Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The "Free Ride" Society

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 29, 2012, 6:56 a.m. EST by struggleforfreedom80 (6584)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The right-wingers often tend to look at taxes as a way of stealing the fruits of other people´s labor, that people are being taxed so that other can enjoy a free ride. Well they´re way off. First of all, the ones who are really stealing the fruits of our labor are the financial elite who have been making billions by pushing a few buttons on a computer at the stock exchange and exploiting people in the US and all over the world. And secondly, the "fruits" of one´s labor can´t be measured in an advanced moderen society.

We now live in a complex, highly advanced technological society built up by generations of people thru hundreds of years. People have been building infrastructure, contributed to science, developed technology, developed efficient ways of manufacturing etc etc. Because of all this effort we now enjoy a more wealthy, advanced and efficient society than ever. All of this, lots of it built and created long before we were even born, we´re now enjoying despite having little or nothing to do with contributing to it ourselves. In other words, our contributions, no matter what we do, are microscopic compared to what we receive from society. We´re enjoying the results of generations of people`s work gradually building a modern society - an enormous free ride.

Now, there are people, certainly in third world countries, but also in the West, who are struggling to get by and do not feel that they´re enjoying all these goods. I totally understand that but that has to do with the unfortunate concentration of wealth. I`m talking about the society as a whole. The western countries are more efficient and wealthy as ever, the problem is that we have a system that allows for more and more accumulation of wealth. That is one of the reasons why we have to abolish Capitalism and replace it with democracy.

Now, what´s really interesting about this "free ride" - debate is that even though the rich, which the right-wing tend to support, are becoming increasingly wealthy by doing less, the right always turn to the poor and working class when they want to give a speech about getting free rides and stealing the friuts of other people´s labor. Citibank first recieved their taxpayer bailout back in the 80s from Reagan and have since that, along with an increasing number of other corporations received an enormous sum of taxmoney. Is that not stealing the fruits of other people´s labor? And what about, let´s say, indonesian facory girls working 12 hours a day for 50 cents an hour at a Nike- factory so that Phil Knight and the rest of them can sell shoes and equipment for huge profits. Is that not getting a free ride?? Why isn´t this theft adressed by the right-wing? The rich, which have become rich mostly by pushing a few buttons at a computer at Wall Street, and/or exploiting workers in the US and all over the world, which isn`t exactly hard work, are being given more and more tax breaks and benefits by politicians, yet the right wing have the balls to criticize sick people for getting their medical bills covered by the government. To put it this way, as long as the wealthy are getting more and more recourses into their hands by doing very little, people should have no right lecturing the working class and poor for asking for welfare programs.

So how should we organize a complex highly advanced wealthy society? Make it more democratic! Make the workplaces democratic, make the communities democratic. Organize society so that people can be in control over their own lives. Create a society where we focus on peoples needs instead of short term profit. End the system we have today, which encourages greed and unsustainable and pointless consumption, and instead create a society where true human characteristics and feelings like engagement and solidarity will come to the fore. Create a decent civilized society where everyone can enjoy a decent life. Create a world where we all can enjoy the "Free Ride" Society.

127 Comments

127 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 11 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

I bought a pack of cigarettes. And paid more taxes than GE paid in the last 4 years!

[-] 4 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

I forgot to add 'as BOTH a % of income AND total numerical value'. The only tax 'theft' going on in America is against the poor-middle class. As I have pointed out many times before, taxes as a % of income are highest the lower down the rich-poor ladder you go. Now THAT is theft!

[-] 4 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

That´s not fair! Tax the rich!

[-] 1 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 2 years ago

Well God know's they don't deserve it.Perhaps they need it?

[-] 2 points by TruNatrsChild (9) 2 years ago

don't buy cigarrettes, then you'd have nothing to complain about. Stop consuming!

[-] 1 points by Quark (236) 2 years ago

Good one.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

I hope you are faulting the Government that makes the laws and not GE itself for not paying any taxes. Do you pay more taxes every year than legally required?

Honestly, the government should double the tax on cigarettes. I cannot think of an easier way to increase revenue while simultaneously cutting expenses by (hopefully) decreasing the number of people who smoke.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago
[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Haha I don't have a problem with smokers really. It is having to pay for all the problems that come from smoking via my tax dollars. People should be free to smoke, drink and eat all they want, I just don't think that they should expect the tax payers to pay $500K to keep them alive for 6 months once they develop lung cancer.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

why do you think the tax payers pay for that? ive never heard of any free medical just cause you have cancer

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Over the age of 65 and those with a disability are on Medicare. A lot of people who are very sick and under 65 are normally considered disabled so they are also on it.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

cancer is not considered a disability.. and if you apply for SS it takes about three years.. so they are dead before any taxes start paying in. and you dont get free healthcare if you are not on SS so i think saying they cost taxpayers is just you repeating propaganda confused with what they say it cost in american productivity

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

The median age for cancer diagnosis in the US is 68. That is a retiree on Medicare. No productivity lost.

