As often happens with debates like this, a middle ground needs to be found. A hike from $7.25 to $15./hr is just as foolhardy as the fact the minimum wage has not increased since 2009. A minimum wage that is too low marginalizes the people earning that wage - seems that is where we are now. But $0.50 an hour isn't going to make a difference. It needs to be more substantial and it needs to be tied to an index such as average wage increases (in percent) for some other wage earning groups.

We let it continue because we haven't yet clearly articulated some of the dangers and I thank you for doing that. Those with seats at the HFT table are simply following the traditional mantra in equity markets - "if you can get an advantage, take it". We appear to accept that as a fundamental principle, the status quo and those in the industry feel a sense of entitlement to that advantage. But putting up phantom trades to confuse other traders (HFT or not) crosses the line and makes a mockery of the exchanges themselves - they contribute to us having to guess under which cup the ball lies in their two bit dog and pony show.

The stongest point in the talk comes just at the 10 minute mark where he talks about the 'greatest tragedy of our anaemic recovery in the last 5 years is the damage it has done to poor Americans.' The outcome of the 'economic recovery' to which he refers is of course quite logical as it was designed to bail out those who needed help the least - even going so far as helping white collar crimminals (banking industry) to stay in their jobs. The ideology that those at the top 'provide' for the poor is simply not proven out in any society.

It's not a pretty picture. Is there some other planet (a kinder, gentler place) to which I could arrange transportation, or are those tickets all booked by the 0.01%? I hear you Charles, but swallowing it all can make it hard to get up in the morning with a smile on one's face. As a society we are in desperate need of a positive message.

Some form of government must exist, but I agree that most governments have become self-serving. At one time elected representatives at least tried to echo the collective voice of their constituents. This "independent thinking" has been replaced with a mandate to adhere to party lines and a political machine most often steered/run by corporate donors. These corporate donors allow politicians to feed at the trough so long as their needs are met. And the 'governed' public receives very little in return. This is socialism and it has always benefitted the wealthy - despite many people confusing the idea that socialism somehow looks out for the poor and needy - your "unwashed stupid masses."

Geez - did you even read the article about the Memphis police officers that you reference? It has nothing to do with 'Obamacare'. Memphis city officials are cutting healthcare benefits for city police officers (and other city employees) and I quote from the article "in order to redirect money to the city's troubled pension fund." That's quite a different picture from the one you try to paint.

Business should take more responsibility to train the workers it needs. Your retail example was a poor one, as that is a sector where store management jobs are often earned by people who have done well in retail sales and show an aptitude for management. Management can help such a worker to receive necessary, extra, third party training through cost sharing or outright paying for it. Your article smacks of suggesting the unemployed and marginally employed will never be of value to employers. Yes, running a business isn't for everyone and yes, there are a lot of barriers and obstacles, but successful business people don't complain - they do what needs to be done, including training their staff.

I'm a bit surprised that opinions such as the one above aren't just ruled "too wacked out" for publication. The opinion smacks of a deep rooted paranoia that someone (the manipulators as you call them) are out to get you. All political stripes manipulate data to serve their respective agendas - that's epidemic in US politics. But global warming serves no political agenda - it is real and cannot be scientifically disputed.