Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Some thoughts on wealth:

Posted 2 years ago on June 18, 2012, 6:45 a.m. EST by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

It has puzzled me for some time now, why are people so protective of the very wealthy? The common cliché is that people think they will be rich someday, so they don’t want the government coming after their money when they are. Of course life teaches us differently, life teaches us that we live in the most class fixed of all the modern countries. So why do we still have so many, who still believe in the “I’ll be rich one day” dream? Many would say it is the great American optimism that all things are possible. I believe it is based in a less illustrious emotion that of pride, ego is what always gets us in the end, it is our ego that causes our fall. If we can learn to be at peace with ourselves, we can learn to be at peace with higher taxes.

A couple of links to illustrate the point:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/watch-full-secret-video-private-romney-fundraiser

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/

229 Comments

229 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The rich own all the tv stations, radio stations, magazines, newspapers, politicians, governments, businesses you work at. They have full control over the public discourse and culture.

It is very easy for them to achieve the ideological hegemony that there is nothing wrong with them taking all the money and making everyone else broke. They have built a society where you are conditioned from birth to accept the lie that our society is fair and that if you want more wealth or power you just have to work hard.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago
[-] 2 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

My understanding is that he is not really offering new technology but showing people how to produce the basics for yourself by using homemade, cheaper versions of expensive machinery.

I don't think his machines will change society much. People in 2012 want much more than what those machines can produce.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Surprised that you are such an expert on what these machines will produce, but I have ran into a number of “all knowing” people here on the site. To your other point, (odd you didn’t know this already), but he is actually developing designs and making them available without patent fees in the same way that wiki and Lynx works, I suppose one could take the position that Lynx is nothing as Windows mostly does the same thing, but most the people I know do not take that position.

[-] 2 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The point that I was making is that I am not sure how having free access to blueprints to the machinery that produce some of the things you buy is going to change anything. What does that change?

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

being able to create all the things that people like to have, like food and shelter transportation and lots of others the list is long and well thought out, did you catch the part where the guy started off getting a PhD. in nuclear fussion, I can tell you dumb people don't get those, so it could be you know lot more about these things than all these people who been studying it, but your comments don't indicate that.

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I did not see where you would be able to produce all the things people want. It seemed pretty limited.

I saw a machine that made dirt bricks. But what about the rest of the house like tile floor, rugs, stairs, fixtures, furniture, windows, doors, appliances, etc.

I don't recall the car you are able to build but I doubt it is comparable to what you can get from a car company.

Plus how much variety can you really farm by yourself? My guess is that the menu will be pretty limited.

What about technology and electronics like cell phones, tvs, computers? Clothes?

Plus the amount of work to produce everything on your own seems herculean. I'm not sure how this is going to change society. It seems like an enormous amount of work to produce inferior products.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I can see you have no vision, there was a circuit board maker as well as 3d printer, but I can see you have limit sight that's ok it's in it's early stages, surprising though with you, you seem so optimistic when it comes to economics and so pessimistic about other things, makes one wonder where your heart is really.

here take a look at what others had to say:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-smartest-guy-in-the-world-today-this-is-how-we/

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

My heart is not in the right place because I can't see how this can work?

Where does he talk about building a completed house and a cell phone or laptop or tv? And how much does it cost? And how much time does all of this take? What does the car look like?

What are the benefits to building everything yourself?

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

why don't you stop by the thread an see what others had to say, don't feel bad if you don't see the promise, these guys are really smart

[-] 1 points by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Instead of trying to insult my integrity and now trying to insult my intelligence, why don't you just answer my questions and try to sell me on the idea?

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I'm sorry did you miss the part where I invited you over to discuss it?

[-] 3 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

What sort of incentives inspire human innovation and brilliance? I mean, I doubt most of us want to live in a world where nothing is ever accomplished, where the sciences never move forward, where new and exciting ideas never flourish, but humans also have a fundamental sense of fairness (which is shown by numerous game theory studies).

What if most businesses were nonprofits or cooperatives or were owned and managed by its employees? What if public housing were ran like a cooperative (or even rental properties in general were nonprofits, where its residents comprised the board that managed the property), what if even the lowest man on the totem pole could enter a public hearing, and have a voice (even a vote) in tailoring the approach of our public agencies, our police departments, etc.?

Would this diminish incentives, would this eliminate all appetite for risk taking?

[-] 5 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Anyone who is innovative and brilliant will tell you, as I will, that some are and some aren't. Some characteristics are endemic to you, and those you don't get to choose. Color hair, color eyes, color skin, sexual orientation....

How old were you when you chose to have the IQ that you do? You may work harder or less hard depending on the incentives, but even that is not really clear. Was Galileo working for the prize of excommunication? Most of science was opposed by the church so everybody quit working on science e.i. Copernicus, Newton, ...

Creative people will take risks in order to create to discover. They don't do it until the tax rate goes from 36% to 39% and then quit.

We have to be careful which myths we choose to believe but we don't have to worry that the creative genius is driven by a 3% change in tax rates. When a bank executive gets only $24 million for creating MBO's with falsified AAA ratings instead of $28 million, I am not so sure that we don't want him to stop being innovative.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Yeah, but not exactly what I was getting at. Sure, I think I was born with a pretty good brain (it got me through law school successfully, through a couple bar exams, and with any luck, I'll be able to accomplish my next academic goal, a grad degree in bio, I must love intellectual punishment :)), but my statement was aimed at "financing" risk taking. I mean, scientists who discovered many of the things we take for granted today, were in many cases not motivated by money at all, there were no venture capital firms, and if we go back far enough, mercantile capitalism didn't even exist yet (and yet these discoveries were still made). However, we do live in a different world, today scientific progress often requires very expensive laboratory equipment, robots, supercomputers, satellites, telescopes deployed in outer space, sophisticated lasers, etc. etc.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

certainly research requires money and there are too few sources of patient money. I have been involved is several start ups and VC's and private equity investors won't touch anything that requires further invention or research.

Angels are pretty scarce and are mostly successful entrepreneurs.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Perhaps something like JFK's space program would produce greater yields in terms of scientific productivity? Supposedly, that program, resulted in over ten dollars worth of economic development for every dollar invested into it. That is, much of what we call modern technology came from the space program.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

It would, although I believe that the ratio can go higher.

I was fortunate to be a young engineer on the Earth Landing System on the Apollo program.

I worked about 50 hours per week, carried a full load of courses, and had two children. I never had a deferment but chose not to participate in the war in Viet Nam. Without that program I would never have become an entrepreneur or participated in a lot of interesting technology development.

Was there waste in the program, certainly, and there were numerous failures. There were more than 50 failed tests in my system, yet it was the first major system qualified as "flight ready". The breakthrough came when a guy I worked with asked me to grab a pair of scissors to cut out 70% of the material in one of the rings of the parachutes. That solved a major problem and there was never another failure in that system.

The point is that programs that require innovation to achieve aggressive schedules work, and require the trade off of some waste for the benefit of having a solution sooner. That isn't a bad approach, really.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Yes, I think we need something like a combination of JFKs space program along with FDR's New Deal, that is, high tech infrastructure development. For example, a comprehensive magnetic levitation train system connecting the major cities of the US.

Of course, a space program would be great as well, setting up factories on the moon and eventually a colony on Mars.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Conceptually, we agree. I would have to examine the list of programs in greater depth in order to prioritize them.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Glad to hear that from somebody who has previously worked on such programs.

[-] -1 points by sirtruthhurtsalot (7) 2 years ago

The Chinese dictator's going to build Maglev trains, don't worry about that. He'll use cheap labor to do so. We can buy it from them when it's done.

Colony on mars? Good, we'll send you first. You'll live far from us in your plastic bubble waiting for terraforming to be finished.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

They already have a maglev train in Shanghai. Many people would jump at the opportunity to go to Mars.

[-] 0 points by sirtruthhurtsalot (7) 2 years ago

Yes, that's my point, they already have a Maglev in Shanghai so they can keep making copies and we buy them. Hello, anybody home?