You really don't see the bigger point of how ridiculous it is to allow people to smoke cigarettes and then spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat them? Or obese people with diabetes and heart disease?

I work as a dentist and at least 75% of what I do is treat problems that were preventable. I could probably be put out of business tomorrow but yet I don't have an open appointment until March.

Americans show an almost unbelievable lack of responsibility when it comes to their health.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

the only problem is then you have to include every other old people disease.. osteoporsis, - lack of calcium in the diet, dvt- lack of moving around because you work behind a desk.. . ect ect. and you would have to section out cancers too lung as opposed to brain etc . so you really have no choice.. and what about people that change thier lifesyles yet still get sick years later from what they did when they were young.. there is no way around it. and as you are talking about people that are almost 70 the fact is.. you body just breaks down no matter what you do and a lot depends on genetics . you cant regulate behavior when there are so many variables

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

You are missing my point. I am not talking about normal aging. I am talking about people who just let their bodies just go to hell and don't care. People simply do not care about their health, so why should others care?

I have made a very successful living due to the fact that people don't do something as simple as brush and floss their teeth. I have realized that if people can't do that, which takes 5 minutes per day, we can't expect people to take care of themselves in other aspects of their health either.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

i do see your point.. there is just nothing to be done about it.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

on I am for public healthcare for everyone

[-] 2 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

But yet you think it is fair that people smoke, overeat, drink too much, and do countless other things that lead to completely preventable diseases?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

they're dying anyway

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

People who smoke, overeat, and drink too much cost the health care system billions more than healthy people as it is. If you give public healthcare to everyone, the costs will be even higher.

I would have no problem with public healthcare for everyone AND allowing people to smoke. They just shouldn't be entitled to healthcare beyond palliative treatment to get them out of pain when they develop lung cancer.

Like you said, they are dying anyways. Why spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep them alive for a few more months.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

can you tell me where to get this free medical? i think that is just propaganda what they cost are the companies they work for,, in lost productivity and insurance claims.. if not.. tell me where are these free programs for cancer patients.. cause mostly, if you have no job you die really quick cause they dont give out free medical based on disease.

[-] 2 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

Sure, I agree, but while they are at it, the gov should tax imported Chinese products at 200%, I can not think of an easier way to increase revenue while simultaneously bringing American jobs back to the USA

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

I can see that being very effective at creating jobs but most of that extra revenue will likely have to go right back out to the poorest of the poor who now have to pay more for the cheap Chinese goods they rely on to live.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

that would be ok.. as the poorest of the poor would be reduced about 90% so instead of it being 20% of the population it would become 2% of the population.

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

THey will not have to pay any 'more' AAPL has over 1,000,000,000 in cash and no debt. It was made using slaves in China instead of Americans. cost per iphone? Less than $40. Cost made in America? Around $80.00. That still leaves crapple with more than enough profit, and still, no debt. The rest of their profits should be taxed at 60+%. All workers will be able to afford a crapple. This will bring 1 ++++MILLION jobs back to the US (FOXCONN employs 700,000 people just for apple).

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Ok, so then what do you say to the millions upon millions of middle class workers who have their pensions and 401K's built around those large companies like AAPL. Just because the super rich are making a ton of money off of these situations does not mean that middle class Americans are not also being brought along for the ride.

Purchasing AAPL stock back in 2004 when the iPod was first becoming popular was a sound investment that millions of middle class Americans (including myself) did either directly or through their retirement funds. For every $1000 that was invested then you would have about $45,000 now.

I don't think it is fair to deprive Americans of those kinds of opportunities.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

well the middle class is not being brought along.. cause they have no jobs anymore.. and from 2004 til now.. 401k's have lost about 70% of thier worth.. so how did that opportunity work out for you

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Do you have a source about 401K's loosing 70% of their worth?

If people had done nothing more than buy an index fund made up of all the S&P 500 they would have had a return of about 15% since 2004. More if you re-invest the dividends. Not great, but definitely not a 70% loss.

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

Apple stock is nearing the $500 mark. Any 401K HOPING for a significant % increase from here is a fool. Either AAPL starts losing money because people are unable or unwilling to buy slave created products OR we get a real politician and they tax the imports. EITHER way, just like house prices, they are screwed.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

$500 does not mean anything considering they earn about $35 per share and are growing earnings at a 20% clip and, as you pointed out, are sitting on piles of cash with low debt. Some people might even say it is cheap at $500.

