, willing or able.. to repay!
     

[45-70.gov]

some one pointed  out a home i own  they found online was worth $14K
i paid  $50K....should  i whine  or blame some one else
i  paid  CASH .......  so there  is no selling  of my loan...i didn't do business with  ''THEM''
if  i wanted to sell....that would mean a loss.........
..other than the fact this  home has paid for itself awhile back
i get  approx  30% return  on my money
the  money was  not  smoked  or drunk up...it was used to buy more homes


people  are FREE to choose to rent my homes OR BUY THIER OWN
i try to keep my prices competitive.........................or else they are free to move


because  i chose to invest my money rather than drink or smoke it
why is some one  making bad choices entitled to part of my profit? ?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
  Right on 45/70 !    You sound much like myself..pay as you go..   And much of what I pay with is money that hasn't been eaten up, drunk away, or smoked up!
   Even though none of my property has lost value but gained in dollars..but of course, dollars have lost their value.. 
 
   A number of politicians seem to have trouble understanding that some folks aren't really fit to own real estate!  These people can be spotted nearly everywhere.  They just live in a house..never doing proper maintenence... not even keeping it painted and repaired, say nothing about occasional updating.

over all  ...i lost  over $300K  ...in paper value
i also  lost  some  of my cash flow


but made up for it  by  buying  a few more homes at  HALF PRICE


THE POOR KEEP GETTING POORER............by continueing to do what made them poor
THE RICH KEEP GETTING RICHER..............by continuing to do what made them rich


the  poor would rather whine than learn from the rich
maybe the poor  are just stupid...and shouldn't be allowed to make their own decisions
or the  rich  should be stopped from making  good choices

[ChungDoQuan]

ChungDoQuan:
 
That idea is not helping you understand how the situation worked. Here's some background that is well written. The pressure was there, and it was applied over a 30 year period in a variety of ways.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis

The first couple of paragraphs completely agrees with what I've been saying. The housing bubble was caused by deregulation of the banks while still relying on the government (taxpayer) guarantees. The rest of that article outlines the right's push towards the EXACT SAME conditions that led to the Great Depression. They did it before, and they tried to do it again.

[mcwoodduck]

IG,,,which is actually lifted from Acts 11:29, or Acts 4: 32-37
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
MCWD...missing, conflating, or avoiding the whole point.....we're not talking about equality in inherent talents,,,we're talking about a fair uncorrupted system, with out undue influence, or preventing those running away with the picnic basket. Please post your links how inequality makes America better, stronger or improves the economy.....thanx.
.
Meanwhile polemics and idealogues aside,  Here's what your conservative friends say about runaway inequality:
.
.
Conservatives Worry That Runaway Inequality Will Destroy The Economy and Society
.
.
 Posted on September 24, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog 
.

 Conservatives and Liberals Agree: Unparalleled Levels of Inequality Is Killing Our Economy and Society
 Leading economists agree that rampant inequality leads to unstable economies and depressions, and makes the middle and lower classes poorer.
While the stereotype is that liberals care about inequality and conservatives don’t, that is actually a myth.
As Canada’s conservative National Post – Canada’s 9th biggest newspaper – noted Wednesday:
 
 
 

According to the voice of Canada’s business establishment: “High inequality can diminish economic growth if it means that the country is not fully using the skills and capabilities of all its citizens or if it undermines social cohesion, leading to increased social tensions. .
***
A mounting body of research shows that, left unchecked, a growing income gap affects the rich, the poor and everyone in between.
***
No matter your political leanings, most people understand that endless concentration of income, wealth and power is bad for the economy. After all, businesses rely on rising purchasing power of the many, not the few, to deliver growth and profits.
***
No one knows the tipping point, but lock enough people out of the promise of gains and at some point, instead of stability and growth, you get social unrest.
***
History has shown us, time and again: When too much is controlled by too few, something has to give. Continuously rising inequality is unsustainable.
Everyone has a stake in fixing this. And the fix has no political colour.

(The Post is correct about the potential for social unrest.)
Moreover, IMF economists have demonstrated that inequality increases a nation’s debt. Because conservatives are passionate about reducing debt, reducing inequality is a conservative value.
And as I noted in February:

 

Renowned behavioral economist Dan Ariely (Duke University) and Michael I. Norton (Harvard Business School) recently

demonstrated that everyone – including conservatives – thinks there should be more equality.
Their study found:

 

Respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution. Most important from a policy perspective, we observed a surprising level of consensus: all demographic groups—even those not usually associated with wealth redistribution such as Republicans and the wealthy—desired a more equal distribution of wealth than the status quo.

