Forum Post: FUCK all this conspiracy shit.
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 4, 2011, 11:48 a.m. EST by hss
(9)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It's no conspiracy that capitalism fucks working people every single day, everywhere all over the world. Corporations aren't corrupt - they are functioning perfectly well, and as they should. Western democracy as we know it was designed by capitalists to serve their interests, not those of the masses of working people. Perhaps that's why every politician seems "corrupt" to you. Get with it people.
P.S. This "movement" should NOT be inclusive to the various racists, conspiracy wanks, and all manner of pseudo-right wing idiots who's political discourse comes mainly from V for Vendetta. They will get us nowhere. They are fucking embarrassing. Grow up. Get serious.
Yep, don't worry. Your "movement" doesn't include those of us who use logic to figure out our stand on an issue as opposed whining to our parents and asking for handouts.
By the way, your "movement" is bowel.
Grow up son, learn a few things, maybe someday you'll be able to figure out where money comes from as opposed to wishing it be created for you.
I have two jobs. Bet you don't believe me.
oh where does it come from then, smartass? bet you dont know the answer to that one because thats some serious education you surely dont have. took me years to understand it myself. btw ive explained it in this forum already though didnt go into the dephts of what value is. not like you care anyways, you just wanted to say get a job without saying get a job.
Youre idea of capitalism isn't correct. To say that western countries have capitalism isnt true. When a corporation gets favors from govt, giving them a competitive edge over entrepeneurs, that is not free market capitalism, its closer to fascism.
And I dont care if you dont agree with me on most things, but this is supposed to be an open forum, and I am looking to reach out to everyone, since this is supposed to be a collection of open minds. I'll debate you all day on free market capitalism, and how govt intervention obstructs a free market. e.g. housing bubble, war, corporate subsidies. But dont just insult us, bring us your argument instead of calling us names. The attacks on each other are the last thing this movement needs. Arent we inviting ALL to join, and have peaceful debate?
next thing you do is call for regulations to forbid derivates and stuff to prevent the next bubbles.. even the fools advocating for glass-steagle know more about capitalism then you, you just carry around your ideal of non-government market which is a contradiction in itself and has never existed anywhere because it cant exist. first thing you need for a market is private property and next thing you need for private property is security and next thing you know is the shit your living in.
what comes after security? because I think thats where it stops. security in the civil and economic arena will protect from fraud.
you make all these claims with no reasoning other than, it cant exist. That is not an informed argument. YOU are the reason this movement will be co-opted by anyone coming with the right rhetoric. Im trying to inform you with different ideas, while all you do is attack my view. Tell me where and why Im wrong, instead of putting words in my mouth. If the occupiers are anything like you, I want nothing to do with this movement. I thought this is supposed to be a free and open forum to exchange ideas. Clearly if I dont agree with your ideas, Im not welcome. This is not the mindset of a movement that gives everyone a voice. You feel just cuz you dont have millions to make govt oppress others, that you should be able to oppress others w/o the millions. I say NO ONE should be allowed to oppress anyone
"first thing you need for a market is private property and next thing you need for private property is security"
what part of this didnt you understand? do you think you can have private property without a state? what keeps the workers from taking control of their workplace if not the guys in blue? go read up on strikes and how they usually end, by state intervention.
yea. private property is capital owned by the people. You can always hire private security. But the state upholds the law. If you have no private property, the state owns all the land. You need common law, which is where anarchism doesnt work. I believe that stealing should be illegal. No govt means that its a free for all. And no economy can survive without someone coming in with force to take over. The guys in blue are supposed to uphold the law. Are you saying that we all should fend for ourselves, and its fair game to kill or steal from your neighbor?
w/o property rights, you own nothing. And everything you produce is owned by the state. Why would you do anything when you cant benefit from your labor?
yea. private property is capital owned by the people. You can always hire private security. But the state upholds the law. If you have no private property, the state owns all the land. You need common law, which is where anarchism doesnt work. I believe that stealing should be illegal. No govt means that its a free for all. And no economy can survive without someone coming in with force to take over. The guys in blue are supposed to uphold the law. Are you saying that we all should fend for ourselves, and its fair game to kill or steal from your neighbor?
