All of which is the central reason for the Tea Party's existence...

One thing I've never understood is how the state governments generally frown on gambling.

Capitalism is based on risks and chances and gambling; how can a capitalist government ban the very thing it is based on?

Capitalism bashes people, destroys people, ruins every normal person it comes into contact with and is generally the social and economical equivalent of Dracula Unchained.
But then it wakes up one evening ("it only goes out at night") and doesn't want to suck just a little blood. It wants to drain every morsel of hemoglobin and nourishment from every vein of every single normal human being everywhere.
This is why it needs to be controlled, and I can't think of any worse remedy to capitalism's appetites than saying it can control itself, regulate itself or act responsibly in a crisis. Capitalism abhors regulation.
"Efficient market" is a euphemism for "dog eat dog," and is no way to run a viable global economy. It's an expression meaning "stab him in the back before he can stab you."
I would sooner trust governmental control and strict regulation of capitalism than I would leave its management to the likes of BP and the people who are responsible for the current depression and world financial mess: Republicans, all.

If you're a normal human being who has a family, a home, wants to keep them and maybe even make a little headway, don't trust the dog-eat-dog, zero-sum, deregulated capitalists. They want to kill you and feed on your rotting corpse. They are scavengers and ghouls.

One percent of the people in this country control fifty percent of its wealth. Repeat: 1% of the people in the U.S. control 50% of the wealth in this country.
This same 1% received 24% of pre-tax income in 2007, but received only 9% in 1976. From 2002 to 2007, their income increased 10% per year.

These super-rich parasites are definitely in need of more tax breaks financed by the rest of us, right? My question is how long are this nation's criminally gullible voters going to continue to bury their heads in the sand, allowing oligarchs and plutocrats to rub their noses in the fact that they are utterly, completely powerless?

Elections used to offer something of a remedy for plutocracy and oligarchy -- but not any more. Elections in this country were turned into Silent Auctions when the U.S. supreme court declared that corporations are people, and are entitled to the same free-speech protections as human beings -- a completely absurd perversion of "human rights."

I'm mystified that anyone could be as obtuse as the people in the so-called "tea party." They actually believe the 1% are looking out for ordinary peoples' interests. What a joke.

The 1% want the rest of us to die from lack of food, clothing, housing, health care and adequate living conditions. Unfortunately for that 1%, when we are gone, they will have nobody to do their work, lick their boots or pay their taxes for them. They're amoebic parasites that kill their hosts.

Ah, yes, the so-called, self-styled "tea party" patriots. With them in one's corner, one will never want for enemies.

"Teapartyidiotism" is the newest cancer attacking the human body politic.
Does anyone have a vaccine? Yes! I do! It's a three-pronged defense and prevention protocol:
(1) Education, education, education! Ignorant people fear what they don't know, and knowledgeable people are empowered to move beyond their selfish preoccupations.
(2) "You-nification" -- not "I-solationism" -- leads people out of the dank, noisome hell of narcissism and zero-sum greed.
(3) The Future: a vision of how we can improve the world by working together, not working against each other.
If these don't work, there's always amputation. If we keep getting "Teapartyectomies" instead of finding a cure for the infection of destructive conservatism, we may end up with... surprise! a great place to live! One can only hope.

I think the important thing to recognize is we are going towards a laissez faire type of economy, but under the guise of a Capitalist one. We began losing our Capitalist system (which I am in no way defending, I'm simply stating that it is a little bit better than laissez faire) around the 70's or 80's, but its taken people till about now to realize it.

Global domination plot? Oh, probably.

@7 There's no need for a global plot. Why would you need a centralizing evil authority that only increases your chances of getting found out, when this is what all greedy fucks do whenever they have the chance anyways? Our current kings of capitalism operate like terrorist cells. No grand hierarchy, and no one cell knows enough about the rest to compromise them, yet all are working towards the same goals.

I tried to make a similar point on Matt Luby's "Morning News" a couple of weeks ago. Capital and State are inseparable and need each other, but there is the popular notion (among liberals and conservatives) they are at odds. This is a total myth.
Sadly, it seems most Americans can't see past this false dichotomy.

