What Can't I sell My House?

“Why can’t I sell my house?”



Reaganomics was a republican ploy and is at least partly responsible for the economic trouble now. The "theory" that cutting taxes for the rich somehow "trickles down" to everyone is a transparent lie created by the rich (who coincidentally and conveniently are also the ones who make the laws). Even the term "trickle down effect" implies we are being pissed on. The triangle of Socio-economic-politics is a carefully crafted and maintained system designed to keep the powerful in power and make the rich richer. Maintaining that goal depends on the system being able to keep the rest of us on the outside. That means having policies and regulations in place that make it nearly impossible to break the cycle of work-tax-debt. Obama's bail outs are not the source of the problem; they are one of the results. If you want to blame someone you have to blame the Bush’s clan for racking up such astronomical debt over war in the name of "anti-terrorism" (which was just another fake bubble created to benefit big business).



The economic "collapse" was planned, just as bubbles are intentionally created and intentionally busted so the elite can get richer off of betting on the next "trend". Through these fake ups and downs of the economy, they profit whether the markets are "failing" or "succeeding" because they've already placed their bets on a result they pre-engineered. Meanwhile the rest of us suffer real losses in terms of layoffs and losing our homes. The Neo-Con-Republican-Wall Street clique preaches Capitalism and "free market" principles but they only mean it for the rest of us. When it comes to their asses they demand socialism. And that's what Obama caved in to. The banks demanded he hand over the American people's hard earned tax money to them, which is a big time socialist move, and a move that Bush would have been hung for because of all the anti-democratic moves he had already pissed off the public with. The people trusted Obama so it was judged by the banks (who have more power than the president) that Obama would be their man to pull it off. It doesn't matter who the president is, or what party is in power. They are two factions of the same group of corrupt greedy cronies. The only things they disagree on are issues that really don't make a lick of difference. Issues like gays in the military, gay marriage, and abortion, are given momentum by a puppet media in order to distract you from issues which actually will affect your life and the society you live in. The outcome of such petty squabbles affects far fewer people than bailouts or massive illegal wars, but when it comes to the latter, the opinions of 'we the people' don't mean shit. An issue of consequence and substance is far too important and potentially profitable for the public to be allowed in on the debate. Suddenly and the so-called democracy we are told is such a high and mighty ideal is nowhere to be found.



When the elite are satisfied they have forced enough small businesses to go belly up and enough tax money has been funneled to the bankers, then the economy will be allowed to improve. After the big real estate investors have bought up all the good property that family business owners can no longer afford, and snatched up all the bargain prices on family's homes who's mortgages can't be paid, or on houses who's value they've forced down, then the housing market will be allowed to recover and the average Joe will be left to pick up the remaining scraps piece his life back together.



Obama’s “socialist” public health care plan is like anything else: it will only exist if can be proven to make the rich richer. Both sides of the game (Republicans vs. Democrats in the US, and Liberals vs. Conservatives in Canada) contribute to this system willfully. The only difference, in my opinion, is the Right is much more ruthless and cold hearted. The left will also do what's best for themselves and big business but they usually play within the rules a little better and make sure the public is somewhat taken care of. The Right just changes the rules at will, and I’m sure would happily slaughter either you or me if they thought it would increase their profit or power any fractional amount.



If you really want a fair and free market to sell your house, then I recommend cheering for socialism instead of whatever ideal you think Capitalism holds. But not in the false way Obama pretends to be doing it, and certainly not in the totalitarian way Fox News portrays him as doing. If limits were put on profits and wealth, and taxes were levied according to what best for all of society, then you probably could sell your house easily because a lot more people would have stable incomes, good educations, good health, and well-rounded happy family lives.



Do you think a family who work like slaves (for the minimum possible income their company can legally pay them) and has to fork over nearly half of their pitiful paychecks to the government could ever afford to buy your house? Probably over 80% of the population live like that. In order for it to be the other way around --where 80% of the population could be in a position to buy your house, here's what would need to happen:



People would have to be less taxed, given higher salaries, not have to pay massive medical bills (and therefore be healthy enough to work a stable job and take care of their family), be comfortable spending their savings on a home (because they know they have a government pension waiting for them when they retire), have free education for their children (so they don't have to spend their savings on schooling or worry about the future of their kids--with a good education their kids could also get a good job and help pay for their parent's living costs when they're old), and free daycare for their children so both parents have time to work and save some money, etc, etc.