Like I said, we all hope you make it to mars.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Only the best and brightest usually become astronauts. That's quite a compliment, thank you.

[-] 0 points by sirtruthhurtsalot (7) 2 years ago

They send chimps and idiots to test things out first. The brightest are kept for later missions when all the kinks are worked out.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Then have a nice trip. You'll see me on the later flight.

[-] 0 points by sirtruthhurtsalot (7) 2 years ago

I'm pretty sure you'll be heading the chimp squad. Or, who knows, you might be sent by your friend the Chinese dictator in which case you'll go with the cute pandas.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Seeing that you don't have anything further to discuss then degradation, I have to insist I don't want to be seen talking with you anymore.

[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Right, and the fact is, much of this research happens in universities or government labs/agencies, and it's funded by taxpayer dollars. So we can validly question the idea that this sort of innovation requires a capital structure like the one we currently have in place. However, it also makes the idea that this research can happen through small/local efforts (that aren't well funded), sort of questionable (or at least this is something that would seem to require a great deal of thought).

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I agree, but worthwhile things deserve careful thought. I know a lot of people have given this serious consideration over a period of years. I can see some blue ribbon commissions with some retired entrepreneurs like me on them (serving for free) to help set up a small handful of models to start, and then put more money in those that work best. One size doesn't fit all.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Yeah, I mean, small/local is great for smaller innovations, but mapping the genome, a trip to Mars, inventing a viable quantum computer, etc., this is all big money stuff. How could this stuff happen if science was reduced to small/local (and scattered) efforts, or even if there was some sort of loose confederation of localities who cooperated with each other, could that sort of set up really manage these types of huge research endeavors effectively? Definitely questionable (and here's where 19th century philosophy is pretty short on answers). My position is, basically, it's not inconceivable that small/local could (along with a confederation of local groups) work in this context, but it's also very possible (maybe even more likely) that this model could set back science (if applied broadly, without any exceptions). Of course this implies the potential utility of some sort of national government.

There's many other functions where I perceive problems. Keeping in mind stuff like 19th century anarchist philosophy was written in the context of homogeneous societies, who would enforce civil rights laws, would we have civil rights laws, I mean, the Bill of Rights is, by design, an anti-democratic document (calculated to protect minorities against tyranny by the majority).

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I agree with all you have just said.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I worked for many years for a mid sized corporation. They frequently told us that people were not motivated by money, but other things like positive reinforcement. They reminded some of us of that a lot around review/pay raise time.

Then of course they say that’s the only way to keep things going, give them tons of money.

[-] -2 points by delayedgrat (-157) 2 years ago

Most profits at most large corporations arent very big, maybe 3-10%. The employees can easily pool money and buyout most big corps.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

If everyone believes so strongly that everyone should be wealthy, why are so many working so hard to take somebody else's money away from them? The reason government costs so much is that everybody is trying to change it so that it only protects them from somebody who is exploiting others the same way they do. Getting the loophole to fit only you is expensive.

Getting rules that affect everybody the same? That is cheap. If nobody made a political contribution, that is what we would get. But, nobody wants that kind.

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I can understand that many feel the government is expensive, I don’t think it is, and many feel it is inefficient, again I’m not so sure, look at how many we imprison, look at our war machine, the government is very good at enforcing the will of the Royal 1%.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

If the real electorate set efficiency as the primary goal it would be more efficient. But since inefficiency in the form of kickbacks, in various forms, to the 1% has been the goal, the government has been very effective at delivering what was demanded. Government works the only question is, "For whom?"

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

true you cannot determine how well a job is being done, till you figure out what the job is

people work for those that provide funds, the people who pay for government offices get their money's worth, but we should impose public funding and outlaw politcal ads of all kinds, make those that hold office dependent on those they govern, of course if every voter in the counrty magicly becomes "above average" but that's not how average works

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

That only works in Lake Wobegon, where the women are strong, the men are good looking and the children are all above average.

I serve on a home owner's association without compensation and we consciously try to serve the priorities of the majority along with the covenants that every owner agreed to when the purchased. We get elected on our records and reputations with no campaigning what-so-ever. It isn't a perfect model but we should be closer to that one than the one we have now.

[-] 2 points by Shule (1696) 2 years ago

Here is the secret to being rich; be happy with what you have.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

so many say "the American dream" when it means so many different things, but many do dream of having lots of money one day, and hell why not? it's fun to do, just don't write your public policy that way I say

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 1 year ago

updated this with links

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 2 years ago

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/7/_/4/Job-Creators-Feudalism.jpg

A Letter from Mitt Romney to his Former Gardener: About the New Immigration Rules

The Borowitz Report has obtained the following letter from Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to his former gardener, José Salazar:

Dear José:

I’m writing to you today with some exceptionally good news. As you probably remember, a few months back I fired from you from your job mowing the lawn at my house. If I remember correctly, my exact words were, “I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals.”

Well, here’s the good news: now I can.

Thanks to President Obama’s executive order regarding immigration, I’m happy to report that I can hire you back to your old job, as long as you’re under 30. Am I right in assuming you are? You looked pretty young to me, especially for a person who spends so much time in the sun and isn’t allowed to come inside the house. You see, as much as I like firing people, I’ve come to regret letting you go, José. Ann and I miss you. The young man we hired to replace you, while “legal” and all, just doesn’t mow the lawn as well as you do, and he insists on being paid “on the books,” which rubs Ann and me the wrong way.

So I hope you’ll consider my offer to come back. The only teeny hitch – and I hope you’ll agree that it’s just a teeny one – is that I’ll have to fire you again come January. I’ll be President then, and I’ll have to reverse everything that Obama did, for Pete’s sake. But there’s a lot of mowing to be done between now and January, José, and Ann and I think you’re the man do it. If not, I suppose we’ll have to go out and hire ourselves a Greek fellow. I understand they work for nothing, or drachmas – whichever’s less. (Laughing Out Loud.)

Sincerely, Mr. Romney

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

hey this Werker guy stole my bit.... I just hope Mr. Romney realizes that this time he's got to do the paying "on the books" hate to see him get into legal trouble.

[-] 1 points by Justoneof99 (80) 2 years ago

You completely missed the point. It is not that people are "protective of the very wealthy." It is that people understand the dangers of greed, envy, and covetousness. Peace and contentment are of far more worth than whatever could be gained by taking what others have. I have never met a covetousness person who was content; no matter how much they have accumulated. “Envy is the religion of the mediocre. It comforts them, it soothes their worries, and finally it rots their souls, allowing them to justify their meanness and their greed until they believe these to be virtues. Such people are convinced that the doors of heaven will be opened only to poor wretches like themselves who go through life without leaving any trace but their threadbare attempts to belittle others and to exclude - and destroy if possible - those who, by the simple fact of their existence, show up their own poorness of spirit, mind, and guts. Blessed be the one at whom the fools bark, because his soul will never belong to them.” Carlos Ruiz Zafón

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

“gained by taking what others have”

Let me say first that one hopes if there is heaven and hell, that hell has a special place for those that would take the words of teachers and use them to deceive.

Let me ask you how do you feel about those that take the lives of others so they can add to what is already a gluttonous amount of wealth? Do you feel that those that choose that path should write the laws for everyone?

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

True, "it is the great American optimism that all things are possible", so create a new constitution, as follows:

We the peoples, in order to secure Freedom and Justice for All, do enact this Constitution for Strategic International Systems LLC (or SIS LLC) as summarized in the following Business Operations Forecast:

The customer value mission of SIS LLC is (1) to organize all customer-investors into 3,000 investment squad sites of 16 friends (or virtual specialties), and related internet investment legislatures of 50,000 friends (or virtual towns), requiring (2) a $20 weekly capital contribution for 1 year (or $1,000) to (3) create your investment club bank of 50,000 friends (or physical town) -- that is, having $50 million in initial assets -- which (4) due to the operation of today’s fractional banking system becomes (5) $500 million in new annual business loans (or $10,000 in new annual individual loans) from yourself as a new bank officer to yourself as a new business officer who (6) takes 75% employee business control as business officer-investors and 25% customer business control as bank officer-investors of (7) your specific 12 businesses (or investments) in your new bank investment account wherein (8) your investor voting power equals (9) your 1 of 12 levels of experience in (10) your 1 of 12 sectors in 1 of 50 industries in 1 of 200 occupations in 1 of 3,000 specialities which (11) votes-upon your purchasing (or investment) orders as (12) proposed by your employee-elected chain of command.