Ariely comments:
 

Taken as a whole, the results suggest to us that there is much more agreement than disagreement about wealth inequality. Across differences in wealth, income, education, political affiliation and fiscal conservatism, the vast majority of people (89%) preferred distributions of wealth significantly more equal than the current wealth spread in the United States. In fact, only 12 people out of 849 favored the US distribution. The media portrays huge policy divisions about redistribution and inequality – no doubt differences in ideology exist, but we think there may be more of a consensus on what’s fair than people realize.

How could the media portrayal regarding this issue be so wrong?
Well, for one thing, as a study the Pew Research Center found, the corporate media tends to take Wall Street’s view on economics. Indeed, the media is largely set up to spout propaganda which supports the view of the powers-that-be. The financial sector has been by far the biggest beneficiary of government policies over the past 10 years or so. So the media tends to defer to Wall Street’s own arguments against equality.
***
Everyone agrees that a system which uses the power of the state to reward the fraud and gambling of the largest banks and biggest corporations through socialism for the rich and capitalism for everyone else is not free market capitalism, and is downright anti-American. As I noted last November:
 

Conservatives tend to view big government with suspicion, and think that government should be held accountable and reined in.
Liberals tend to view big corporations with suspicion, and think that they should be held accountable and reined in.
Irreconcilable difference?
Not really.
Specifically, a

Rassmussen poll conducted in February found:
 

70%

[of all voters] believe that the government and big business typically work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors.

(and see this).
Remember that the government helped and encouraged the giant banks to get even bigger, and then has hidden their insolvency and shielded them from the free market, and helped them grow even during the severe downturn.
In return, the big banks and giant corporations have literally bought and paid for the politicians.
Conservatives might call it “socialism” and liberals might call it “fascism” – they are the same thing economically.
But all Americans – conservatives and liberals alike – can agree that it is not capitalism, and it is not American.

As I pointed out in December:
 

Conservatives hate big unfettered government and liberals hate big unchecked corporations, so both hate legislation which encourages the federal government to reward big corporations at the expense of small businesses.
As an example,

both liberals and conservatives are angry that the feds are propping up the giant banks – while letting small banks fail by the hundreds – even though that is horrible for the economy and Main Street.
The Dodd-Frank financial legislation … enshrines big government propping up the big banks … more ore less permanently.
Many liberals and conservatives look at the government’s approach to the financial crisis as socialism for the rich and free market capitalism for the little guy. No wonder both liberals and conservatives hate it.
And it’s not just the big banks. Americans are angry that the federal government under both Bush and Obama have handed giant defense contractors like Blackwater and Halliburton no-bid contracts. They are mad that – instead of cracking down on BP – the government has acted like BP’s p.r. spokesman-in-chief and sugar daddy.
They are peeved that companies like Monsanto are able to sell genetically modified foods without any disclosure, and that small farmers are getting sued when Monsanto crops drift onto their fields.
They are mad that Obama promised “change” – i.e. standing up to Wall Street and the other powers-that-be – but is just delivering more of the same.
They are furious that there is no separation between government and a handful of favored giant corporations. In other words, Americans are angry that we’ve gone from capitalism to oligarchy.
So if both liberals and conservatives hate something, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a compromise. It may mean that they feel disenfranchised from a government that is of the powerful and for the powerful.

In other words, while many conservatives are against raising taxes on the wealthy, they are overwhelmingly for stopping the use of the power of the state to increase inequality. See this, this and this.
This is an area of agreement between people of good faith on the left and on the right. As Robert Shiller said in 2009:
 

And it’s not like we want to level income. I’m not saying spread the wealth around, which got Obama in trouble. But I think, I would hope that this would be a time for a national consideration about policies that would focus on restraining any possible further increases in inequality.

