How Will the Rich Rule Without Money?

[Toddsterpatriot]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

But, your end of the world scenarios are funny. Keep up the conspiracies.

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

But not for long.

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"In the event of disaster, the response of the rich hasn’t been to work with others to ensure the collective security of all those affected. It has been to use all resources at their disposal to protect themselves and their property.

"And increasingly, as in New Orleans, this protection has come in the form of armed violence directed at those less well off–people whose desperation, they fear, could turn them into a threat.'

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

 

[georgephillip]

Ya finally got something correct.

The End is Near.

 

[georgephillip]

You know what sucks more than shrinking glaciers?
Growing glaciers.

Did Trump tell you that?

 

[georgephillip]

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:
Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

How is it the humans that create a corporation's wealth are commodities and human investors are its owners?

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

Saving and investing some of your own money might make you less of a parasite.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Which category contributes more to the corporation's productivity?

Michael Hudson’s New Book: Wall Street Parasites Have Devoured Their Hosts -- Your Retirement Plan and the U.S. Economy

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Employees produce goods and services.
Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

You're an idiot

You're an idiot

Open your eyes.

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"Today, our worldview has a bias – that stockholders are to be paid as much as possible, while employees are to be paid as little as possible.

"'Income for one group is declared good, and income for another group is declared bad.'

"Nowhere is this more clear than in our financial statements. Here’s the basic formula you’ll find on financial statements:

"Capital Income + Retained earnings = Revenue – (Employee income + Cost of materials)"

Why do you believe shareholders should share in profits when they do little or nothing to produce them compared to employees?

 

[georgephillip]

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:
Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

How is it the humans that create a corporation's wealth are commodities and human investors are its owners?

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

Saving and investing some of your own money might make you less of a parasite.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Which category contributes more to the corporation's productivity?

Michael Hudson’s New Book: Wall Street Parasites Have Devoured Their Hosts -- Your Retirement Plan and the U.S. Economy

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Employees produce goods and services.
Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

Employees produce goods and services.

They'd better, that's why they receive their paychecks.

Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

Sounds like you should save your money to buy some stock.

Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

Sounds like you should save your money to buy some stock.

Because the world needs more parasites?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:

"Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

Are corporations "a piece of property" or a "human community"?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You know what sucks more than shrinking glaciers?
Growing glaciers.

Did Trump tell you that?

The Vikings on Greenland told me that.

 

[georgephillip]

When the pushers of the scam are living the life of riley as they have throughout history and other scams, only fools believe.

One of us is a fool.

Effects | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

"Sea Level Will Rise 1-4 feet by 2100

"Global sea level has risen by about 8 inches since reliable record keeping began in 1880.

"It is projected to rise another 1 to 4 feet by 2100.

"This is the result of added water from melting land ice and the expansion of seawater as it warms.

"In the next several decades, storm surges and high tides could combine with sea level rise and land subsidence to further increase flooding in many regions.

"Sea level rise will continue past 2100 because the oceans take a very long time to respond to warmer conditions at the Earth’s surface."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

Saving and investing some of your own money might make you less of a parasite.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Which category contributes more to the corporation's productivity?

Michael Hudson’s New Book: Wall Street Parasites Have Devoured Their Hosts -- Your Retirement Plan and the U.S. Economy

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Employees produce goods and services.
Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

You're an idiot

You're an idiot

Open your eyes.

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"Today, our worldview has a bias – that stockholders are to be paid as much as possible, while employees are to be paid as little as possible.

"'Income for one group is declared good, and income for another group is declared bad.'

"Nowhere is this more clear than in our financial statements. Here’s the basic formula you’ll find on financial statements:

"Capital Income + Retained earnings = Revenue – (Employee income + Cost of materials)"

Why do you believe shareholders should share in profits when they do little or nothing to produce them compared to employees?

Why do you believe shareholders should share in profits when they do little or nothing to produce them compared to employees?

The employees should buy all the stock from the shareholders.
Then they can keep all the profits.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

What makes you think that the elite even believe in this "climate crisis" bullshit?