This means you will have 75% employee business control over your workplace as business officers and, as bank officers, 25% customer business control over all 12 investments (or businesses) in your new bank investment account. In turn, with this 100% town-level business control of your 3,000 workplaces, you can decrease your 12 customer consumption expenses by 75% for services, vehicles, education, retail, food, construction, technology, manufacturing, wholesale, health, justice, and banking expenses; that is, over your first 12 years of SIS LLC membership using a 75% more effective and efficient town design, and related 3,000 workplace designs (herein). Furthermore, while creating your new town & workplace design as described by this constitution, you will replace today’s communist big businesses, and related big governments, with your new small investment club banks, and related small businesses (or investments), as proposed, financed, and patronized by your 3,000 investment squad sites of 16 friends (or virtual specialties) in your internet investment legislature of 50,000 friends (or virtual town).

Why? First, because today’s executive business income (mostly from bank or financial asset income) is 33% of all income which is a huge amount of upper 1% income to split among yourselves as new bank officers having 25% customer business control, right? Second, because today’s executive business wealth is 42% of all wealth which is a huge amount of upper 1% wealth to split among yourselves as new business officers having 75% employee business control; that is, only after becoming new bank officers (above) first, right?

For example, this means if you earn $12/hour today, then you will earn $36/hour tomorrow after adding (1) your old wage income, plus (2) your 33% (more and new) interest income as a new bank officer, plus (3) your 42% (more and new) dividend & gain income as a new business officer. Together, these 4 sources of wealth & income from your specific 12 businesses (or investments) will double your net worth every 6-12 years (until retirement); that is, from the compound interest decline of today's upper 1% executives whom you will replace as the new bank & business investor-officers. So, with this power, let’s end today’s communist big businesses, and related big governments, okay? How? By helping to operate your own Business Operations Forecast (above) at http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/ ; so help us help you, today!

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

When it gets to my state I'll look at it. I think there is still a lot of work to do to lay down the fundamentals before we can start writing laws and such, there is a working group that has a good amendment to end corporate personhood and CU. At first glance this looks far too detailed for a constitutional amendment they should be brief and to the point. Take a look at the working group’s work and make some comment, I think you’ll see the it is better to keep it simple.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

It will never get to your state unless you join the SIS site (above) and show at least tacit political support now. Also, you can use NextDoor.com to implement this new constitution in your own neighborhood as a new economic, and related political, leader. It's town-based, not state-based. Towns rule above, individually and collectively, not counties, states, or nations.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

If we have a Constitutional Convention how do you know what they will write?

[-] 1 points by marvfriedenn (5) 2 years ago

In a commercial republic like the U.S., the more money one has, the more freedom one enjoys. And the more freedom, the happier we are. Who doesn't want to be happy? Now when all roads to happiness are detoured except one, namely, accumulation of wealth, the desire to be rich someday is as natural as the wish to be happy. That the goal can be achieved is optimistic. When time and time again, however, one fails to reach the goal, optimism turns desperate, the desperation, for instance, of compulsively playing the lottery. Nevertheless, I think you'll admit that a million to one odds of attaining happiness--even a happiness as uniform as a federal reserve note-- is better than no odds at all.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I don’t accept your premises that money equals freedom. Those who wish to use their money to control our government would wish you to think so, however I feel freedom includes the freedom to have a good life and decent shot at some of the finer things. Now if that results in some moderation in the items that can now only be obtained with money such as health care and education being allocated through a more efficient matter based on need and merit then I don’t see that as a restriction of freedom but an expansion of it. On a practical level this would require a total rethinking of our tax system and there I think Truman and Eisenhower were on the right track.

[-] 0 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

The full proposal touches upon all these problems, needs, and goals at: https://docs.google.com/a/strategicinternationalsystems.com/document/pub?id=1mKKLMTIyvRCLK2ppPj_GDjdieCvJnATaZaCmlajubWU

The devil is always in the details though. Almost all of our problems stem from not having a constitution that's detailed enough, so vague amendments won't do it, only a holistically detailed re-write as above will; a new and mathematical constitution for a new information age.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Do you really trust a complete Convention? I don't.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

I'm not sure what you mean by a "complete Convention"; please elaborate. Do you mean you don't trust direct democracy, or internet investment legislatures of 50,000 friends (or virtual towns) controlling investment club banks of 50,000 friends (or physical towns), and related 3,000 businesses as 3,000 investment squad sites of 16 friends (or virtual investment specialties)?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

If we have a Constitutional Convention how do you know what they will write?

[-] 0 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

It’s doesn’t matter what people believe, it only matters what they can PROVE as the law (or science) by physically TESTING it. Consequently, all I need is 50,000 people, in any town, to test the above new constitution, and thus prove it mathematically. Said another way, the law (or science) isn't subject to anyone's personal opinion, for after mathematical proof is provided through testing, then acceptance is the only rational, as opposed to emotional, opinion people can have in what they write, say, do, etc. For example, there is only one law of gravity, right? Why? Because that's what repeated physical testing has proven. Consequently, even though the church didn’t BELIEVE that Galileo was right about the sun (not the earth) being in the center of the solar system, Newton proved him right with his tests, and related mathematical proof. Of course, Newton’s law of gravity was further REFINED by Einstein, but that didn't change the substantial correctness of Newton's Law of Gravity as proven by his physical tests, and related mathematical proof. The same is true of natural social law, such as the above constitution (in the bottom link), as a natural physical law in need of testing, and related mathematical proof. Therefore, I assert to the world that the above Constitution, when physically tested by 50,000 people as an internet investment legislature in just 1 town, will mathematically prove that they will have a 75% competitive advantage over today’s upper 1% bank & business upper managers. Consequently, those 50,000 people will become the new bank & business investors-investors of their town, and thus take away that 33% of income and 42% of wealth which today’s upper 1% suck out of their town to their seaside villas elsewhere. Instead, you will have the seaside villa because you will have increased your income by 33% and your wealth by 42% while reducing their upper 1% wealth and income by an equal amount. That will be true of everyone in your town 50,000. Furthermore, much more important than those monetary (or quantitative) results, are the standard-of-living (or qualitative) results; namely, that you (and they) will thereafter work 75% less and yet have 75% more luxury. Therefore, you will have 75% more freedom (or time), by working 75% less, to enjoy that 75% more luxury, such as the luxury of spending 75% of your day studying (or enjoying) the arts and sciences (or whatever you choose to do) instead of working some mindless, boring, repetitive job (requiring no creativity or thought), all while having 33% more income and 42% more wealth (quantitatively) than you do today. However, 50,000 customer-investors have to DEMAND that this new constitution be TESTED by themselves as new bank & business investor-officers. Why? Because today’s upper 1% managers have a VESTED financial interest in maintaining the STATUS QUO to your (and their) detriment. Therefore, what have you (and they) got to lose (such as today’s bank and business dictators) by joining the web site above and becoming a consumption purchasing officer; that is, for a few hours a week, just to test and prove it to the world, bettering the world by your scientific accomplishment, and related entry into history. You have nothing to lose, but a great deal to gain, as cited above. Bottom line, you (and they) can have 75% more luxury for 75% less work if you will let me prove it to you by executing that new constitution as described above in just 1 town of 50,000 people. Why? Because it's the law (or science), and I can prove it mathematically if you participate in its testing, and thus join the site along with 50,000 other people whom you incrementally recruit as cited in the business operations forecast. The business operations forecast details the quality-of-life increase, the benefits, for the cost which is just a few hours of your (and their) time per week. Have you read that business operations forecast in the above "full proposal" link in order to understand the benefits to yourself and others (aside from making history)?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