I have been taking profits along the way but they definitely still have room to run for awhile.

The bigger point I was trying to make is that by taxing corporations (not just AAPL) at 60% harms the middle class just as it does the wealthy. If anything, tax the wealthy individuals more on the personal level.

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

I get ya Mooks, I really do.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

legalize marijuana thats one way to increase revenue

[-] 2 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

No argument there. You would save a ton too in legal expenses and by cutting out the parts of the DEA that deal with weed.

[-] 0 points by freewriterguy (882) 2 years ago

ge paid my small business alot of money over the years. the government wouldnt have paid me shit in those taxes, rest assured. Dont be brainwashed any longer, richer government doesnt make a better society, a poorer government does.

[-] 0 points by BradinUtah (32) 2 years ago

That's easy; Quit smoking.

[-] 0 points by asauti (-113) from Port Orchard, WA 2 years ago

Why'd you do that, on both counts?

At least you didn't say that you smoked 'em.

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Not likely. GE paid around 1 billion dollars in taxes for 2010.

[-] 3 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

Sorry, but ge made 10BIL 08-2010 and RECEIVED over 4 BILLION back in 'taxes'

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Ok this is why you need to occupy a seat in a classroom or learn to google better. Companies and rich people do not have federal taxes taken out of their paychecks every Friday. What Companies and Rich people do is make estimated tax payments every 3 months. So if I think I am going to have a tax bill of $20,000 at the end of the year I send Uncle Sam $5000 - four times during the year. Now my account goes to do my taxes and we find out I only owed Uncle Sam $17,000. So I get a refund of WHAT I OVERPAID. I get $3000 back in taxes...which was my money to start with. People overpay all the time and the reason is if you owe money the interest and penalty on what you owe is very high, better to be safe than sorry. You CAN NOT GET A REFUND in excess of what you paid in 99% of the time and NEITHER can GE. There are several "refundable" tax credits that can result in a refund greater than what you paid in. The most common are the Additional Child Tax Credit and the Earned Income Credit (EIC). There are also more obscure credits such as the credit for repayments of previous years' taxable income. GE would not be allowed either of these.

[-] 2 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

Only that your wrong. GE did/has/will/does receive more tax money BACK than they pay in, corporate welfare style. Its gangsta but real

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

I never hear about all of the jobs that these companies have created, about the fact that most of them offer their employees health insurance and other great benefits. I never hear one drop about the contributions these companies make to the communities. I hear negative negative negative. Maybe GE should just pack it in and move the 150,000 jobs they have in the United States overseas. 1978 when I was 18 there were not alot of jobs. Another recession. We did not sit in parks we joined the Peace Corps, did volunteer work and we were not the self serving generation of young people I see today. Thank god the real 99% of young people are not like the ones in these Occupy movements.

[-] 2 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

Why don't you look at MITT ROMNEYS companies that do a GREAT job of making a profit. By outsourcing everything over seas to slave labor camps its too easy to become a Millionaire. In fact, everyone can do it, just be a sociopath and start with 1 Million bucks or so and you'll be well on your way to being a billionaire. MITT that freaking loser hasn't even gotten close, but he has succeeded in removing 100's of thousands of jobs from the USA and creating jobs in China

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Way to go. Nice contribution. I'm going to start smoking so I can help get this country out of debt!

[-] 3 points by freewriterguy (882) 2 years ago

amen b rother i like how you described it. and in the declaration of our independence, it says we have the right to abolish a government if it no longer working for or represents the people, and form a new government.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

glad you liked it:)

sff http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

@ sff - Takk og 'fyi' : "How Swedes and Norwegians Broke the Power of the ‘1 Percent’, by George Lakey" ; http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30364.htm og beste onsker. Solidaritet Norge !!

[-] 3 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Takk, det samme :)

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

We are sick and tired of giving the ultra-rich a free ride.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Yes. Tax them senseless!!

[-] 2 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

NORTH DAKOTA’S ECONOMIC “MIRACLE”— IT’S NOT OIL Ellen Brown August 31st, 2011

North Dakota has had the lowest unemployment in the country (or was tied for the lowest unemployment rate in the country) every single month since July 2008.

Its healthy job market is also reflected in its payroll growth numbers. . . . Year over year, its payrolls grew by 5.2 percent. Texas came in second, with an increase of 2.6 percent.

Why is North Dakota doing so well? For one of the same reasons that Texas has been doing well: oil.

