Debt is Pushing the US Into Fascism

[Toddsterpatriot]

Many Americans don’t have many job options.

And that's Bezos' fault?

Straw man and dumb.

Keep whining, because that's not dumb. Durr.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There's also a zero-sum aspect to capitalism that makes their willingness to expand their fortunes at the expense of society

If you paid for your Microsoft software, instead of stealing it, how was that "at the expense of society"?

 

[georgephillip]

What difference does that make? You are the employer of the guy that is building your deck. Do you pay that guy working for your benefit, the full value he has created?

Who determines the "full value" of what's been added?

 

[Andylusion]

Greed. Without question. As unjust as that is, it’s even worse because that little fucker Bezos has enormous political power, because of his enormous wealth

Faces of Greed: Jeff Bezos

"Faces of Greed: Jeff Bezos
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos' wealth increases by $275 million every single day. Meanwhile, Amazon workers have to rely on food stamps and public assistance just to survive. This is what a rigged economy is all about."

Sickening. Yet we have Americans who think he deserves his absurd wealth.

Sickening. Yet we have Americans who think he deserves his absurd wealth.

Deserve has nothing to do with it.
He built the company, the wealth is his.

So he deserves it right?

LOL....

Do you not even see how illogical your question is?

Do I "Deserve" tomatoes for free? Do I? Is there something magical about me, that I just deserve free tomatoes?

But, if I get a pot, and put dirt in it, and plant tomatoes in it, and fertilize it, and water it..... I will end up with free tomatoes!

Because I made it happen. Not about 'deserving' it. I did it... therefore I got it.

Brian Scudamore didn't "deserve" to end up a multi-millionaire. But he got a truck, and started hauling trash. He earned the $900. He bought the pickup truck. He started driving around hauling trash.

Thus he had a company.... because he built a company. That's how life works.

The farmer isn't standing around "I deserve fields of crops". He plows the field. Plants the field. Waters the field. And thus ends up with a field of crops.

Nothing about this, has anything to do with "deserving". It's the natural way life works. You harvest what you plant. You collect, what you work for.

 

[Andylusion]

Many Americans don’t have many job options.

And that's Bezos' fault?

Straw man and dumb.

No it's not a straw man. If you have zero options in your life, when you live in a capitalist country where you can do anything..... then it's not the fault of some CEO somewhere.

 

[georgephillip]

Because all you do, is add in more people... and you have a corporation. Otherwise, there is zero difference between you hiring someone, and a corporation hiring someone.

The particular focus of relevance in this conversation was Richard Wolff's distinction between the Marxian and mainstream definition of a corporation, namely, the surplus value appropriated by the corporation's board of directors.

Do you have any thoughts on this subject?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The particular focus of relevance in this conversation was Richard Wolff's distinction between the Marxian and mainstream definition of a corporation

Yeah, Marxist distinctions are so useful. And by useful, I mean hilarious.

 

[Andylusion]

What difference does that make? You are the employer of the guy that is building your deck. Do you pay that guy working for your benefit, the full value he has created?

Who determines the "full value" of what's been added?

The market. The buyer. The person who pays, determines the value.

This is another reason that Marxist logic fails, because the value of any product is always in a dynamic state. The value goes up and down, with demand.

So if you have a workers building a car, and you pay them only the value added by their labor, then as the price of the car declines as customers no longer want it.... then all the workers should get a pay cut month over month, until they earn zero.

Now of course you don't want that. But that is the logical outcome of paying the workers the value they add, since the value changes with consumer demand.

 

[georgephillip]

Everyone, including you, dodges taxes. Are you telling me that you don't take every deduction you qualify for? Then prove it by posting your last 5 years of tax returns.

Since I've been fully retired for the last eight years, I can dodge your challenge to post my last 5 years of tax returns. Over the course of my 45 year life I never earned more than $18,000 in any one year. Some years I earned 0 official dollars without spending any time in prison or county jail. During those years when I filed income taxes I did claim exemptions to which I was not entitled. Since that time, I've come to the conclusion that paying as little in taxes as you possibly can is a prescription for national suicide especially for those taxpayers in the top 1% of earners.

 

[Andylusion]

Because all you do, is add in more people... and you have a corporation. Otherwise, there is zero difference between you hiring someone, and a corporation hiring someone.

The particular focus of relevance in this conversation was Richard Wolff's distinction between the Marxian and mainstream definition of a corporation, namely, the surplus value appropriated by the corporation's board of directors.

Do you have any thoughts on this subject?

Sure. So again, I deny the concept of surplus value appropriation to begin with.

Because if you fix your car, and sell it, you don't take the extra thousands of dollars of surplus value created by the mechanic that fixed your car, and give it to him. Why? Because you bought the car. You own the car. It's your car. So the value, is yours.

Same is true of a company. The shareholders own the company. Thus they own the value the company creates. Thus if they want to hire a board of directors, it's their money to do with as they please.