you got your head stuck in a pile of leaves and the forest is burning dude

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

Also, in order to catch a criminal, like today's communist big banks, and related big businesses and big governments, the cop mirrors the criminal, step-by-step. That's what the above plan does, it mirrors the criminal who is focused on money by taking that money away from him and spreading it out. Today's upper 1% bank investor-officers have absolute power. I'm just giving the other 99% the means to have the same power, albeit much more greatly disbursed, for disbursed power can't be dictatorial like it is among today's upper 1% bank investor-officers, and therefore cannot be a "scam" because so many are being "watchful" in the above chain of command (if you read the bottom link). If you like being suckered by these dictators, that's okay, for you're not be the first to be suckered by these upper 1% repuglicans, nor will you be the last. My direct democrats will do better -- bank on it -- while overthrowing today's fake democrats too (who are just more repuglicans in disguise). See you in the financial statements -- or perhaps you'd rather remain being a repuglican stooge or demo-fascist know-nothing. No, then join the above site to at least show tacit political support for the above new constitution for new times. Also, start your own NextDoor.com site in your neighborhood to create the internet investment legislature needed to implement that new constitution in your town as a new economic, and related political, leader yourself, for as Gandhi said: “You must be the change you wish to create”.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 2 years ago

Finally, the actual return for a bank investor-officer is much greater than it is for a business investor-officer. For example, if you invest a $1,000 in capital you can loan out 10 times more (or $10,000). If you loan that out at 10%, then your interest income is $1,000 on a $1,000 investment, or a 100% return per year (but you have to have 50,000 people and a CEO plus staff to make that return). Nonetheless, that's why banks earn 33% of all profit (3 times higher than any other industry). Consequently, if you are not a bank investor-officer, you're nobody because the entire business and government system revolves around bank investor-officers, right? For example, when the president speaks, the market yawns most of time, but when the federal reserve bank chairman speaks, the markets often react with huge movements in the trillions of dollars. Do you like being a nobody (like today’s presidents), not me and mine, for we bank on the law (or science) -- he, he, he.

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

The wealthy need no one's protection.

They will be just fine for the most part.

The issue is not protection, the issue is theft. Most people have a moral aversion to stealing from others, regardless of how much they may have.

There are several problems with increasing taxes (on anyone):

  • The money goes into a black hole of Gov inefficiency. This is not only a waste but a moral crime. Only 30% of of every tax dollar targeted for the poor ever gets to the people in need. Charities do a much better job.

  • As Gov grows it continues to erode our freedoms and further concentrates power in the hands of the few. Don't feed the beast.

  • Gov is now close to 40% of the US economy and there is little competition within the many layers and no incentive to improve, innovate, or excel. Public education is the saddest example.

http://libertariananswers.com/is-private-charity-more-efficient-than-government-welfare/

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Employers are a much bigger threat to freedom than the government and it is they who steal our very lives, bringing balance to our economic system is not just about justice it is the only way to save the system overall, no system as unbalanced as our economy can continue.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

There are fewer billionaires than Senators what is concentrating the real power?

[-] -1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

That pretty much sums it up. It's so simple and clear and obvious. Too bad most don't understand it. So many people are hung up on what others have and foolishly expect the govt to make it all better.

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

Generally, the Gov makes things worse. All that people need to be successful is a little luck and a little government.

  • P. J. O'Rourke
[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

Some fun facts!!

"The total lending for the Fed's "broad-based emergency programs" was $16,115,000,000,000. That's right, more than $16 trillion. The four largest recipients, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch and Bank of America, received more than a trillion dollars each." - Alan Grayson after the release of the GAO audit of the Federal Reserve

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf

Unlimited resources for the banks, and nothing for the people.

So I ask... when will people rise up and start speaking against the federal reserve? Everyone

They give banks unlimited resources, the banks keep it on deposit, gain high interest and pay huge CEO bonuses, fat cat city... all while the rest of America falls apart.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

We must reshape what money means in America.

[-] -2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I'm going to try to buy my groceries with speech next week. Wish me luck.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I hear Stephen King does pretty well at that, the world awaits.....

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

He does at that. Got me there. Lol.

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Luck.

I think perhaps he meant to say our perception of money.

We need to get past the propaganda that monetary wealth and possessions means happiness.

People need to stop striving for monetary wealth and need to start striving for health.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I agree that what you suggest is a more fulfilling path, also there is this ideal that money represents freedom and that the most important thing in life is to protect our money, we build a system where our very survival depends on processing money then it is no small wonder that people put it in high esteem, I suggest that we see freedom more as the freedom to live, and money as a reward for the finer things for the clever hard working people to feel good about, this is the model accepted by people in Sweden I believe, it is my take on it so how they describe their social compact I'm sure is based on their experiences, but here the right has worked for many years to associate freedom with money not just in speech but throughout society, we could address that and I think it would build support for broader health, education and such that should be based on need or potential not wealth. ( DK I hope you know that I go into more detail with you, not because I think you need it, but because I think you can get it and are a light into the darkness yourself)

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Thank you for sharing and for the compliment. But please always use as much detail as you feel comfortable with as that helps others to more fully understand as well.

Yes we desperately need a rebirth of real values.

Education - for one thing I feel that is wrong is that it ignores the individual. Individual strengths as well as weakness. It also ignores social values purposely for some stupid bend over backwards separation of church and state. Social values/ethics/morals need not be a religious issue.

Anyway I feel that you know this as you too are shining a light into the darkness - I go into the detail - for our better understanding of each other as well as for the better understanding of others looking in.

We make progress - the word is spreading.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Being a good bureaucrat, the sort of person that does well on a board or in a CEO office, that’s important work and we should reward that, but to not listen to the nurses, the teachers, the cops, the even the doctors and lawyers. To allow our economic system to become so twisted that airline pilots qualify for food stamps because we have bought into some crazy ideal that we are so stupid that if we try to tweak it a bit the rich people will all close their shops and fire everybody. I mean how much ass do the people have to kiss to keep these guys happy they own everything, now they’re complaining about having to pay back the retirement money they have been stealing from the working man’s trust fund, they call it entitlements, well how about we call the bank loans an “entitlement” or the government interest on the 15 trillion an “entitlement” and tell the people expecting them sorry.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Let them close-up shop and move out - let the TBTF fail. We do not need them - on the contrary they need us - the market the consumer.

Let them all pack-up and go - we can then get to work fixing this country - without interference.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I agree, but they can leave the capital we created back here or go to jail, I mean their the ones complaining about theft, we need to take the cash out the PIGGY banks they got it in and put it out as wages anyway so we can get this thing going again.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Give them the Madoff makeover = Riches to rags to jail or deportation.

Freeze their foreign/offshore accounts as they (the government) have done to other criminals (foreign criminals).

Tax/tariff imports ( all goods manufactured outside of the USA ) so as to remove advantage over domestic businesses.

Restructure the fuel industry to implement true green energy technology - no more bio fuel no more fossil fuel - phase out pollution technology ASAP. Creating new jobs and industry in the process.

Cancel subsidies to businesses that are making profits and do not need the gravy train support of the taxpayers money.

Stop the privatization of social programs - adopt universal non-profit health care - stop the privatization of the military.

Reinvest in the people - show our children that they do have a future. Start by implementing a living wage for all workers.

Upgrade the educational system to be free to all citizens and modern to reflect the technology of today - but do not skimp on the basics and the ability to function without technological support as that would be foolish - we need to be able to think for ourselves and be able to problem solve and apply our knowledge in practical fashion. Besides it will take a while to fully update all of societies infrastructure - and one should never count on technology as always being available.

All of these things and more and we will be on a healthy course to the future.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

SCOTUS says taxes are not theft!!!!

[-] -2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Money = speech, therefore, I thought it worth a stab to see if I could buy my groceries with speech next week. Equating money to speech is already bananas and who knows what absurd shift in thinking will occur with money next......money = life. Yep, we really need to rethink and reshape what money means before it gets any crazier.