yea. private property is capital owned by the people. You can always hire private security. But the state upholds the law. If you have no private property, the state owns all the land. You need common law, which is where anarchism doesnt work. I believe that stealing should be illegal. No govt means that its a free for all. And no economy can survive without someone coming in with force to take over. The guys in blue are supposed to uphold the law. Are you saying that we all should fend for ourselves, and its fair game to kill or steal from your neighbor?
always the same private property state or state property state. im tired of repeating myself: property itself is the reason for the state. if you dont need to exclude the 99% people from it there is no need to a state. why would you kill your neighbour? does he have anything you need and wont let you have that makes it worth the effort? who gives a shit about your computer, its access to the corporations stuff i want, they have all the means of production, not your living room and not the living room of all americans combined either. why would you steal when you can get for free? typical capitalist morals, did you ever recognize that people kill while there is a state? so where is the argument?
yes my neighbor has land I want, with no govt law, i can take it by any means. What do corporations have that you dont? They dont exist w/o the labor people put in. nothing is free, everything involves labor, and everyone has right to the fruits of their own labor. How is food free if no one puts in the labor to grow it? And shouldnt the grower deserve something for their effort? thats why you dont volunteer
oh plenty people volunteer. now if you dont dispute my stuff i dont care about repeating myself, i already explained that you dont have any right to your labour when doing wage labour, you cant equal wage with labour its false, you get paid by the hour, not by the stuff you produce.
Its only false because we accept it, and those corporations have a competitive edge over your starting your own business to compete with them. Say a mechanic doesnt want to work for $20/hr. Why cant he start a biz out of his own garage. He would have less overhead than a jiffy lube, and can charge the same, but save on his overhead cost. he cant do that because he needs a biz license, and jump through other eonomic hurdles that stop him from starting a business on his own. That is what needs to be fixed.
If you separate savings and investment banks, investment bank can go bust if they invent derivative schemes. They wouldnt be able to leverage it 10-100s of times their capital. you act as thought govt knows all, at least better than the market. You act as though govt would never do anything that wouldnt be in the interest of the public. Youre calling for a totalitarian regime to tell everyone how to act, where to live, and what to do for the "greater good"
What if i dont agree with you, then I have no choice in what I do, therefore no freedom. Get off your high horse, you arent always right. No one is. So you need a system where people can rise and fall on their own will. Let people make mistakes.
if you think keeping glass steagal repealed, youre insane and dont understand the recent boom and bust. You dont understand the boom/bust cycle at all.
What are your solutions then? Since you consider all of mine wrong?
i dont advocate government at all! i want the working class to take control of the economy and produce for the common good instead of profit, thats my solution! you are supporting THIS totalitarian state by not attacking the foundations of its power, the market economy, free or unfree, doesnt matter a shit except if you want people to starve when they dont find a job. of course this sounds dellusional to you since you know that not finding a job is only a matter of the market not being free enough.. thats what im saying keep repeating your ideal, it has nothing to do with how this system really works, its only your idealization, your ideology.
who is to say what the common good is? That is your ideology. And if i dont agree, you think you should oppress me for having a different view. This provides no real solution. I argue to free up the market and let people control their capital so they can provide for themselves in an atmosphere that is a level playing field. Only because of govt intervention do corporations have monopolies and a competitive edge Do you volunteer? Because that is working for the common good and not profit. I sure as hell want to reap the benefits of my hard work. I also feel that if I dont work as hard, that I should get less. If I dont have anything to gain from doing a job I dont like, why would I do it? In a society where I reap the benefits from work, I have more capital to deploy back into the market, and even some to donate with either time or money if I support a cause. In that type of system, I have the choice (freedom). Whereas in yours, I have no choice in helping or not helping the common good that I may or may not agree with (say standardized schools) I like the idea of no govt, but THAT is a system that is not sustainable, more so than my ideological free market. Govt needs to be there to uphold the constitution (common law). So we should be striving to get as close to that free market idea, because it allows for maximum freedom, civil and economic, which are one in the same.