They know that past prophecies of climactic apocalypse have failed.

You really don't have much faith in these people's intelligence. Only the commonest of the common people actually believe that poppycock.

What makes you think that the elite even believe in this "climate crisis" bullshit?

They know that past prophecies of climactic apocalypse have failed.

Do they?
Got a link?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"But something is wrong with this picture.

"To believe that someone in Morrison’s position could genuinely be ignorant of the dangers of climate change is itself to give up on reason.

"The prime minister of Australia is among the most well-briefed people on the planet, with thousands of staff at his beck and call to update him on the latest developments in climate science or any other field he may wish to get his head around.

"The only rational explanation is that Morrison and his like are aware of the dangers posed by climate change but are choosing to act as though they’re not."

Do you think the capitalist imperative of short-term profit might be clouding their perspective?

Climate Change is political tool of frear

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

Saving and investing some of your own money might make you less of a parasite.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Which category contributes more to the corporation's productivity?

Michael Hudson’s New Book: Wall Street Parasites Have Devoured Their Hosts -- Your Retirement Plan and the U.S. Economy

Shareholders are owners while employees are commodities, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Shareholders are people who own the company while employees are people who work for the company, right?

Employees produce goods and services.
Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

Employees produce goods and services.

They'd better, that's why they receive their paychecks.

Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

Sounds like you should save your money to buy some stock.

Shareholders collect dividends for doing nothing.

Sounds like you should save your money to buy some stock.

Because the world needs more parasites?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:

"Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

Are corporations "a piece of property" or a "human community"?

Because the world needs more parasites?

Because you're already a parasite.
Maybe this would help you mooch less off of your parents?

Are corporations "a piece of property"

Yes.

 

[Andylusion]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

I don't see that the rich rule anything to begin with.

Jeff Skilling was extremely wealthy, and had control over one of the largest energy companies in the world. He went to prison.
Lehman Brothers, and Bear Stearns were, between the two of them, companies that had been around for almost 200 years. Two of the most wealthy group of bankers on Wall St. Neither exist anymore, and all those executives have a tiny fraction of the wealthy they formerly had. Contrary to popular opinion, no one was 'bailed out".

And then you look at the credit card companies that opposed the Card Act, and it happened anyway. The insurance companies that opposed Obama Care, and it happened anyway. The banks that opposed Dodd Frank, and it happened anyway.

On and on..... where do you see these rich people "ruling" anything? It's not happening.

That said... who cares what these people do?

Some rich guy has a security force, and an underground bunker? So what.
Please... these are just crazy people. Let them be crazy. What business is it of mine.

Some rich guy has a security force, and an underground bunker? So what.
Please... these are just crazy people. Let them be crazy. What business is it of mine

Perhaps they are aware of an impending Event you don't expect (or are too stubborn to see)?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"The most forward thinking of the super-rich are aware that we’re heading toward a future of ecological and social break-down.

"And they’re keen to keep ahead of the curve by investing today in the things they’ll need to survive.

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of ‘the future of technology’'. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers.

"When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology. They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: ‘How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?’"

You seem to be ignorant of human history. There have always been groups of people saying doom was coming. Throughout all human history, there have been such people. This isn't new.

You seem to be ignorant of human history. There have always been groups of people saying doom was coming. Throughout all human history, there have been such people. This isn't new.

Sudden anthropogenic climate forcing is something new.

"'It should have been daylight but it was black like midnight and we could hear the fire roaring,' said David Jeffrey, a local business owner. 'We were all terrified for our lives.'

"'There's a rock wall that they've built to keep back the sea, and that was where we were going to jump into the water if the radiant heat had hit,' he added."

Thousands flee to beach to escape bushfires

Climate change has worsened global economic inequality, Stanford study shows

Yeah, because there was never a natural disaster in all world history, until the last 50 years.

You proved that the climate is changing. Yes, we know this. It's been changing for the last 6,000 plus years. There was never a time when the climate was static.