Just like you with your thousands from your car you sold, are going to use that money as you please. You do not go to the mechanic who fixed your car, and get his approval for how you use your money.

 

[georgephillip]

Name one investment, that makes a 5% return, that you don't consider to be a parasite? Amuse me.

Possibly commercial real estate?

 

[JakeStarkey]

A person who has decided his or her politics has decided her or his religion, georgephillip. Your Jesus would not be choosing capitalism as His economic system.

 

[Andylusion]

Everyone, including you, dodges taxes. Are you telling me that you don't take every deduction you qualify for? Then prove it by posting your last 5 years of tax returns.

Since I've been fully retired for the last eight years, I can dodge your challenge to post my last 5 years of tax returns. Over the course of my 45 year life I never earned more than $18,000 in any one year. Some years I earned 0 official dollars without spending any time in prison or county jail. During those years when I filed income taxes I did claim exemptions to which I was not entitled. Since that time, I've come to the conclusion that paying as little in taxes as you possibly can is a prescription for national suicide especially for those taxpayers in the top 1% of earners.

I did claim exemptions to which I was not entitled

There you go. You dodged as much taxes as you possible could. Just like everyone else.

I've come to the conclusion that paying as little in taxes as you possibly can is a prescription for national suicide especially for those taxpayers in the top 1% of earners.

Yeah, but that's not going to change. You are basically complaining that all human beings, are acting like all human beings.

The reasons Ronald Reagan became a Republican, and stopped being a Democrat (among many reasons), was because he lived out the reality of taxes.

When he worked in Hollywood as an actor, the tax rates were up at 70% or close. The result was, Reagan intentionally setup his work year to work around the taxes. So he would work the last six months of one year, and the first six month of the next.

This way both years, he would get up close to the tax bracket, without going over it. Thus avoiding paying the 70% tax rate.

Then he would just take the rest of year off. He would go back to his ranch. Ride his horses. Have cook outs with friends.

Why? Because why would you spend hard work and effort, to lose 70% of your income to government?

Why do you think so many of the super wealthy, collect a salary of $1?

One-dollar salary - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can raise taxes as high as you want. Even 100%, if you want. And you won't collect one dollar more from any of them.

You want more of those wealthy paying more taxes? Lower the tax rate to a flat 15%. They will all collect a real salary and pay the tax.

The solution is to reduce government entitlements. Cut spending.

Greece tried your system. They jacked up taxes on everyone, and the result was people simply moved their wealth out of Greece, and they had the crash.

 

[Andylusion]

Name one investment, that makes a 5% return, that you don't consider to be a parasite? Amuse me.

Possibly commercial real estate?

Really?

How to Invest in Real Estate | The Motley Fool

Investing in real estate is a great way to diversify your portfolio, but many don't know where to start. Learn about your options, how to invest, and the pros and cons.

www.fool.com

By the way, you know that commercial real estate is more risky than rentals. You can very easily lose everything.

 

[georgephillip]

First off, that statement, doesn't even make sense. You supposedly area against investing. You just said in another post, that shareholders were parasites. Now you are saying Sharon should have invested with a 5% return?

I don't think investing for charity and investing for a luxurious lifestyle are necessarily the same thing; however, I take your point.

In California, lottery winnings are paid out over 20 years as one option. In such a case $10 million payout would be dispensed at about $500,000 a year. Depending on how much taxes a non-profit foundation would pay, hundreds of subsistence level lives could be improved over two decades with such an investment portfolio.

 

[jackflash]

Is the US borrowing its way to Fascism?

20th century versions of the merger of state and corporate power (Germany, Japan, Italy, and Spain) interacted differently in each country's particular history and conditions.

If it comes here, the Federal Reserve will play a key role:

Richard D. Wolff - The U.S. Is Borrowing Its Way to Fascism | Brave New Europe

"Today’s crisis-ridden capitalist economy is more dependent on credit than at any time in the system’s history.

"More than ever, credit sustains the purchasing power of consumers and of government programs.

"Capitalists depend on that purchasing power..."

"Once it was mostly private entities—rich families, banks, insurance companies, and pension funds—that were the chief lenders to corporations. They bought and held the corporate bonds and IOUs.

"Now those private lenders increasingly sell their corporate bonds to the Federal Reserve.

"That happens when the corporate loans get packaged into asset-backed securities sold to the Federal Reserve.

"More recently, the Fed has undertaken the market purchase of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) composed of corporate bonds and of corporate bonds direct from their private issuers."

Some Things Never Change
View attachment 387406
Renegade Inc - Michael Hudson: He died for our debts, not our sins | Brave New Europe

American society has been entertaining fascism since 1913. Fascism, communalism, socialism, anarchism, etc, all lead to the parent "statist left" religion. No matter the title if it leads to totalitarianism it's statist left no matter what one wants to call it.

 

[Andylusion]

First off, that statement, doesn't even make sense. You supposedly area against investing. You just said in another post, that shareholders were parasites. Now you are saying Sharon should have invested with a 5% return?