If we stop bailing out the fraudsters and financial gamblers, the big banks would focus more on traditional lending and less on speculative plays which only make the rich richer and the poor poorer, and which guarantee future economic crises (which hurt the poor more than the rich).
Indeed, if we break up the big banks, it will increase the ability of smaller banks to make loans to Main Street, which will level the playing field.
Moreover, both conservatives and liberals agree that we need to prosecute financial fraud. As I’ve previously noted, fraud disproportionally benefits the big players, makes boom-bust cycles more severe, and otherwise harms the economy – all of which increase inequality and warp the market.
And as I noted last April, prosecutors could claw back ill-gotten gains from the criminals and use that money to help the economy:
 

The government could use existing laws to force ill-gotten gains to be

disgorged (see this and this) [and] fraudulent transfers to be voided …

The bottom line – as conservative blogger Michael Rivero writes – is that too much inequality kills the market:
 

For an economic system to be a system, money must flow freely at all levels and in all corners. When those in charge of the system decide to so order the mechanisms of the financial sector to drive the money into a single huge pile, the system cease to be a system and a crash becomes inevitable. One might as well force all the blood in your body to stay in the brain. The end result is the same; death for the body.

He’s right.

Not sure what you are talking about.
Capitalism, is the best system where talents will be rewarded and lazy will be eliminated.
Socialism, is where the lazy are rewarded and the best are punnished
Communism, is where everyone is punished and no one is encouraged to be special.
No matter what you have Human nature can not be taken out of Hunamity.
The Capitalist system is going to be your best effort to see an equal system.
Look at all the coruption on the Democrat side.  Hypocrites, too much reliance on regulations and rules that give the false sense of security.  Look at Madoff- Democrat supporter and was part of the rules and regs commitee and the other officials assumed he was not stealing the Billions he was.  The Democrat congressman that caused the Loan problems knew it would cause problems and a transfer of wealth, was accused of tax fraud and allowed to get away with it.
We had a President that lied under oath, suborned purgury in a sexual harrasment law case and was alllowed to get away with it.  If they can bend or break the laws with out fear of punnishment then coruption will abound and flurish.
Our laws eiher mean something or they do not and they are supose to apply to all.  If any are allowed to ignore them then coruption will grow and grow.  Socialism in the US makes some more equal than others and will allow the unequalness to grow.
 

[351 power]

How hard is it to stay on topic? This is not about home ownership or democrat/repub. It's about the fact that the present and evolving economic system is imbalanced and continues to become more so. We are trying to analyse the problem and offer suggestions that can help a citizen or a nation that percieves the need for change. And it's not communism or capitalism but it might be about economic imperialism or corporate fuedalism. Open up your minds to the fact that the strength of a community depends on the help and health of ALL the citizens

[mcwoodduck]

How hard is it to stay on topic? This is not about home ownership or democrat/repub. It's about the fact that the present and evolving economic system is imbalanced and continues to become more so. We are trying to analyse the problem and offer suggestions that can help a citizen or a nation that percieves the need for change. And it's not communism or capitalism but it might be about economic imperialism or corporate fuedalism. Open up your minds to the fact that the strength of a community depends on the help and health of ALL the citizens

True and to get back on topic there are different ways to do this.
and that is what the topic is about.  Not specifics but the general system.
The system the Democrats are pushing is one that goes against everything they say they want.
The green party with in the Democrats dictates the lack of building, refining, manufacturing, and obtaining raw materials by mining. drilling, or logging all in the name of Global warming.  All of these are are union / middle class jobs that they are allowing to be shipped over seas.
The idea of free anything, causes problems with simple economics, either it is going to be demanded well beyond what is willing to be produced, or it is worth nothing.  Would you work for free at your profession?  And I do not mean Probono for a case or two but all the time, noone would or could.
Having a government dictate what is made and by whom is also inefficient and does not promote any innovation.
You talk about the health of the people.  Name one socialist society that has free health care that has cured anything?  It is not in the interest of the government to cure things, or even treat them to a point. What has Cuba cured lately?  What has Canada done (heck their ministers of something came to the US to get surgery rater than wait for their system)?  And you want us to be more like them? 
The Democrats say they want better health care and they make laws to limit it.
They say they want jobs for the middle class but they make laws rules and regulatuons that eliminate Union Jobs.
They say they want houses for all but make laws that encourage people to default on loans and loose their houses.
they say they want equality for all and create a whole underclass with their need for poor people to help.
They say they want better schools, but rather then teach they indoctranate with silly global warming ideas and that government is the be all do all in your life.
So yes we can talk about the menutia of what we think is the problem of enequity but does it matter if the whole system being pushed forward is the problem.
We can fix the broken leg, but the man is dead.