Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The 1% spends millions brainwashing average folk to hate govt regulation and taxes.

Posted 2 years ago on Nov. 27, 2011, 6:46 p.m. EST by Mondia (25)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The corporations want to be able to pollute anything they want. The rich don't just want their taxes cut again, they want to sell people the idea this country doesn't need taxes. A shame so many young voters fall for all this "liberty" crap nowadays. It's not liberty for YOU, it's liberty for corporations to trample over workers and the environment!

Stop buying this new line Koch Brothers are trying to inject into OWS through new youth Libertarianism that OWS is against regulation and taxes. They spend MILLIONS to get voters to vote against laws that protect workers and the environment.

Believe what you want, just beware that there are billionaires preying on the patriotic and average Americans, unduly influencing them and twisting words like "freedom" in favor or 1% at the expense of the country. This new Libertarianism is not even accepted by Republicans, yet business wants to steer the entire GOP in this direction, as Libertarianism benefits the 1% more!

Let us not forget, the 1% wants us to start working as children, work 60 hr workweeks, and die working without ever experiencing retirement.

We made progress last century, boy are we now backsliding when it comes to workers rights and environmental pollution.

26 Comments

26 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by shooz (26680) 2 years ago

More like billions, and it's starting to pay off.

[-] 1 points by XXAnonymouSXX (455) 2 years ago

"The real menace of our republic is the invisible government which, like a giant octopus, sprawls its slimy length over our city, state and nation. At the head is a small group of banking houses, generally referred to as 'international bankers'."

www.thrivemovement.com

[-] 1 points by OccupyGovernment (1) 2 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZGhsUoS9Y0

Pro-business or corporatism means easy money, protection from competition and bailouts of taxpayers expense. Pro-free market means businesses are on their own in a competitive environment to serve consumers. Reject corporatism and embrace the free market.

[-] 1 points by ContinuationofEarth (220) 2 years ago

They brainwash, but you can learn the truth from real Patriots! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxJTwbHdH6k

[-] 1 points by Puzzlin (2898) 2 years ago

The claims and promises of US capitalism to be an engine that builds and sustains a vast "middle class" and that constantly "delivers the goods" seem more hollow today than ever. Questions, criticisms and opposition bubble up across the country. The CBO report reflects, as well as documents, the underlying economic realities. However inadvertently, it thereby supports the rising tide of protest.

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I've got it. We shall refer to this demographic as kockbloggers!

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 2 years ago

I don't see your complaint. It was money well spent in my case for my brain's washed and dried and folded. No complaints/ couldn't be happier. Peace.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20546) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Hear! Hear!

Well said! I say.

The Koch suckers!

I keep saying what we have are a series of empires built up within the U.S. and they are in direct competition with the government. So far they are doing a great job at weakening it, both economically and in the minds of the public.

You can't even get a decent five gallon gas can anymore - the emissions regulations have dictated that the funnel system of the gas can somehow trap the fumes - in consequence the funnel system - or spout - never works, people get irritated and angry, and who do they blame?

The EPA . . .

  • deregulationists 1
  • public 0

z

[-] 1 points by sovaye (259) 2 years ago

The Kock Buggers!

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20546) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Hey, I'm headed into negative point territory. I think everyone should hit the dislike button on my comment, just to see how deep we can get!

[-] 0 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 2 years ago

They didn't need to spend millions to convince me to hate the government.

Businesses without the government are as threatening as a kitty.

[-] 5 points by Mondia (25) 2 years ago

You are disastrously wrong. You need to fear Corporatocracy.

[-] 1 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 2 years ago

Like I said. Unless businesses get private armies, businesses rely on the government to enforce their tyranny.

[-] 3 points by anonwolf (279) from West Peoria, IL 2 years ago

They really don't; they are quite capable of enforcing private tyranny. Read about the labor struggles at the turn of the 20th century. Maybe read the The Jungle and The Grapes of Wrath too, and see the other side of government - good government, which is what we need to restore.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 2 years ago

...

Actually I don't know who to side with anymore. I just know that I fear the government more.

[-] -2 points by whisper (212) 2 years ago

'corporatocracy' as you call it is made possible by government.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by EndTheFed214 (113) 2 years ago

Oh yeah thats why we need BIG goverment that solves all the problems, when you have big goverment corporations never do anything bad. HEY DUMBASS you know the goverment really doesnt care what big corporations do. As long as those crony captalist are in charge and takeing money from big bussiness were screwed. we need small goverment and tough courts to get rid of these frauds. there should be some regulation but not big goverment wiping our buts

[-] 4 points by Mondia (25) 2 years ago

You gave yourself away as a Ron Lawl conspiracy theorist, you all are unique in your use of the words "crony capitalism", and resorting to namecalling within the first post. Just admit it, don't be wishy washy, say you love Corporatocracy. I understand you want to be king of your castle as it feeds your ego, but there is such a thing as SOCIETY.