stop pulling your socialist shit on me, im not advocating the state defining the common good. the common good is what people request. in capitalism if you dont produce for the common good (which is narrowed down to the wants of those with money) you go bankrupt. in my system you can keep your shit for yourself if nobody wants it, makes you figure prolly you need to produce something else or be an artist and hope the use-value of your stuff will be discovered in the years after your death. producing for the common good is producing for what the people need, pretty easy to say what that is if not in terms of education - food, shelter, health care come to mind first. i dont volunteer much because i get nothing for me out of it if its not the general mode of production and people volunteer for me too. i used to spend money for all kinds of shit but i stopped because reproducing myself is hard enough without giving everything away, i simply cant afford it.
youre more capitalist than you think. I have to ask, what is money then. Money is nothing but a claim to someones labor. I work for money, use that money for labor that someone put into a product. In a free market we would be able to produce anything, and compete with larger biz because there were no govt intervention, and we'd operate on sound money. Ultimately, free market capitalism is advanced bartering. And in that system, you can choose to save your money, or spend your money on anything. Property rights are upheld, and infringing on someone elses property is breaking the law, which serves as the regulator of fraud. I actually think you and I are more aligned than you'd think. And glass steagal goes a long way in keeping banks from fraudulent practices, not the end all be all, but a big step. If we had glass steagal, we couldve let the too big to fails fail, without destroying millions of peoples' pensions and savings
large corporations own you with their productivy and thus low prices, not with anything else. why do you think the first countries to mechanize are the rich countries now? yes its advanced bartering, you got that right. only you dont know about the competition if you think you can compete with macdonalds making the same burgers because you cant without their machines, their wages and their productivity. you could only make an expensive burger and hope some above-average earners give it a try.
to say that a corporation has more productivity than you is a falsehood. they would be no where without their employees, i advocate a level field for those employees to do the same ass corporations. the problem is that govt is paid for by corporations so that employees cant compete with them. Think about raw milk.. many love it, but cant buy it legally because of govt intervention. yes there is risk, but willing buyers are willing to take that risk
its not about workers, its about machines! corporations have machines, you dont! you cant compete with machines! nobody will buy the milk of your garden cow because its too expensive.
AND if machines do the work better than people, then thats innovation. The price of doing the work a machine does lowers overall cost, so the labor that was used to do the same work also falls. if I knew how to make typewriters, should I be kept in business because computers do it better? Of course not, but I should be able to produce those same computers without govt intervening telling me how I should do it.
In fact, electronics are an excellent example of no govt intervention. Every year innovation in electronics increase, as price decreases. This is the free market. And just because I dont have the money, doesnt mean I cant raise it from savers (investors) who are willing to take a risk on my product succeeding. its not just because they have more money than us, its because they have regulators on their side to reduce their competitiion... I keep on repeating myself
AND if machines do the work better than people, then thats innovation. The price of doing the work a machine does lowers overall cost, so the labor that was used to do the same work also falls. if I knew how to make typewriters, should I be kept in business because computers do it better? Of course not, but I should be able to produce those same computers without govt intervening telling me how I should do it.
In fact, electronics are an excellent example of no govt intervention. Every year innovation in electronics increase, as price decreases. This is the free market. And just because I dont have the money, doesnt mean I cant raise it from savers (investors) who are willing to take a risk on my product succeeding. its not just because they have more money than us, its because they have regulators on their side to reduce their competitiion... I keep on repeating myself
You havent followed the rawsome foods story, where a group of private individuals split up farm costs to get their own organic food. They were raided by the FDA. people willingly ate the food from their own garden and couldnt do so because it didnt meet FDA regulations. If their food was bad, thats the risk they took. Why should the FDA decide what is and isnt good for you, even if it is only you consuming.
Even amish have been arrested for selling raw milk, even though they had no complaints. Its the regulations put in place by big corporations that give them the competitive edge. including the monopoly on money ie the Federal reserve
so if I produce food, I have to give it away, but if i make a painting I can keep it?
who protects me from someone stealing my food or my painting? Im not socialist, but it sounds like you are... I would argue that taking my food to feed others IS socialism
you dont even have any right to the product of your work in capitalism so why would it matter to you? did you ever keep something you produced? no, the moment you sign a labour contract you give up any right on your own work except the right to get paid for every hour you work for whatever the contractor offers. thats socialism?? cant you see the difference? production in society is inherently social since a long time, you dont see a lot of subsistence anymore with the means of production being as progressed as they are now. youd just make a fool out of yourself trying to live of the apples in your garden, if you can even afford a garden. simply isnt an alternative anymore to not go to wage labour when you have nothing to produce with which is the general situation of the 99%.