[+] -4 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

We need to see a rebirth of real values.

Family Friends Neighbors community environment health.

[-] -3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

We need an entire ethos makeover.

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

The public has been a victim of psychological warfare for decades. Commercialism consumerism capitalism and more.

From the cradle to the grave commercial propaganda is there telling the people what they need to live. Bling.

This has been supported by the government as a good way to control and direct the population in ways the government would like them to go.

This indoctrination is also carried out in schooling. Stand by your values kids - What (?) - not to worry we will be telling you what those values are.

[-] -2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

My milkshake is better than your milkshake. Keeping up with the Jones'. It's all the same. Ronald (he whom I refuse to type a last name) reshaped the old values behind the American dream into the more selfish value of "You too can be rich".

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

This is also why ethics are not being taught. Ethics has a tendency to make people ask questions. Can't have that - they would be questioning the indoctrination.

[-] -2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I disagree. I recently went to school to be certified to work in a medical office. They did, indeed, teach a whole class on ethics. The problem is the culture of ignoring those ethics in real world situations. Ethics is handled by 'winking' in that knowing way - yeah, it is wrong, but it is okay, everybody does it.

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

There are certain places/positions in society where ethics are wanted/needed by those in power - so that they do not fall victim to their own BS by mistake/oversight.

I think it is also why you see more social activism on average out of the medical community - from those who actually do the care giving.

[-] -2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

At the bottom of the medical community perhaps, but at the top, it seems more about lobbying for big pharma. My primary teacher ranted a bit every now and then on how big pharma astronomically jacks up the prices on critical medicines that people must have in order to keep living. Talk about kicking somebody when they are down.

[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

-3 the corpoRat shills do not like this conversation.

[-] 3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I guess this shit hit them where it hurts.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

They have taken over the site since limits were placed on the value of the vote.

It's like the Kochs own it now.

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

shooz ??? vote value? It is great that they can not collapse a comment anymore - but vote value?? I don't understand.

[-] 2 points by shooz (7665) 9 minutes ago

They have taken over the site since limits were placed on the value of the vote.

It's like the Kochs own it now. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

A catch 22? Tell me business practices are not messed-up.


[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 11 minutes ago

After I graduated with a 4.0 gpa and perfect attendance, I still can't land a job in that profession because 1) they won't hire me unless I already have held that exact position somewhere previously 2) I don't pass their debt test. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I caught half of an interview on NPR radio talking about the cultural shift in the hiring practices of businesses. I don't know who the guest was, but he made some excellent observations on how we went away from cultivating talent and promoting from within. They simply want someone who can step in and do the job 'right now'.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yes - food for thought - a dose of reality - stuff that could awaken the public.

Makes the shills as crazy as a shithouse Rat.


[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 0 minutes ago

I guess this shit hit them where it hurts. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I can keep this shit up all day.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Later.


-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 0 minutes ago

I've seen that 'aww, boss got feelings hurt' expression before. Good talking with you. I've got to run for a while, see you later. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yep - owners/management and workers - the more things change the more they stay the same.

My former boss once said that he was trying to get the company formatted like a fortune 500 operation. He thought it was a great way to go - had this shit eating grin on his face while he was waiting for me to say what a great idea. Unfortunately I disappointed him when I asked him why he would want to do a thing like that? That it seemed many fortune 500's at the time were having problems - legal problems and employment problems. That rebuttal won me no friends - he just looked confused and hurt and suspicious.


[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 1 hour ago

I can relate. I had similar experiences coming up from the bottom to managing a small warehouse. I found myself in the position of being nothing more than a meat shield for the owners to lower employee expectations at the same time they wanted me to push to get more out of them.

Once I got called into the owners' office because a member of my team told a member of another department about receiving a raise. I was told to reprimand this employee for talking about pay with other employees.

I thought I was going to get fired, but I refused to do it. I told them the right thing to do is explain the raise policies to the concerned party that raised the issue - people are generally fair and reasonable, and if you're being fair about giving out raises, there is no reason to hide raises from your employees. Better yet, make it transparent what every employee makes.

The owners didn't like it, but they did not fire me and followed through with my first suggestion. Not the transparency part of course. lol. that would have been too much. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I've seen that 'aww, boss got feelings hurt' expression before. Good talking with you. I've got to run for a while, see you later.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Also correct. You know the people, the people know you, you know the business and get a better feel for what is actually necessary.

That was part of the problem with my last job. I started form the ground floor in receiving and inspection, then as the company grew my job and responsibilities grew as well - to the point where I ended up writing the policies and procedures for the QA department - well long story short I also got to see more of the total operation and used my position to advocate for the workers.

I worked at making their jobs better as it made our quality better but I also started to advocate for a more even sharing of the companies success.

Well anyway that's not the whole story but a good part of it.

They liked my improvements to quality but did not appreciate the idea of sharing the rewards.


[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 6 minutes ago

I never thought of it that way. But it makes sense. Another thought: people who form close relationships are more likely to feel secure in getting together to question leadership decisions. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I can relate. I had similar experiences coming up from the bottom to managing a small warehouse. I found myself in the position of being nothing more than a meat shield for the owners to lower employee expectations at the same time they wanted me to push to get more out of them.

Once I got called into the owners' office because a member of my team told a member of another department about receiving a raise. I was told to reprimand this employee for talking about pay with other employees.

I thought I was going to get fired, but I refused to do it. I told them the right thing to do is explain the raise policies to the concerned party that raised the issue - people are generally fair and reasonable, and if you're being fair about giving out raises, there is no reason to hide raises from your employees. Better yet, make it transparent what every employee makes.

The owners didn't like it, but they did not fire me and followed through with my first suggestion. Not the transparency part of course. lol. that would have been too much.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Promotion from within for baseline workers has been dying out for a very long time. I worked at CDC ( Control Data Corp. ). They would accept some interns for a work study program but never hired from that pool. They would hire from other sources.

Insane?

Or shrewd policy?

See if a worker comes up through the ranks - the worker has a good idea of what goes on on the level they just left - they have also developed relation ships with people from that level.

So perhaps an advanced inside person might have some loyalty to the group that they just left.

Bring someone in from the outside and you do not have growing loyalty issues.


[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 0 minutes ago

I caught half of story on NPR radio talking about the cultural shift in the hiring practices of businesses. I don't know who the guest was, but he made some excellent observations on how we went away from cultivating talent and promoting from within. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I never thought of it that way. But it makes sense. Another thought: people who form close relationships are more likely to feel secure in getting together to question leadership decisions.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yep - it is kinda like having a set of nasty cheerleaders.

You know you are doing good when they try to mess with you.


[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (3049) 0 minutes ago

I can keep this shit up all day. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

After I graduated with a 4.0 gpa and perfect attendance, I still can't land a job in that profession because 1) they won't hire me unless I already have held that exact position somewhere previously 2) I don't pass their debt test.

[-] -3 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yep - the top of the food chain again. This is where the nasty work takes place. Profit over People.

[-] -3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Shit always rolls downhill.

[+] -4 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

That is exactly why we need to get the greedy corrupt manipulators to the bottom where they belong - let em drown in their own shit - or change their ways. LOL

[-] -3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

No shit sherlock. LoL.

[+] -5 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

That's a really good one JC! This could make for an interesting direct action campaign. Buying groceries by talking the store into submission. Flood a grocery store with patrons/protesters who will talk up all the employees, grocery carts full, and everyone just stands around talking until the goods are 'paid for'.

[+] -4 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Satire, girl....it's called satire.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

In reply to the "right now" aspect of those hiring.

Its a culture wide thing. Everyone wants everything "right now". Its pathetic, and like Ive said a million times- Politicians cannot fix a culture. They are the result of it. Because that is where they came from.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I agree. Being a society that wants instant gratification is everybody's fault. I saw the video clip of Dylan going off. The politicians are shills, we cannot look to them to solve are problems.

[+] -8 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

speech <> privacy

money for donation need not be private in terms of speech

[-] -1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I'm all for transparency, but we should probably go a bit further than that with the whole idea of money.