[-] -1 points by EndTheFed214 (113) 2 years ago

society should have every opportunity that I have. But if I work hard and make my own money. then im not giving more than I have to away. I pay my taxes. communism, socialism tho two diffrent things have the same idea. take from one person give to another. the state runs everytrhing. thats not a good idea. see the mess the state has us in right now. fyi goverment isnt that good at running a business. hince why Collectivism always fails. oh and it doesnt take a real smart person to read my name and know I support Paul2012

[-] -3 points by EndTheFed214 (113) 2 years ago

Oh yeah thats why we need BIG goverment that solves all the problems, when you have big goverment corporations never do anything bad. HEY DUMBASS you know the goverment really doesnt care what big corporations do. As long as those crony captalist are in charge and takeing money from big bussiness were screwed. we need small goverment and tough courts to get rid of these frauds. there should be some regulation but not big goverment wiping our buts

[-] 3 points by Mondia (25) 2 years ago

OMG are you a bot paid by Koch Brothers?

[-] 2 points by aeturnus (231) from Robbinsville, NC 2 years ago

The government doesn't care what corporations do, but the corporations most certainly care what the government does. That's why corporations spend lots of money on policy institutes and lobbying efforts, to make sure the government is bent to act on their behalf. There are more corporate policy institutes than there are activist groups. Some are allocated just to serve an interest for a specific time and then disbanded after the issue is through. APCO, Heritage, Koch, Bradley, RAND, the list goes on.

[-] 1 points by EndTheFed214 (113) 2 years ago

I agree with that. but its not goverment does nothing and its all corporations. Of course you are right that corport lobbiest are outta control. but the goverment knows it too. they know that when they take money from certain corporations then pass laws letting those corporations do whatt they want. Like GE giving tons of money to Barack Obama. the GE goes and gets every coal plant to shut down expect the ones they are invisted in. they make billions then hardly pay any taxes. I wish the liberals could see how hyprocitc they are at times. if you think that its only because of big corporations were broke your wrong.

[-] 1 points by aeturnus (231) from Robbinsville, NC 2 years ago

What the government does outside of the corporate arena is often due in large part to satisfy the population, but that must be done with ultimate care.

Take the notion of tax relief. That just doesn't satisfy the rich, but also many in the middle class, to the tune of something that amounts to a couple of extra paychecks a year. That doesn't stop the fact that the money overwhelmingly goes to people who don't need it. It is essentially a waste of tax money, but it gets supported due in part to dramatic fears of government perpetrated by the media as well as providing at least something to some who may need it.

Liberal programs aren't much better. They often rally around their support for progressive issues but often just give a bit of crumbs. Medicare has donut holes. Many disabled people are often denied disability in the beginning and have to fight to get it. Financial aid is streamlined through the inclusion of family incomes. The list can go on.

There is a tug-of-war being played with almost any bill in Congress. As long as there is corporate control, there is going to be calls to privatize programs and find ways to maintain lower social costs.

I look at things from a leftist perspective, but I am not all entirely favorable to government control. In order for government to actually work, it needs to be run by the people. Campaign finance is a start, but it's far from enough. If it is the only feature included, it probably won't even work.

[-] 1 points by EndTheFed214 (113) 2 years ago

right you are. we can disagree on a lot but we can agree on just as much. the media is a big problem, they are not objective anymore. they do have a agenda. and it take people like us do need to come together and talk about issues cause we are the final say the people. that is why I agree with OWS. but i dont wanna see us co-opted and taken down a dark path. sorry to call u a dumbass or the person that wrote this.

[+] -4 points by whisper (212) 2 years ago

If the country does away with taxation of income, sales, profits, etc, how is it that this will hurt anyone? I agree with the abolition of the taxation of things which are necessary for human survival in a society based on division of labor. In conjunction with this, I advocate a tax on only those services which are not necessary for said survival but which only government can provide, such as the enforcement of contracts. This would provide sufficient revenue for the maintenance of a government which existed solely to protect individual rights. Such a government would involve itself only in maintaining a court system, police force, and military. There is no legitimate use of force and coercion in a free market. I am an advocate of free markets. This is not to say that I believe everything which exists can or should be owned by someone, but that the means of production absolutely should be owned privately and that the government should not interfere in economic matters. The only legitimate use of force and/or coercion (government) is in retaliation to the initiation of the use of force and/or coercion. This is because such initiation is the only method by which individual rights can be violated.

"But what about pollution?" some may ask. I say that it is up to each and every person who purchases a product from a manufacturer to know what it is that they are purchasing and what went into its production. There is no reason why government would create a more effective environmental agency than private interests would. The only difference is that a government run environmental agency would have access to the legal use of force, while a private agency would not. However, force is not necessary in order to educate the public about the practices of a given company. The legal use of force, given to an environmental agency would allow anyone who wished to do so (and had the means to do so) to purchase the leaders of that agency, just as senators and congressmen are purchased today (as a result of the powers granted by the commerce clause).

If such an agency existed to educate the public as to the harmful practices of certain businesses, it would be up to the public to decide whether or not to support these businesses. Isn't this what OWS is all about? Increasing public awareness of evil and malpractice and convincing them not to support those they identify as evil? Or is OWS about obtaining access to the legal use of force in order to destroy what they believe to be evil "on behalf of the greater good"?