I have a right to that product by buying it! You are saying that if I produce something that everyone needs I should give it to them. In a free market I could live off the garden I grow, and sell my products to those w/o so they can pursue other interests. In a free market, if I dont like the wage, I can do it on my own. I have the right to start up my own biz. Its getting through the govt intervention that stops me from doing so. Have you ever tried to start a biz?
what, your not allowed to start a biz? sounds like socialism what you are claiming about capitalism. of course you are allowed to start a biz, its actually encouraged by the government in every respect (aslong as you abide the rules). the money you get as a worker is only whats needed to bring you around the next day, not the value of your work. where does the profit come from if not from the work, can you tell me? nobody buys your garden stuff because its too expensive and people go eat in macdonalds for 3 bucks when you would charge 3 bucks for a loaf of bread if you made it yourself. im not saying you should do that on your own because youll get raped by capitalism in the process. only if all people do that it will be the means for your wellfare.
who makes the rules? corporation legislate by buying politicians to make rules that only they can abide by. And no people cant buy my food because I dont have the proper paperwork that says Im not selling you dangerous food. And while big corporations do sell you dangerous food, they can sell it because they get over the hurdles of regulation by either paying large fees, or outright breaking those rules and paying the fines that go with them
who makes the rules? corporation legislate by buying politicians to make rules that only they can abide by. And no people cant buy my food because I dont have the proper paperwork that says Im not selling you dangerous food. And while big corporations do sell you dangerous food, they can sell it because they get over the hurdles of regulation by either paying large fees, or outright breaking those rules and paying the fines that go with them
who makes the rules? corporation legislate by buying politicians to make rules that only they can abide by
who makes the rules? corporation legislate by buying politicians to make rules that only they can abide by
conspiracy. you think the politicians dont want business to be successfull? they make rules that are best for business because business is the nations base of power.
not a conspiracy. a little girl cant start a lemonade stand, and will get arrested for doing so. but bankers are fined millions on billions of profits, that if we were to do the same thing, we would be prosecuted for fraud. Politicians make laws for what is best for the corporations that fund them, because they got them into office, which again is fraud. How is restraining business via regulation better for biz?
if the girl paid taxes would be no problem but she doesnt want to. you cant get your lemonade sold on contracts but not paying for the state that guarantees the contract, even a little girl should see that. obviously i answered the second part of your question already, housing bubble, environment pollution, whenever the business of one is threatening the business of all.. stopping this discussion here, i told you your fault in the first post, you keep making up ideals that have nothing to do with the reality of capitalism. nothing i have to add to that.
its fraud in capitalism, not capitalism itself. You keep thinking that fraud is part of capitalism, but its not.
So you believe in an income tax? What happened to your no govt? But an income tax is really a double tax on money. Why should you pay (taxes) to work (income)? All taxes should be taken on the consumption level, this will actually promote saving (and savings are where investment comes from). Only pay taxes when you spend the money, not when you make it. When you pay income tax, you are literally paying to work, as opposed to paying when you consume -and are benefiting from the economic environment to increase your standard of living...
CLearly you dont recognize the true nature of the boom bust cycle. in the housing boom, interest rates were artificially lowered to promote mortgage lending. You can only have this with a fiat currency. Fractional lending intesified the boom, leading to malinvestment.
Its sad that you dont want to continue, because I have found flaws in your rationale. I have throughly explained every counter argument you have given me. You keep jumping from -ism to -ism, and in your heart you actually advocate for free market capitalism, but dont understand it because we are told that we live in a capitalist society when in reality we dont.
learn to understand when you read, i wont repeat myself. i argued this system, not an alternative. you are the one who thinks you can have both at the same time, not me.