A number of other mineral-rich states were initially not affected by the economic downturn, but they lost revenues with the later decline in oil prices. North Dakota is the only state to be in continuous budget surplus since the banking crisis of 2008. Its balance sheet is so strong that it recently reduced individual income taxes and property taxes by a combined $400 million, and is debating further cuts. It also has the lowest foreclosure rate and lowest credit card default rate in the country, and it has had NO bank failures in at least the last decade.

If its secret isn’t oil, what is so unique about the state? North Dakota has one thing that no other state has: its own state-owned bank.

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/north_dakota.php

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

TIME FOR AN ECONOMIC BILL OF RIGHTS

Ellen Brown November 9, 2011 http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/rights.php

[-] 1 points by rpc972 (628) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

The tax code, rates and exemptions are hashed out and written by lobbyists and silk stocking attorneys hired by the 1%. You'd think that immense wealth would be enough, but given a chance and mindset, greed will find a way to get more.

We have the best tax code money can buy! as well as legal system, health care and government.

It's a crime that a person's labor (underpaid at the onset) is taxed higher than Investment Income. But laborers don't have lobbyists or lawyers. These days they're lucky to have a home, or just their job.

And this is exactly the way the 1% likes it, and has designed it. The system ain't broke, it's fixed.

Democracy and fascism are forms of government. Capitalist and socialist are forms of economy, and among these are supply or demand, and lassiez-faire or regulated. And market, mixed, planned, traditional, participatory, public, gift and barter.

I vote for Democratic-socialist-regulated-mixed!

[-] 1 points by poltergist22 (159) 2 years ago

This is what I think we should do for starters with a few honest uncorruptible public servants in charge of the fund. Its just an example but the basic idea of unifying common people and empowering them with the necessary funds to change the mistakes and corruption is there. www.nationalday911.org

[-] 1 points by thunk (15) 2 years ago

American democracy has killed millions. Democracy has been a massive failure.

[-] 1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Are you even American because your blog seems to indicate otherwise..

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I live in Norway.

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

The problem is massive inequality. For prosperity to endure it needs to be shared Mass production demands mass consumption, but people can’t afford to consume if the wealth an economy generates is concentrated at the top. A giant suction pump has drawn into a few hands, an increasing portion of currently produced wealth in this country. As in a poker game where the chips are concentrated in fewer and fewer hands; the other people can stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit runs out, the game stops. This is where we are now.

http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

jepp. Thats why we must raise taxes for the rich etc, and work towards libertarian socialism, which should be our end goal.

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21086) 2 years ago

I agree that we need to re-evaluate the way labor is valued and compensated in this country. The way our capitalist system is working right now leaves too many people behind, but I don't understand when you say we need to replace capitalism with democracy. Capitalism is an economic system and democracy is a political system.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"but I don't understand when you say we need to replace capitalism with democracy. Capitalism is an economic system and democracy is a political system."

I get that a lot. It seems like lots of people are thinking in those directions. It is however not correct.

Let me explain:

Let´s say we made the economy more democratic. Which category would that fall into then?

We have to look at democracy in more ways than just voting once every second year.

If the economic institutions (workplaces) were run democratically, cooperating with each other, building democratic communities and networks of cooperating communities etc, with direct democratic participation by the participants and the ones affected, then we´d have a more democratic economy. Please read these two:

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320871888_replace_capitalism_wi.html

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

Creating Libertarian Socialism , or Libertarian Socialist-like societies means creating more democracy replacing un-democratic structures that is in the capitalist system

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21086) 2 years ago

Okay. I was going to ask you if you were talking about direct democracy.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Democracy with direct participation - where people control their own lives, their own work and communities - is the way to go :)

Do you agree with the article "the society we should strive for" ?

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21086) 2 years ago

Is that the Noam Chomsky one? I'd have to re-read it when I have more time. I generally agree with Chomsky.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No the other link. But if you generally agree with C, you probably agree with it. Good to hear:)

[-] 0 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Sorry, I don't. But I think you were talking to beautifulworld. I prefer reforms on the current system. One really good place to start, would be to get the money out of politics, that is the election process. The penalty for taking bribes should be a 30 year jail sentence. The benefits congress receives should be the same as the average company for it's employees. They must participate in the legislation they pass: no exemptions for themselves from obamacare.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

That´s ok Kirby. We seem to be more or less on the same page in terms of short term goals (money out of politics etc). Hopefully youll change your mind as we´re moving gradually towards libertarian socialism :)

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Read the original and other stuff here: http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/

sff

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by WooHoo (15) 2 years ago

Boy you got that just exactly ass-backwards, don't ya?

"The right-wingers often tend to look at taxes as a way of stealing the fruits of other people´s labor, that people are being taxed so that other can enjoy a free ride."