I don't think investing for charity and investing for a luxurious lifestyle are necessarily the same thing; however, I take your point.

In California, lottery winnings are paid out over 20 years as one option. In such a case $10 million payout would be dispensed at about $500,000 a year. Depending on how much taxes a non-profit foundation would pay, hundreds of subsistence level lives could be improved over two decades with such an investment portfolio.

Again, you are assuming that they will invest the money. If they don't... then in 20 years, they will live in poverty again.

You are constantly making assumptions about what people will do. There is no assumption about what they will do. If they blow the money, which is typically what people do.... then they end up back where they start.

Further, "investing for charity and investing for a luxurious lifestyle"

That comment makes no logical sense.

Your life style has nothing to do with investments.

And investment is something that has a return. Luxury does not have a return. If I buy a bran new Corvette for $60,000 today, in 10 years it will be worth $35,000.

Buying luxury goods is not an investment.

Neither is charity. Now you can in fact make money running a 'supposedly' charity business.

The director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NJ, made $700,000 for 6 months.

Yeah, you can make tons of money by running a business that is labeled by ignorant left-wingers as being "for charity", and make millions off of it.

However, one thing you need to consider, is that no charity anywhere could ever exist, without for-profit investments.

If no one anywhere, anywhere.... is making a profit.... where do you think the charity is coming from?

So investments, are inherently for profit. You can't "invest" in charity. That's not even logical.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Name one investment, that makes a 5% return, that you don't consider to be a parasite? Amuse me.

Possibly commercial real estate?

Really?

How to Invest in Real Estate | The Motley Fool

Investing in real estate is a great way to diversify your portfolio, but many don't know where to start. Learn about your options, how to invest, and the pros and cons.

www.fool.com

By the way, you know that commercial real estate is more risky than rentals. You can very easily lose everything.

We are averaging 8 to 9% on our rental properties.

All of the renters have steady employment, so we have been fortunate.

 

[gipper]

Greed. Without question. As unjust as that is, it’s even worse because that little fucker Bezos has enormous political power, because of his enormous wealth

Faces of Greed: Jeff Bezos

"Faces of Greed: Jeff Bezos
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos' wealth increases by $275 million every single day. Meanwhile, Amazon workers have to rely on food stamps and public assistance just to survive. This is what a rigged economy is all about."

Sickening. Yet we have Americans who think he deserves his absurd wealth.

Sickening. Yet we have Americans who think he deserves his absurd wealth.

Deserve has nothing to do with it.
He built the company, the wealth is his.

So he deserves it right?

LOL....

Do you not even see how illogical your question is?

Do I "Deserve" tomatoes for free? Do I? Is there something magical about me, that I just deserve free tomatoes?

But, if I get a pot, and put dirt in it, and plant tomatoes in it, and fertilize it, and water it..... I will end up with free tomatoes!

Because I made it happen. Not about 'deserving' it. I did it... therefore I got it.

Brian Scudamore didn't "deserve" to end up a multi-millionaire. But he got a truck, and started hauling trash. He earned the $900. He bought the pickup truck. He started driving around hauling trash.

Thus he had a company.... because he built a company. That's how life works.

The farmer isn't standing around "I deserve fields of crops". He plows the field. Plants the field. Waters the field. And thus ends up with a field of crops.

Nothing about this, has anything to do with "deserving". It's the natural way life works. You harvest what you plant. You collect, what you work for.

There it is. The old “I’ve got mine, and fuck the rest” mindset. We should change our national motto to this since after all, it’s much more applicable than “In God we trust” or “E Pluribus Unum.” I’m sure you and the Parrot would approve.

Inequality Is America's Monster Id
Privilege and inequality are two sides of the same coin. Those with privilege get more than everyone else without actually creating more value, which is the definition of inequality.
What few seem to grasp is the absolute source of inequality / privilege is our financial system, specifically the way we create and distribute money.
Few people connect the dots between a central bank (the Federal Reserve) creating money out of thin air and giving the super-wealthy first dibs on this new money, and the vast inequalities of wealth and power that are widening to the point of social disorder on a grand scale.
While the majority may not fully understand the source of inequality, they do intuit that billionaires got the mine and the rest of us got the shaft.
Of Two Minds - Inequality Is America's Monster Id

 

[georgephillip]

What happens when Bezo is removed as head of Amazon?

Let me give you a hint. In 1995 to 1997, when Steve jobs was gone from Apple... what happened to Apple? Do you remember?

The companies stock value dropped down to 12¢ a share. Apple laid off thousands of workers.

How has Apple stock fared since Steve died?
How about Microsoft since Bill Gates stepped down from running the corporation?
All three parasites earned their fortunes because taxpayers created the Internet, yet Apple consistently refuses to pay its fair share of taxes.
In short the US economy would not be fundamentally different if Bezos, Gates, and Jobs had never been born.