I read what you said, and private property and protecting that property is all that is necessary. Im saying corporations come in and instill more regulations on their competitors, via paying off regulators. Without private property, everyone is a slave to the state.
who decides who should be allowed into a "leaderless resistance" sounds like someone is pulling the strings to me
hss is stalin bro, he decides for the movement and the movement follows. how about if the movement decides they wont tolerate infiltrators to spark violence? where there is a decision there must be a leader? just shows you are a conspiracy nutter who probably got reminded of his own stupid beliefs with that text. that goes for the width of this movement, claiming corruption, conspiracy, criminal behaviour and something went wrong after a long time of everything was fine just shows you have no clue about history and what capitalism is and always has been. the best system of exploitation of the have-nots by the haves ever. did you even know similar occupations like this one are happening all over europe for a while now and are spreading beyond? this has nothing to do with the arab spring shit, this is not about pulling down a dictator with the help of big oils corps to go into the hands of democracy and get plundered like iraq or afghanistan. they will soon realize they are truly fucked now after disposing of ghadaffi for example who guaranteed some sort of minimal social security. those guys are on the receiving end of capitalism and if you dont shut your mind to whats happening there now you will see that living conditions are rapidly decreasing like in iraq which went from the most developed and educated land around the place to a 3rd world state in a matter of years.
Has - You really dont understand the issues
what are your solutions?
Agreed.
This is a good start, but you need to go too the head. your screaming at the monsters feet. wall street starts at K street .
The Communist Corporatist System is ran by the family's that have worked in the bureaus that we can't elect. these are the same family's that have worked there from the beginning and if you think that they don't have family in the DOD your wrong.
You're such a fucking idiot.
No, he's exactly right. The people in here advocating change that don't realize there are multi-generational banking families that have infiltrated every level of most governments in the world are just circle-jerking.
How do you expose multi-generational banking families and put them in check ?
A lot of the "left" isn't going to like this but it is going to come out that Obama is actually the covert CIA agent that played bin Laden. Check out Pastor Manning's interview of Wayne Madsen. This is a sufficient revelation to rout all the rats from government.
Seals kill Tim Osman bury him at sea then the seals involved die in a helicopter crash and Wow we buy this shit .... Don't believe in conspiracy theories.
the government taxes them and the people who work for them. if you think being rich is a problem for the government you dont understand shit about capitalism. you dont know what they even calculate when they talk about the national product.
No, the families that own the Fed don't pay taxes. You don't understand how the system works. We have a large national debt because the owners of the Fed can get 0% interest loans from the Fed's discount window, leverage this capital, and purchase 10s of dollars of treasury notes (just for example) for every 1 they borrowed at 0% interest rate. Treasuries paying 3% on 10x leveraged dollars borrowed at 0% gives you a 30% return on capital per year that isn't even yours.
and you dont pay taxes on treasury bond interests? of course you do! and how long have they been at 0%? thats since the crisis started, they dont care to pay you interests that are below inflation because they need to get banks to hand out their money for interests or the economy will seize to work and that will give seriously red numbers you cant compare to a few hundred billions of bailouts, thats all there is between a great depression with a standstill and the still-working system that is now. those are desparate measures in times of crisis, not the regular mode of capitalism.
Normal people pay taxes to service the national debt and yes I am one of them. However, as I just explained, the national debt is nothing more than a wealth-transfer mechanism from you to the owners of the Federal Reserve.
capitalism in its totality is nothing but a wealth-transfer mechanism from the working class to the owners of the means of production. thats what you get a wage for making a profit with your work. seriously, other nations dont have a private fed and they are in the exact same situation, even with occupied public squares by the ones on the receiving end of the crisis.
Come on, take this commie crap elsewhere. There are very few countries in the world without privately owned central banks. Iraq, Afghanistan, and (recently) Libya have all been toppled for precisely this reason.
oh yeah? take your ignorance elsewhere, the us is pretty much the only privately owned central bank, thats why you dont hear this kinda bullshit in other countries.
SO GOAL #1, LETS GET SUM BETTER FAMILIES IN THERE
Yes and no. We don't want to just change families running things. We want to return power to the people and advocate for rational policy that uplifts all of us.
sounds like someone is an angry communist
Nail. Head.
We have to destroy capitalism so all can be in harmony with ourselves, we all need to look at how wonderful Socialism/Communism works, we need to imprison the bankers and all small and large business because they have hurt people by not giving back to everyone.
true words.