The question is, is man made CO2 causing it? I say that's a far fetched claim.

The idea that the tiny fraction, of a fraction, of a fraction of the entire greenhouse effect that can logically be attributed to man... is somehow over powering the other 99% of the entire atmosphere of the planet.....

Is ridiculous. That's not science, that's fairies and unicorns.

 

[georgephillip]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

But, your end of the world scenarios are funny. Keep up the conspiracies.

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

But not for long.

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"In the event of disaster, the response of the rich hasn’t been to work with others to ensure the collective security of all those affected. It has been to use all resources at their disposal to protect themselves and their property.

"And increasingly, as in New Orleans, this protection has come in the form of armed violence directed at those less well off–people whose desperation, they fear, could turn them into a threat.'

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

Except for Pompeo

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

But, your end of the world scenarios are funny. Keep up the conspiracies.

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

But not for long.

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"In the event of disaster, the response of the rich hasn’t been to work with others to ensure the collective security of all those affected. It has been to use all resources at their disposal to protect themselves and their property.

"And increasingly, as in New Orleans, this protection has come in the form of armed violence directed at those less well off–people whose desperation, they fear, could turn them into a threat.'

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

Except for Pompeo

Yeah, Maduro, author of the Venezuela diet.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

But, your end of the world scenarios are funny. Keep up the conspiracies.

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

But not for long.

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"In the event of disaster, the response of the rich hasn’t been to work with others to ensure the collective security of all those affected. It has been to use all resources at their disposal to protect themselves and their property.

"And increasingly, as in New Orleans, this protection has come in the form of armed violence directed at those less well off–people whose desperation, they fear, could turn them into a threat.'

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

Libertarian Somalia stinks even worse.

 

[Andylusion]

Are those who make money from money sponging off productive members of society?

The Fed Has Made Jamie Dimon $250 Million Richer Through Its Repo Loans

"As Wall Street On Parade has previously reported, JPMorgan Chase has been fingered as the bank that contributed to the Federal Reserve having to intervene in the overnight loan market on September 17 of this year, and every business day since then..."

"But as it now turns out, few individuals have personally benefitted as much as Jamie Dimon as a result of the Fed’s actions.

"Jamie Dimon is one of the largest individual shareholders in the stock of JPMorgan Chase. Those shares are the sole reason Dimon is a billionaire.

"On October 10, 2019, the shares of JPMorgan Chase closed at $114.21.

"On October 11, the New York Fed announced a dramatic escalation in its plans to flood money to Wall Street’s trading houses."

You were free to buy JPM before the Fed increased their repo lending.

You were free to buy JPM before the Fed increased their repo lending.

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:
Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

How is it the humans that create a corporation's wealth are commodities and human investors are its owners?

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

Saving and investing some of your own money might make you less of a parasite.

Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property

Yes, people actually own corporations. And property.
Even if that fact makes you feel like a loser.

Actually good point..... if you intend to retire on Social Security, that would make you a parasite. Living off the hard work of others.

Saving your own money, for your own retirement would make you less of a parasite.

Actually good point..... if you intend to retire on Social Security, that would make you a parasite. Living off the hard work of others.

Actually, your retirement on SSA comes AFTER your decades of productive labor has helped those who've come before you live a dignified retirement instead of dying in the streets when they are no longer capable of working.

Oh, so as long as you worked some, you can live off the hard work of others?

So what's wrong with the wealthy living off the hard work of their employees again?

Bill Gates worked for decades, so now he can do nothing, and live off the hard of his employees, right?
The current CEO of Walmart, started off unloading trucks for a low hourly wage. What's wrong with him spending the rest of his life on the beach while his employees work for him to live off of?

Funny how quickly you magically spin your arguments around, and end up with your foot in your own mouth over and over.

You can make up whatever rational you want... in end, if you are collecting money from other people, without compensation... that makes you a parasite.