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

all transaction can be publicly posted on the internet

that should give money some focus

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I like the idea of an open money trail...fun to follow it back and pin the tail on the rich donkey.

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

or eating peanuts the elephants missed

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Matlock, may I call you Matlock? I hope you are not getting paid by the word.

[-] 1 points by Fransel (3) 2 years ago

Obviously there is no absolute answer. In a capitalist system there is always a balance between government and free enterprise. Based on the tax-rates before Reagan some would not consider that America Capitalist though it was. on the other hand in the 1920's most owned their owned land without property taxes-does that sound like anarchism? A state which takes everything the people owns and gives it to the banks through the Fed (while throwering demonstrators in jail) and property taxes is little different from a communist regime which takes everyones property and jails dissenters. So I agree what is needed at the least is a balance and we are at the extreme of one kind of system where all resources are going to the banks and the government beomces the opressor instead of the fair minded-cop. I don't know what that is but it is not Capitalism (or Communism or Anarchism for that matter). To correct this we need at a minimum to return to real Capitalism which means major banking reform/legislation

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

to create and regulate money, modernize and provide stability for the monetary system of the United States, retire public debt and reduce the cost of public investment, and for other public purposes.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr6550/text

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

I think the idea that people are so protective of the very wealthy, is what's "sold" by the mainstream media, so we believe it. The lawmakers are the ones that are protective of the very wealthy. Most middle class Americans are content making a living wage and being able to pay their rent and buy food in the same month. Turn OFF the tube.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

but people are an easy sell when the hook is based are how smart they are

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Many of your points I agree with. I'd suggest however, that we would be better off increasing the amount of taxable economic activity, rather than increasing the tax rate.

That is, with a New Deal style, creation of credit for infrastructure development. This would create millions of good paying jobs, as well as profitable businesses, which would increase government revenue without increasing anyone's tax rate.

I'm aware of the studies showing higher degrees of happiness in countries with higher tax rates, but that is in comparison to America today. I wonder how the same studies would turn out comparing America under JFK with those same high tax rate countries.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

In the TED talk featured in this post it is shown that taxing can achieve the desired results, another is to spread income, unions are best to do that, but they are under attack as well

http://occupywallst.org/forum/sorry-republicans-these-are-the-facts/

top rate under JFK was 70% I think, that might do it

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Interesting.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

keep in mind JFK lowered it to 70%, it was 90% during the boom years of the fifties

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Is this information online, if so, where?

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 2 years ago

Thanks, I'll check it out.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

The dollar is the God we truly worship.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

those with money have convinced us that money is freedom, so if you want some you better work for me

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Not just freedom, but salvation. Money can save us from every problem, move any mountain, and conquer all injustice.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

their belief in money is strong, they have very carefully cnnected in the American mind that the use of money is the same as freedom, so taxes, regulation these all interfer with their freedom, they trun Americans into wage slaves and call it freedom

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Some have a religious belief in “free enterprise” they believe that God picks winners and losers, God decides who is worthy of great riches and who is not, and in their beliefs what God has put together, let no man (or government) tear asunder.

[-] 0 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

money is what we use to pay the bills. GOD is who we pray to.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Or prey with.

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

ego is our will to balance between instinct and social rules

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

while I may not agree that it is instinctual to desire control, it is common

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by monetarist (40) 2 years ago

I don't think that's the case. Considering that we have median income of $25k (correct me if I am wrong), it should be statistically extremely tough to break into the (moderately) rich club, say annual income of over $250k. I don't think the average McDonalds or Starbucks employee or even the average grad thinks he/she would be 'rich one day'. May be you had such an idea. When I completed my undergrad, from a rather prestigious univ, I was not hoping to get rich, I knew I would have a comfortable life and had a starting salary of around $80k. I never thought I would be a millionaire one day, though that does seem a possibility now. But most working people know pretty well where they would end up in life, their career progressions and how well off it will make them. Outliers are very few. Say if I were to quit my job today and start my own firm, I might become the next billion dollar IPO or I might fail which is what happens to most startups.

I am not protective of the rich. I am protective of people's right to own the fruits of their labor, whether it's the CEO or the blue collar worker.

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

So you are a firm supporter of unions? I did not know that, it is the method used in Japan, prevent excessive inequality at the distribution point. Do you have any other suggestions, (other than super strong unions, nation card sign law, that sort of thing which I am sure you support being in favor of people getting to keep what they earn and all) as to how to fix the hugely flawed system we have that result in so much for so few?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Part of the problem of living "for" the fantasy of extreme wealth - is that wealth - material possessions are pushed at the people every day - nonstop. This has become the approved god of America and much of the civilized (?) world. The gospel as presented and taught by the CorpoRATs.

You can only have a quality life through riches - so sayeth the god money.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

manipulation of thought through media is essential to maintenance of the status quo

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I thought I was being manipulated and then I was sure I wasn't.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

As we see in the TED talks that are being released the whole concept of efficiency through concentration is false, or at least it can go too far. The wealthy send their cronies (the GOP) out to tell Americans that the only way the avg. joe gets anything is to give everything to the wealthy and hope they drop some. We can win elections with the truth and realization that elections matter, (till they don’t). The right has maybe ten or twenty years before the wedge issues catch up with them, look for some serious election rigging before then.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Sure it works when it works. But it can exceed the optimum point. Efficiency isn't always the most important criteria. There is a scale that is most efficient for delivering wilted flowers. But maybe the market wants fresh ones.

I think you just described "crummy capitalism." I hope it doesn't take that long.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago
[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Yep, it used to be that buying more created jobs. It still does, but they are in some other country.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

we are now a service based economy and the folks with all the money can only use so much servicing, even Mick said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y78mv4cK1CI

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I get nervous in the service.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Psychological warfare practiced on society - how to control the masses - at least until the corpoRATs fuck up and destroy their own illusions by destroying the economy and bringing down their own house of cards - smoke and mirrors.

This is what we are trying to reverse - decades and decades of psychological warfare.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

responded to BS below but same to ya!

damn that felt wierd, but BS may want to think about that name or maybe he did?

early morning rising and the con hunting looks good today....

[-] -2 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

CorpoRat troll/shill attacks do seem to be on the rise.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

these TED talks that underdog and GF posted got them stired up though, that one by UD really put a bur under their butts

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yes anything that is going to demonstrate reality and abuse are going to have the Shills go Ape Shit Nuts.

They ( the greedy corrupt manipulators ) can not have the public becoming aware.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

truth has been their enemy for quite a while now, that's why they started the whole discredit the media thing, just in case some news show screwed up and told some, like back when a few were talking about the wealth issue (when OWS was pushing it) but now the real problem has faded back into the background while we chit chat about whatever distraction of the day passes for news

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Soap operas are popular as they are so outrageous - that makes them a nice psychological distraction for the masses - the average person can watch and sympathize/empathize with the characters and say - now those people are really screwed up - makes them feel better about their own personal situations.

News media has been pointed to playing down real information. And to also deliver feel good stories to offset any bad news that does get presented.

It is more complicated then that - but you know that.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

they should call them magic shows, instead of news shows with all the distraction going on

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27763) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yep - smoke and mirrors - with lots of pretty people doing fun and expensive things during the propaganda breaks.

[-] -1 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

If you haven't noticed, people who become "wealthy" do so because they have a plan to become wealthy.

There are lots of people out there who are "fat and happy" just to work a 40 hour week, have enough money to pay their bills with some left over for their enterntainment.

This country wasn't built on "being part of the status quo" it was built by people who had a vision - be it inventing something, starting up a manufactruing plant or investing their money.

I often ask this question of people who like to complain about not having anything - where do you want to be 5 years from now? The vast majority say - well I don't know. And to that I answer "well, 5 years from now you will be exactly where you are today".

It surprises them when they hear that reply but you know what - it's true. If you don't have a plan to bcome successful and wealthy, you never will. You will continually blame someone else because you have nothing - yet you will make no effort beyond what is needed to become successful and wealthy.