Last time I looked it wasn't the Republicans who want to raise taxes to give someone a free ride.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Did you read the entire article or just the first sentences? Do you have any counter arguments to what I wrote in the article?

[-] 0 points by dantes443322 (148) 2 years ago

Make the workplaces democratic

So the workers can vote for pay raises and every other day off and only a 4 hour day when they are at work.

Sounds great. Idiot.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"So the workers can vote for pay raises and every other day off and only a 4 hour day when they are at work.""

Things like this must be decided within reason and realisticly of course, and in cooperation with the community in general. Instead of insult, read what I actually stand for

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

[-] 1 points by dantes443322 (148) 2 years ago

Yeah, sorry about the insult. Meant to delete that but hit reply to quickly.

[-] 1 points by dantes443322 (148) 2 years ago

to=too

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

isnt that how congress works?? but thats not good enough for regular folk?

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

What you're talking about is a co-op that is managed by its employees, and honestly I feel like that's a great idea. I am 100% behind setting up an ESOP model for most if not all corporations large enough to go public, and in fact I would set up a distinction like this: Type I stock would entitle the holder both to voting rights in how the company is run and to dividends based on how well the company does or does not do. It would be issued to employees upon hiring, be non-transferable, and be cashed out on retirement. This would be issued on percentage of the company's net worth that would float a bit but stay pretty close to 20 percent. The other 80 percent would be issued in Type II stock, which would entitle the holder to dividends but NOT to any voice in how the company is or is not run. Type II stock would be freely tradeable on exchanges the way all current stock is now.

That distinction would basically allow everyone to win; it would keep corporations firmly democratic and very firmly tied to their employee bases and their communities simply because the people who make policy decisions are also in turn going to have to bear the brunt of any repercussions of those decisions. It also puts an end to the "we want to be even more profitable than usual so your job is moving to China" crap because nobody with any brains at all would deliberately destroy his or her own career, and it means that it will be much easier to balance the needs of the company with the needs of the employees as far as wages and benefits are concerned; employees won't push for $100 per hour and a monthly trip to Cancun (they never did to begin with, but this eliminates any possibility of that happening) because that will crash the company and put everyone out of work, while management won't push for tiny salaries, no benefits, and poor working conditions because the management is comprised of people who would have to live on those salaries and work in those conditions.

[-] 1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Would this plan be for companies that are started by employees or would it be necessary to appropriate existing companies? Wouldn't this plan eliminate the need for unions? Why would employees need to negotiate with themselves?

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

Basically, this plan should be implemented by pretty much every new business with more than ten or twenty employees, and ideally it would be phased into existing firms as well. This plan basically would eliminate the need for unions as collective bargaining entities in industries that are all co-op firms, and at that point negotiations over salary and benefit packages wouldn't be traditional negotiations with the workers on one side and management on the other, but rather development and ratification of a comprehensive payscale with input from people at all levels of the firm.

[-] 0 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

The majority of your post is standard leftist fare, a part of the never ending attempt to justify the theft of property of others to give to themselves. It's really kind of funny, productive people are greedy for wanting to keep what they earn but you aren't greedy for wanting to steal what they earn.

The only reason I bothered to respond is to address the incredible leftwing hubris of using poorly paid foreign workers to support their redistributionist drivel.

That 50 cents an hour is a living wage to that worker. If she doesn't have that fine factory job she goes hungry. But you would take that from her if it would hurt Nike. It's sad the business climate in America is so poor we have to turn to foreign labor but never disrespect those workers as something less than you because they are not.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"The majority of your post is standard leftist fare"

Well, I am a left libertarian so that´s no newsflash.

"a part of the never ending attempt to justify the theft of property of others to give to themselves."

It depends on what property youre talking about. The huge wealth of the finacial elite? YES! Your Ipod? NO!

Instead of accusing me of this and that, why dont you instead read what I actually stand for: http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

"It's really kind of funny, productive people are greedy for wanting to keep what they earn but you aren't greedy for wanting to steal what they earn."

Did you read the article? The real theft is done by the finacial elites.

"That 50 cents an hour is a living wage to that worker. If she doesn't have that fine factory job she goes hungry. But you would take that from her if it would hurt Nike."

I want the workers to control the institutions they participate in themselves. That way they´d get decent remuneration.

[-] -1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

No, the theft is from people voting for those who will tax the productives and give it to the non productives.

How, exactly, have rich people stolen from you personally?

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"No, the theft is from people voting for those who will tax the productives and give it to the non productives."

Did you read the article? I argued against the claims you just made. You are an example of the people I was referring to in the article.