As you can see, it is a recession only for those who are not rich.

Not really. In my job I have visibility into what people make and there are a lot of people out there with jobs making a very good income, even if they're not "rich." Sure, maybe they didn't get raises last year but the recession really hasn't hurt them.

@11: To the vast majority of Americans, anyone "making a very good income" is rich.

@11, And if most of those folks ever lost that nice income stream, they'd soon be just as fucked as the rest of the hoi-polloi in this country. It's only that nice, creamy top 1-2% of wealth aggregators that could ride out any crisis/collapse.

@13: Exactly. The kind of rich Charles is talking about are on a whole other level.
12: Also true, especially when compared to most of the world.

Uh, an intelligent blog post! Oh...wait...it's Mudede, no wonder!

Most of the commenters here -- with but one or two exceptions, sound like complete uneducated and simple minded morons (especially #1, 2 & 3).

"Capitalism is based on risks and chances and gambling; how can a capitalist government ban the very thing it is based on?"

Negative, moronski! Predatory capitalism is all about rigged markets as there has never, ever been any such thing as "free markets" in the existence of humanity.

Gambling is unproductive, although in the lottery-based gambling, somebody does eventually win.

The problem with concentration of wealth is that it is counter and anti-progress.

All true progress universally stems from two forces: the sharing of wealth and resources, and exploration.

Throughout the ages, many fraudsters have attempted to claim that war is a driver of progress -- a total falsehood of the first order.

This country has been in a regressive and crumbling stage for quite a few decades now; one need only observe the wave upon wave of Calitards (that would be Californians to the rabble) who have poured into the Puget Sound region over the past 20 years to realize how bad education has gotten in what was once the leading state in education in America -- now it is near the very bottom.

Neither "communism" as practised by totalitarian states (or totalitarian capitalist states), nor capitalism as practised by the American Corporate Fascist State, are suitable systems.

Only a system where there is no monopolization of land, capital and knowledge is the proper system. This is a very difficult concept for many cow-like people who have been propagandized from birth by their lords and masters.

Their research shows that the gains by the wealthiest were not a product of hard work or an invisible hand, but rather policies shaped by elected officials who may or may not have been swayed by campaign donations. Citizen's United has solidified the position and influence of money in politics (and therefore policy), and unless our markets are re-regulated and the tax burden is adjusted to lower the burden on the middle class and the poor - without eliminating additional public sector jobs - this trend will continue. The shift in our economic structure has destabilized the middle class and created a primarily service based economy. Unfortunately with fewer middle class consumers, this top heavy wealth distribution may not be sustainable because so many low level positions are dependent on a healthy and consumptive middle class to create the demand for their goods and services. In a consumer based society where the consumers can no longer afford to consume, one can only expect anemic growth. The rich might well have slain their golden goose with a thousand self interested paper cuts.

13/laterite; @11, And if most of those folks ever lost that nice income stream, they'd soon be just as fucked as the rest of the hoi-polloi in this country. It's only that nice, creamy top 1-2% of wealth aggregators that could ride out any crisis/collapse.

They would only be as fucked if they didn't save much money. Someone who makes $150,000/year has the ability to save far more money than someone making only $40,000/year and, therefore, not be just as fucked as the $40K person if they both lost their jobs.

12/Furcifer: @11: To the vast majority of Americans, anyone "making a very good income" is rich.

I guess we all have our own definitions of what level of income (and/or assets) makes someone "rich." To me, being "rich" means being in the financial upper class. I'm talking about people making over $100,000/year. I think that qualifies as a very good income, putting someone in the upper middle class, yet it doesn't make someone "rich."

Roma- the person who is really concerned about wealth inequality-- I mean, if this was really a core value, such a person would naturally, quit their jobs for any publicly listed corporation, of course, refuse to cooperate or give our life's energy or attention. Furthermore, realizing that the average income of the 7 billion people on this sorry planet is way down below $10,000 year, we need to literally, get our own income down there, closer to what's fair and just. This step liberates so much of your free time that there are MANY things you can then do, to reduce the power and wealth of the oligarchs and aristocracy of today's world.