Many a people who have succeded have failed miserably along the way but they didn't let that stop them. It's up to the individual to want to be successful and wealthy and not the federal government nor your next door neighbor.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

most wealthy people are born that way

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/

[-] -2 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

Back up your statement with facts - prove that "most wealthy people are born that way". And when you do, I will provide you with names of people who were "dirt poor" and as a result of their vision to succede became very wealthy - and it isn't just a few people.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

I will provide you with names of people who were "dirt poor" and as a result of their vision to succede became very wealthy

And I'll match that list with the names of lottery winners who became wealthy out of sheer luck. The odds are about the same.

If you believe that there is equal economic opportunity here in the US today, you believe in unicorns, elves, and fairy dust.

[-] 2 points by HempTwister (667) from Little Rock, AR 2 years ago

Yeah, Ross Perot was from my home town. He talks about his humble beginnings. His father owned a cotton gin. They just have a different concept of dirt poor. Now Clinton and Obama really were. But that is why they hated Clinton so much. He did not care about money. How do you buy a man like that. FOUL

[-] -1 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

It's interesting you mention that. Just yesterday I was at a auto parts store talking with one of the employees. We were having a casual conversation and I noticed he was in a good mood.

When I mentioned it, he said he had been promoted to supervisor. Now when we talked about his promotion I asked him if it was something he was looking forward to.

And you know what he said - he said he had his eye on this job for several years and had worked dilligently to get it - his reward for his focus on wanting that job was "he got the job" because he had a "plan".

He also mentinoned when I asked if he had other plans for the future - he told me he wanted to start his own business.

So here is an example of a person who had a "plan" on wanting to succede and he did. This applies to anything a person does - be it working on a car, learning to drive, learning a trade or wanting to become wealthy.

If you think that there is no "equal economic opportunity here in the US today". with that way of thinking 5 years from now you will be complaining about the same thing and be exactly where you are today.

Your way of thinking is an example of how not to become successful.

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Doesn't apply to me. I have played the game and am now retired. I have run my own business and know what it takes. Plans are all nice and wonderful, but if you think that luck has no place in the scheme of things, you are living in a fantasy land, or you never owned a business for any length of time.

I wish your friend in the autoparts store well. But I won't deny reality. Anecdotal evidence is nice and makes you feel all warm and fuzzy about your beliefs, but thats all it is a nice story to prove your point.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

I don't disagree with "luck" playing a part in the game. But where does the "luck" come from - being at the right place at the right time and having the necessary credentials to go along with it.

That cannot be denied.

As far as being involved with a business, I managed and ran a small HVAC business for about 10 years. No luck in keeping the business running but persistence and taking care of the customers - regardless of the situation - that's what kept the doors open - and of course, proper management of the company helps too.

So, here is one example where "luck" didn't play a part in operating a business and there are many, many more out there.

However many a business do fail because of "poor management" and all the luck in the world won't keep them afloat.

[-] -1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

When did he say luck had nothing to do with it? Must you make shit up to avoid conceding a point? If you're retired, shouldn't you have grown out of that lame nonsense years ago?

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Following me around to check on my conversations? Butthurt must run deep in you.

[-] -1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

do I know you?

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

LMFAO!

[-] -3 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

You're so cynical, you're naive. People work their way to wealth all the time, even in this shit economy and even with the govt working against them at every turn to take as much as they can and hand it to ungrateful malcontents like you.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

What exactly has the government handed me?

[-] -2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

a trainload of stupidity, apparently.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 2 years ago

Oh so witty! How long did you have to think to dream that one up?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Here is an extensive and detailed break down for you, as far as your antidotal “evidence”, now provide your list if it has a million names on it you might have a point, I’ll be waiting……

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/

[-] -1 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

Nobody is stopping you from entering the enchanted land of peace and higher taxes. Just send the treasury more money than you owe. IOW, put your money (not someone else's) where your mouth is.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I think Buffet offered to match some guys dollar for dollar but none took him up on it.

[-] -3 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

And he surely couldn't afford to do it on his own, huh?

What a fucking hypocrite.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I know you are but what am I

[-] 0 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

You're an idiot if you think I was calling you a hypocrite and not buffet.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

you're just an idiot

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

you are.

[-] -2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I think people just see what a horrible job the gov does with everything it touches, and figures that a bunch of beaurecrats in DC should learn to make do with what they have, before they start asking for more.

Perhaps prioritize a few things?

Im never going to be rich. Most end up in the same bracket as their parents, for a variety of reasons. But I dont think that the people I know who have worked very hard and long and made some good decisions (with a bit of luck too) should be taxed noticably more than I, for the good of a corrupted being that supplied minimal services, but bombs and steals like there is no tomorrow.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

A lot of people have the impression the government does a bad job till you start pointing out things, like Seal Team 6 and the post office stats ( which crush FedEx and UPS), the fact is the feds are very good at what they do, it’s just in many cases they are very underfunded. Even take that trip to Vegas everybody got all hot and bothered over, look at the party that Enron guy threw with the Roman slaves and all.

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Seal Team 6? What the hell does that have to do with federal programs?

I dont think they do EVERYTHING bad, but the underlying feature of "its not their money" makes it very hard for them to move with any sense of urgency.

I didnt care too much about that party in Vegas thing, it goes on all the time. Typical of the culture, but not a rare occasion.

There are basically two things that the federal gov should be involved in: military and infrastructure. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Our foreign policy is a disaster. The two big welfare programs they run are SS and medicare. They take taxes directly out of people's paychecks to fund it, which is basically them just being a middle man that transfers the money. Pretty easy.

Everything else they touch is garbage. The EPA is a joke, pollution keeps getting worse. The FDA is a joke, our food is loaded with chemicals and 100 million people are on pills. The Dept of Energy is just a front for the oil companies, or we would all have more than ONE choice when getting energy for our homes. The Dept of Education just wants us all to be mindless consumers, or the standards would be going up, not down.

Nothing they do is really that complicated, but there just isnt any motivation to achieve because of the lazy culture of politicians.

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

The biggest problem in America is too many people thinking it is their money and not enough thinking it’s really our money. We should decide as a nation what we want to do with the money we make, we should not leave it up to the bankers and CEO’s that rig the system to put it all in their private accounts. We need to bust it loose and put it to work for all of us. We do that through our government.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Right, and Im pretty sure we all want the exact opposite of the agencies that I listed above, as in agencies that actually do their job.

Im pretty sure most of us want them to end this military nonsense, but they wont. And Im pretty sure we all want out bridges and roads in better shape, but they wont fix em.

Im pretty sure we want them to leave SS and Medicare the hell alone, but they wont. They've already defunded medicaid, and SS is next.

So pretty much everything the vast majority of Americans want, they do the oppposite. Im not sure what other options there are to get the stuff done, but you can clearly see why people hate the gov so much.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Do you have any ideal what the Hudson river was once like?

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

wet.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Yes, and its still disgusting.

I used to be able to eat fish out of lake ontario too. Cant do that anymore.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

"PCB contamination

PCBs were widely used as dielectric and coolant fluids, for example in transformers, capacitors, and electric motors.[33]General Electric manufacturing facilities at Hudson Falls and Fort Edward discharged between 209,000–1,300,000 lb (95–590 metric tons) of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs) into the river from 1947 to 1977. The PCBs caused extensive contamination of fish in the river and apparently triggered a rapid evolutionary change in the Atlantic tomcod, which after about 50 years of exposure evolved a two amino acid change in its AHR2 receptor gene, causing the receptor to bind more weakly with PCBs than normal.[34] The mutation does not prevent the tomcods from accumulating PCBs in their bodies and passing them on to striped bass and whatever else eats them.[34] This system of passing contamination on to larger organisms is also known as biomagnification. The toxic chemicals also accumulated in sediments that settled to the river bottom.[35] The highest concentration of PCBs comes from the Thompson Island Pool. [36]

In 1966, Pete Seeger and Toshi Seeger founded Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, an environmental education organization and an actual boat (a sloop), that promotes awareness of the river and its history. Clearwater has gained national recognition for its activism starting in the 1970s to force a clean-up of PCB contamination of the Hudson caused by GE and other companies.[37]

There are many economic effects caused by the PCB Contamination. The water cannot be used for agriculture use, money is lost from the fishing industry because of the ban on recreational fishing, medical expenses for people who have side-effects from the water, and the cost of clean-up efforts.