We could have an endless discussion on what´s theft. You want the rich to keep on making huge profits. Profits can be called theft too. Property rights that apply today are not graven in stone. What "Theft" is can be whatever you want it to be.

[-] -1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

So, no one has stolen anything from you. Do you believe that the money supply is a zero sum game and if I make a dollar that is a dollar taken from the pot and reduces the amount of dollars available?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"So, no one has stolen anything from you"

No one has stolen in the sense of breaking the law. But Capitalism itself is based on what one might call "legal theft" (the same way you think of taxation)

Capitalism means that the means of production are privatly owned by individuals who make a profit from other people´s work (cf exploitation /profit) In other words, the value of the worker´s pay is less than the value that was added thru his/her work in the payed hours. That creates a profit for the owner of the means of production who did not create the value, but still gets payed in the form of profit. This profit is hence the capital and investments for more profits. So, the capitalist is making money simply by just owning, not adding or creating value. These are the core elements of capitalism.

That can be called theft too.

I say in the article that we live in a complex, highly advanced technological society built up by generations of people thru hundreds of years. People have been gradually building a modern society. All of this, lots of it built and created long before we were even born, we´re now enjoying despite having little or nothing to do with contributing to it ourselves. In other words, our contributions, no matter what we do, are microscopic compared to what we receive from society. We´re enjoying the results of generations of people`s work gradually building a modern society, and we should therefore use all this wealth to create a good equal democratic society.

[-] 0 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

You didn't answer my question, I'm trying to determine your level of understanding of economics.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Read between the lines, bro.

After what I just wrote, what exactly do you want answered?

[-] 0 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Do you believe that the money supply is a zero sum game and if I make a dollar that is a dollar taken from the pot and reduces the amount of dollars available?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Based on what Ive written, what do you think my answer will be roughly?

[-] 0 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Do you not understand the question?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

yes I do. What do you think my answer would be, roughly?

[-] 0 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Why would I ask you a question and then answer it for you? Isn't that kind of silly? You have no real understanding of economics and I don't believe this can go much further. You can't give me a basic concept of how money circulates.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No it isnt. The wealthy still control huge parts of society if we started a co-op. The whole society must be changed - a LS society must be the end goal.

Again, wcould have an endless discussion on what´s theft and stealing. You want the rich to keep on making huge profits. Profits can be called theft too. Property rights that apply today are not graven in stone. What "Theft" is can be whatever you want it to be. We all enjoy much more tcompared to what we contribute, so lets just share this enornous wealth :)

LS is what we should work for, because thats the type of organization in which people control their own lives, workplaces and communities. I want a society based on peoples needs, not short term profits.

You seem very interested in the society I want, well read and watch this to learn more:

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1317735903_chomsky_explains_libe.html

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

[-] 1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Never going to happen sport, your Democrat masters are quite happy with the status quo.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"Why don't you start your own company and institute your ideas?"

That´s not how it works. The economy is all encompassing

[-] 1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

That's exactly how it works. Someone started those companies, are you not competent to start a company? If you stole someone elses company wouldn't your incompetence drive it onto the ground?

If you can't stat one, how would you know enough to run one? Or could any fool run a company?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"You want control of the productive class in order to provide you with money"

No I want the productive class (workers) to be in control of their own workplace and community.

"Rather than producing your own rewards it is easier to try to take them from others."

Did you not read the article? We all get free rides. Our contributions are microscopic compared to what we get. We should therefore create a more egalitarian society where everyone can have a decent life.

The Democrates are in the pockets of the rich, just like the republicans.

[-] 1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Why don't you start your own company and institute your ideas?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Of course theres a relationship. Actual cash is going into the pockets of CEOs when they grant themselves bonuses. This actual cash could instead have been used on paying workers more f.ex.

The worker is being cheated. I explained this above. These "agreements" are just in your head. Youre overlooking the different distribution of money hence power.

I want democracy, people running their own lives, work and communities democratically. I am aware that many of you right wingers hate democracy.

[-] 1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Actually, you are describing a distaste for democracy. You want control of the productive class in order to provide you with money. Rather than producing your own rewards it is easier to try to take them from others. You can use all the euphemisms you want but it all boils down to forcing others to provide for you.

Fortunately, your masters in the Democrat party have no intention of allowing you to do any of the idiotic things you folks dream up. Of course, they will continue to use you to create a "diversions" like OWS but they are quite happy with the status quo and is they get to increase some taxes that will be great but you won't see any of it. In fact, it will never be as good as it has been since the 60s, no money left. Not even the evil rich have enough to get us out of this hole. :)

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Technology, value and wealth is created all the time hence increasing the "pie", but any point in time there´s of course also a question of balance. Lowering taxes or CEOs giving themselves major bonuses means less can be used for workers saleries and public welfare.