Another idea: How about raising tax on junk food and lowering it on healthy food so poor people can eat healthy and live longer and work more and be less burdens on the medical system (if they even have health care)? How about medical schools whose texts DON'T teach doctors only to prescribe drugs because drug companies have "donated" tons of money to the school? Then doctor's might actually treat patients and cure problems instead of just prescribing medicine which patients either don't need or that makes their health worse in the long run, thus burdening the system more.



Or, how about keeping the private "free market" out of public service? Why? Think about it... if a highway is public it doesn't need tolls because that's what your tax is for, if it’s private it must be profitable. If it isn’t profitable then employees are laid off, fees go up, quality of service goes down, etc, etc. If it’s public, and it is profitable then the extra money can be used to prop up other public sectors we may not be profitable, or the profits can be used to improve the service, increase staff wages, etc. Any service is the same. Post offices, rail lines, security, schools, etc. “But,” you say, “in public sectors the staff can’t get fired and get really high wages!” …Yes. Yes, they do! That’s the goal. As long as management is diligent on reprimanding lazy workers and the staff benefits are structured in a way that doesn’t let things get out of hand…what’s wrong with a stable job and a decent salary?



Then there’s the other horrible side effects of privatization or corporate sponsorship of public services:

In schools: there are Coke machines in elementary schools instead of milk and juice, Nestle potato chips instead of apples. Environmental courses are developed by Shell Oil and other companies that rape our Earth.

In medicine: doctors get paid trips to “medical seminars” in tropical paradises for prescribing quotas of drugs—contributing to the mass dumbing down of society.

Insurance companies profit from suffering and misfortune rather than survival and wellbeing.

Agriculture, food, manufacturing, and other industries which, in order to compete with other big companies, are forced to either lower health, safety, and employment standards or pack up and move overseas resulting in mass layoffs.

Prisons make huge profits for every person locked up, and bribe judges in ensure a constant supply.

Security firms profit by encouraging government propaganda that scares the public into accepting that tax money must be spent on violating their privacy rights….

Etc, etc, etc. But worst of all is the media which only serves as a propaganda arm for all these corporations ensuring you believe this “capitalist” system is so great.



All this horror listed above is made possible by a Capitalist “free market” system which allows for corporate lobbies to legally bribe governments into doing whatever will make them richer regardless of the consequences for society. Changing this system into a more society-friendly one doesn’t mean everything should be private, but there should be limits on greed. There should be regulations in place to ensure a society can function in a way that benefits everyone. If big business can’t compete with publically owned and operated service, then so be it! That means society doesn’t need the service privatized and the greedy bastards who think they can get rich by exploiting the rest of us have to come up with a more sustainable business idea. It doesn’t mean they can’t run their own business or make profit, it just means they can’t do it in ways that damages society solely to feed their greed. “No, you can’t dig up that forest to extract oil! We need those trees to breathe! Find a different profession!” “…No, you can’t invent diseases then sell us false cures! If you can’t take a pay cut and be a real doctor then get a normal job like the rest of us!”





A more logical policy than huge tax cuts for the rich would be if SMALL business were given all the breaks instead of the BIG ones. That would mean steady employment for the whole family, for several generations, with profits being put directly back into their local community (and jobs created for local people) instead of franchises and massive corporations whose profits only line the pockets of a few investors and CEOs who don't give a shit about community or people, and may not even spent a dime of the profit in the country where their business operates.



All these ideas I write here are socialism. Socialism is NOT what Fox or CNN makes you think it is. It is not communism, and it is not ant-democratic. Many socialist societies do operate, and have operated very successfully.



Of course no system is without flaws, but the damage done by capitalism allowed to run wild has been catastrophic. Damage has in fact been far worse overseas than on the domestic front. Hordes of wars and military campaigns have been fought in the name of greater profits and often kept secret or fought under the guise of "liberty" and perpetuated by the corporate propaganda machine. They are often to stamp out successful socialist governments that prove socialism works well for the people. They are punished for setting an example that says "people before profit" can work, and their democratically elected governments replaced with dictatorships whose policies of death and destruction are of less concern to the Capitalists than policies which allow for the exploitation of cheap labor and resources instead of using them to pull a war torn nation out of poverty.



I think there is a better way, one which would not only allow you to sell your house, but also improve a lot of other things, too.