In 1976 the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation banned all fishing in the Upper Hudson due to health concerns with PCBs.[38][39] PCBs are thought to be responsible for health issues that include Neurological Disorders, lower IQ and poor short-term memory (active memory), hormonal disruption, suppressed immune system, cancer, skin Irritations, Parkinson’s Disease, ADHD, heart disease, and diabetes. PCB contamination in humans come from drinking the contaminated water, absorption through the skin, eating contaminated aquatic life, and inhaling volatilized PCBs. PCB contamination is especially dangerous for pregnant and nursing women. The contamination can reach the fetus and potentially cause birth defects. Contamination through breast milk can also have harmful effects on the child indirectly.

In 1977, PCBS were banned in the United States.[40] In 1983, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared a 200-mile (322-km) stretch of the river, from Hudson Falls to New York City, to be a Superfund site requiring cleanup.This superfund site is considered to be one of the largest in the nation. In 2001, after a ten year study of PCB contamination in the Hudson River, the EPA proposed a plan to clean up the river by dredging more than 100,000 pounds of PCBs. The worst PCB hotspots are targeted for remediation by removing and disposing of more than 2.6 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment.[41] The dredging project is the most aggressive environmental effort ever proposed to clean up a river, and will cost GE about $460,000,000. GE began sediment dredging operations to clean up the PCBs on May 15, 2009.[42] This stage (Phase One) of the cleanup was completed in October 2009, and was responsible for the removal of approximately 300,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment, which was more than the targeted amount. Over 620 barges filled with sediment were transported to the processing facility on the Champlain Canal, and over 80 rail cars transported the dredged sediment to a waste facility in Andrews, Texas. [43]The true scope of Phase One was about 100,000 cubic yards more than planned, and Phase Two will be expanded as a consequence. Before Phase two of the cleanup, GE was given the opportunity to opt out of the clean up efforts, but they chose to complete the project. Phase two of the cleanup project, led by GE and monitored by the EPA, began in June 2011. This phase targets approximately 2.4 million cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from a forty mile section of the Upper Hudson River. Phase Two of the clean up will take approximately 5 to 7 years to complete.[44] "

Unlike you I see a lot of good work being done by the government here but there are always those that would rather throw stones than bulid something.

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Cleaning up a section of the Hudson does not mean that it still isnt a front for the corporations.

Im not saying they havent done some good stuff, and havent helped. But I would grade their efforts as a C, tops. Certainly not an A.

So the question remains, why are they operating at a CD level, instead of A?

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Because a bunch of people are standing outside throwing stones, instead of rolling up their sleeves and helping out?

[-] -3 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

Because it is wrong to take the possessions of another.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

is it wrong to take the life of another? even a day at a time. don't the money lenders steal your life? you say but you agreed to the deal, but what choice does a working man have? work or starve. when they take 90% of the fruit of your labor what is "right" about that? possession is a matter of law, if the law say you own the tax it's not your possession no more so than when the custom hands your the hundred while you're working the register, it's not your money, your just handling it for a bit.

[-] -3 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

I have the choice whether to buy an item from a particular corporation or to buy from another corporation or not to buy at all. I have no choice about whether or not I wish to have money TAKEN from me by the government.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Nor should you. That is why taxes were invented. Voluntary contributions were invented soon after, but they never caught on.

I believe in government protecting me from you and that is worth something.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Tell me this, if you are born without wealth, do you have a choice to work or not?

[-] -3 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

There are many people who have no wealth who choose not to work. There are homeless people who have no wealth and do not work. There are people who live in the hills of Appalachia that have no wealth and do not work. There are natives in Alaska that have no wealth and do not work.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

You are correct to point out that those that live closest to the way we did long before machinery work much less. As desire for manufacture goods allow the people with a bit of a edge to exponentially increase their wealth by skimming a bit from many workers, the hours of labor grew much longer. Almost right away life became far more difficult for most and easier for a few. To satisfy the greed of the new born 1% the hours go up, the workers organize and the hours go down hours move in reverse of unions, when unions are stronger, people get to keep more of what they earn, and as a result get by better on fewer hours worked. Thank you for spurring the conversation forward.

[-] -2 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

I got news for you... Your life today is a hell of a lot easier than the life of someone who lived a hundred years ago.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Depends on what you call easier, truth is people spent a lot less time searching for food then they spend working today, today we have to pay for those car elevators. Of course things are better because people don’t sit still, but that’s no reason to spend your whole life building a future for the boss’s kids. We need to make sure that what we create and build benefit all of us.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Natives? LOL. Don't they work to hunt food, create heat, or doesn't that count.? I think also that Appalachian people might not agree with your assessment of their work ethic. And do you seriously believe that homeless people choose to be homeless? Blame the victim? We need to be a little more evolved than that. Oh... Sorry. do you believe in evolution?

[+] -4 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

... and that proves that if you don't work, you don't live.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Survival of the fittest? We are better than that. As human beings we care about our sick and elderly and those struggling. Unlike animals we are humane. Not you? You got yours F%$K everyone else? They must have chosen to be unemployed, or homeless, or poor, and hungry? How very republican of you.

[-] -1 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

Why push your religious rant on me? Most intelligent people believe in evolution.

[-] -3 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

the IRS does all the time.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

so does the paymaster

[-] -3 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

they paymaster? you mean the person that issues you a paycheck? they take deduction from your check only because they are forced by the IRS and in some cases state and local govts.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

first they take the biggest piece of all, the boss’s piece

[+] -4 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

WHAT is the " bosses piece"?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

really? you don’t know how free enterprise works?

Let me give you a clue, don’t hire anybody less they’re going to make you money.

[-] -3 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

REALLY? i never knew that.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

sounds like your learning about that "boss' piece" now

[+] -4 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

do you know what sarcsm is?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

don't care what you call it, as long as we both agree the boss always takes the biggest piece for himself out of anything you make

[+] -4 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

i DONT agree with you, that's why i asked if you knew what sarcasm was.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

then you don't know much about how the world works

[-] -3 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

so how old are you,..............6?

[+] -4 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

you certainly dont.

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I know I am but what are you

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Those who dont like it are more than welcome to start their own business I suppose, right?

There has to be some sort of reward for doing all the bullshit that comes from running a business. Or everyone would just go work for someone else, right?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

and get paid a living wage and if the business don't want to pay a living wage then they can just work for someone else, that could work, problem we have now is that it is easy to collect capital but hard to form unions, all corporations should be required to have union workers to make it fair then it might work, as things are we are forced into high taxes and welfare programs as the income is not fairly distributed in the first place, and end up with far too little of both as the 1% are running everything for their benefit, and that's where we come in....

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I think the fact we have been the wealthiest nation the world has ever seen has a lot to do with apathy here.

I mean, lets face it, life has been pretty good here. Its starting to get worse, but it hasnt reached a tipping point yet. When it does, I think then you will see workers starting to band together again.

But then again, that could possibly be the main reason the gov gives out these benefits to the very poor, to keep them from organizing, and hence putting a hurting on corporate profits?

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I guess those who don't like taxes can start their own country too, hey I like the way you think!

[-] -2 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

No business is a sure thing. when you start your own , you're risking your money. the reward is that eventually you'll be making a profit. many business's are family run because of the cost of hiring outside ( non family ) help. you put in more hours than any one that is working for you. you take the risk, you deserve the rewards.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (6763) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

85% of wages are paid by large corporations, we should write a set of rules that don't just think of them all as some "small family thing" the cost of living is pretty high too, if you can’t meet that then maybe you should do what hchc has suggested work for someone instead, but then we’re back to do you want to make a living if you do?

[-] -2 points by secnoot (-14) 2 years ago

You are right. It is wrong.