[-] 1 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Yes, wealth is created all the time, that is correct. But saying someone getting a bonus means less can be used for workers salaries is simply wrong. There is no relationship at all.

A worker is a profit center to a company, that is not mean, that is not evil. The work performed must create income for the company or pretty soon, no jobs and no bonuses for anyone. If company has the business to support 100 workers than that's what they hire. Each worker makes an agreement as to what his time is worth and the company pays that amount to the worker in exchange for PROFITABLE labor. In no way is the worker being cheated of anything.

If the worker doesn't create value for the company there is no point in having him. I hope that you understand that.

Like all these screeds it all boils down to the last two words in your post, public welfare. You and your friends want more of other people's money and and you will use any justification to take it. We have reached the point in our democracy that the havenots will vote for those who will take from the haves and give it to them. De Toqueville pointed this out; democracies only last until the people find out they can vote themselves the nation's treasure...and here we are.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

It just wierd that you cant figure out what I would say about this based on the article and my answers to you..

[-] 0 points by iwantfreemoneynow (58) 2 years ago

Even weirder is your inability to answer a relatively simple question. I already know what I know I wanted to know what you might know other than left wing dogma, not much I suppose.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

the combination of lending fraud and wall street corruption has stolen from every single land owner in the United States.

Or perhaps you have not heard of plummeting property values . . .

[-] -1 points by Kirby (104) 2 years ago

Make your own damn more democratic society somewhere else. Leave ours alone.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Thats not how it works. The economy is all-encompassing.

Besides, I´d think that wanting to live in a democratic society where people control their own workplace and community is sthing most people want.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

if most people want that,

why don't they have it?

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Propaganda, mostly. Power structures, states, corporations, the wealthy, have all done a good job fighting ideas like this

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1323595118_documentaries.html

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

A company is allowed to pay a CEO whatever the company wants to pay a CEO as long as it is above the minimum wage. If you want the government to start regulating worker’s salaries then you would be perhaps happier living in a communist country or a socialist country. This country was built on the principals of Freedom and part of the Freedom is allowing these high salaries. The only ones who have the right to squash the high salaries are the shareholders of the companies. On one hand the occupy movement speaks of less government and on the other hand they want a government that controls everything.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No, you seem to support corporate tyranny

http://occupywallst.org/forum/noam-chomsky-on-corporations/

this is freedom: http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

The laws existing today are not graven in stone. They can be edited/changed/replaced.

[-] 1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Citibank, Microsoft, Apple, Bank of America, Proctor Gamble and Gamble, AT &T and most large corporations are already public companies and are owned by the public and the owners are called shareholders!! What a shocker…So if you want to own part of a company you need to get some shares of stock in the company…you can get those by purchasing them or going to work at the company. Since these companies are already owned by the public it is the public (shareholders) who decide how much a CEO will be paid. There is not a greedy CEO sitting in an office that says I want to make 26 million dollars this year and I will just write myself a check. It is the board of directors of a corporation that decide how much a CEO will be paid or compensated. The shareholders have to agree by a majority and then the CEO is paid. To call these companies greedy is absurd. When I was 18 and wanted to go to college my parents did not have a pot to piss in. I went to work for Xerox and they paid for my education. I worked 40 hours a week there, worked as a waitress part time and went to college in my “free time”. Xerox gave me a pay check, paid for my college, gave me health and dental insurance and a retirement account in exchange for 40 hours of work a week. Nothing was given to me nor did I expect anything to be given to me. SO please…figure out a way to get yourself educated by smart people instead of this motley crew of Occupiers that have 90% of their facts construed, confused and boggled up. Occupy a seat in a classroom. Get ANY job at a company that will pay for your education, the mail room, cleaning the bathrooms whatever it takes. And…stop thinking that you deserve to own/control/direct because you THINK so?? You think you should be given..what….because why? When I see you I am going to pluck those little earphones from your ears and put them in mine because I deserve them. Then I am going to take your computer or I phone and give it to the library so everyone can use it instead of you. Think about that and then OCCUPY a seat in a classroom.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

But you see, I want democracy. I think that democratic workplaces and communities - people being in control of their own lives - should be the goal. The finacial elite controling things is not democratic, so we should dismantle this current system.

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Honey you are free to be in control of your own life. Now take control. Get up early, take off your jammies, get a decent haircut, shower, wear some pants that cover your ass and get out there and apply for some jobs! Work hard and you will be the boss of everyone else in now time. Keep sleeping in parks and you are not going to control anything. You already have democracy you want a commune and you can have that too..because this is a free country.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

That´s not how it works. The economy is all encompassing. We need a libertarian socialist society not just a co-op here and there:

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/1320873951_the_society_we_should.html

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

The economy is all encompassing and if you want to be a libertarian go ahead this is a free country...start your co-ops but get the heck out of your jammies, stop smoking the weed, save enough up for a farm and get it rolling. Action not TALK!

[-] -1 points by asauti (-113) from Port Orchard, WA 2 years ago

You say: "I want democracy".

You then say: "people being in control of their own lives - should be the goal".

A true democracy is "majority rule". How can an individual be in control of their own life if a group of people are telling them what to do?

I say adhere to the Republic and Our Constitution.

For example: I am completely against "The War on Drugs". It is an outright infringement on Individual Liberty. Drugs should be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes are, but not be a criminal offense like consumption/possession/production of marijuana, mushrooms, speed, etc. is.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"A true democracy is "majority rule". How can an individual be in control of their own life if a group of people are telling them what to do?"

When you live in a society with other people you cant always get what you want. Issues affecting many have to be decided by the ones affected. Democracy - people having one vote each - makes it fair when deciding things together. Democracy in the workplace and in the communities means people are controlling their own lives.

It should be hte people living today that should get to decide what kind of society they should live in, not a peice of paper written by slave owners.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

good point.. only problem?? THer Are No JOBs if you think you could do the same thing today you are in dream land im so tired of people bringing up what was possible 10 years ago as though nothing has changed.. as though there has not been an elimination of 14 million jobs... as though people that have worked and slaved for years and now have no income are to blame for losing thier jobs and lifestyles.. hopefully.. you will be fired tommorrow and come to understand these facts.

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

honey there are jobs out there...however there are not jobs out there for people that don't get out of their pj's and comb their hair. The jobs may not be the million dollar jobs you thought you were going to get the minute you got a diploma in your hand..but try starting from the bottom and working your way up. Getting your foot in the door even if it is in the mail room is better than nothing. I have worked at jobs that paid very little and getting very little is better than getting nothing. Getting nothing and living off of mom, dad and handouts seems to be alright with a generation of people who think they are special and have done nothing to be special. And I will not be fired tommorrow since I work for myself and I have to say I have seen and fired enough spoiled brats to make my head spin. Give me a worker over 40 any day!

[-] 2 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

you do know that many of the occupy supporters are 40.. and until 3 yrs ago did work and make 50k + if you are just thinking that everone on here is 20 and on welfare you are so cluless it isnt even funny. i dont know who the hell cares about a bunch a kids in this anyway... there are no jobs for 30 to 50 yrs olds.. you need to lose your job today.. and see whats really going on.. do you really think the 5000 nasa workers.. the 5000 whirlpool workers 5000 middle managment and the 14 million other jobs that have been eliminated in the last 3 yeears where held by 20 yr olds? get informed

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

I think that 90% of the 40 year olds who are out of work are not sitting in a park pissing on bushes and spitting on the police, they are looking for jobs. Since I live 55 minutes from downtown Manhattan I have the luxury of stopping by Occupy whenever I care to and for the most part what I have seen is a group of misguided 20 year olds in their pajammas smoking week talking about being free. Most 20 year olds don't qualify for welfare when their legas residence is still with mom and pop. Many of my friends have become unemployeed (man more not) and while they can not find their perfect job they have rent to pay and have to eat so they take whatever job they can find. And if one job isn't enough to do the trick they take a second and then a third job if need be. They are not sitting in a park making asses of themselves.

[-] -3 points by Libertarianliving (149) 2 years ago

"""""""Create a decent civilized society where everyone can enjoy a decent life. Create a world where we all can enjoy the "Free Ride" Society."""""

Kum By Yah (splchk). Where are you getting the good weed?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I don´t smoke weed. Do you have any actual counter arguments?

[-] 0 points by Libertarianliving (149) 2 years ago

Yes. Fix some of the problems we have right now and move on.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I agree. Giving the rich a HUGE tax increase and using the money on infrastructure and welfare is a good short term initiative f.ex. But this was not a counter argument, I have not objected to this.

[-] -2 points by Libertarianliving (149) 2 years ago

Great idea.... Take from those who earn it and give it to those who don't. Wonderful idea. In your utopia will a person be able to decide he/she wants to devote his/her life to recreation of some sort and still be able to own a nice car and a home with all life's luxuries? Just wondering HOW MUCH you think the lowest income earners should be given. In your dream world, could I just say,"I am tired. I want a year or two off from working", and still be able to collect a livable income? No "poor" people in your "progressive" world. Is that the ultimate fantasy of the socialist mined "Occupiers".