If you expect others to work, so you can sit at home and not work... you are parasite. Rationalize until the end of time.... truth is truth. You expect others to pay for you to be able to do nothing... you are parasite.

Save for your own retirement. When you are living off of your own money, then you are not a parasite.

 

[Unkotare]

The OP can only be so radically stupid due to a lack of life experience. A perpetual college freshman.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

You should axe how the poor will defend their food stash under socialism when the State goes door to door to grab your food "for the people"

Just about every top economic achievement has been by a hybrid Socialist system, and NOT Capitalism, nor Communism.

#1 economic growth period in the 21st century thus far China (Socialist)
#1 economic growth period in 20th century was Japan (Socialist)
#1 economic growth period in 20th century Europe & #2 in the World was Franco's Spain (Fascist Socialist)
#1 economic growth period in 20th century USA was FDR Fascist Lite (Socialism)

BTW, Nazi Germany achieved faster economic growth than FDR.

This means Nazis (Socialists) outranked every USA president in the 20th Century for economic growth.

NOT that I deny that Nazis did the bad like invading Poland, and the ugly like the Holocaust & Generalplan Ost.

Just maybe there's more & better options out there.

Maybe we could learn from the achievements from Nazis.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How will the richest among us protect themselves and their property if (when?) catastrophic climate chaos makes money worthless?

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"Writing in the Guardian in 2018, media theorist and futurist Douglas Rushkoff related his experience of being paid half his annual salary to speak at 'a super-deluxe private resort … on the subject of "the future of technology’”. He was expecting a room full of investment bankers. When he arrived, however, he was introduced to 'five super-wealthy guys … from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world'. Rushkoff wrote:

"'After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology.

"They had come with questions of their own … Which region will be less affected by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? … Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked: "How do I maintain authority over my security force after the Event?"

"The Event.

"That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down … They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs.

"But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless?

"What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader?

"The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

"Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for survival."

If your plan calls for allowing the world to drown in the swamp of mass death and destruction while you cower in a South Pacific bunker protected by hired killers wearing exploding collars, you are not likely to win much in the way of public support for the capitalist state economics that are creating the next mass extinction, are you?

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

But, your end of the world scenarios are funny. Keep up the conspiracies.

How will poor people live without money? The rich are going to have assets that will always be worth something.

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

But not for long.

MR Online | How the rich plan to rule a burning planet

"In the event of disaster, the response of the rich hasn’t been to work with others to ensure the collective security of all those affected. It has been to use all resources at their disposal to protect themselves and their property.

"And increasingly, as in New Orleans, this protection has come in the form of armed violence directed at those less well off–people whose desperation, they fear, could turn them into a threat.'

Millions of poor people will die or become refugees because rich parasites control the levers of government.

Yeah, Maduro is the worst!

Libertarian Somalia stinks even worse.

Stockholders in Somalia taking all the money?

 

[Andylusion]

Any business that isn't in business to make money, isn't in business long.

If you don't want to be an employee ... then become an employer. Sponging off the productive members of society isn't (or at least shouldn't) be an option.

f you don't want to be an employee ... then become an employer. Sponging off the productive members of society isn't (or at least shouldn't) be an option.

Are those who make money from money sponging off productive members of society?

The Fed Has Made Jamie Dimon $250 Million Richer Through Its Repo Loans

"As Wall Street On Parade has previously reported, JPMorgan Chase has been fingered as the bank that contributed to the Federal Reserve having to intervene in the overnight loan market on September 17 of this year, and every business day since then..."

"But as it now turns out, few individuals have personally benefitted as much as Jamie Dimon as a result of the Fed’s actions.

"Jamie Dimon is one of the largest individual shareholders in the stock of JPMorgan Chase. Those shares are the sole reason Dimon is a billionaire.

"On October 10, 2019, the shares of JPMorgan Chase closed at $114.21.

"On October 11, the New York Fed announced a dramatic escalation in its plans to flood money to Wall Street’s trading houses."

You were free to buy JPM before the Fed increased their repo lending.

You were free to buy JPM before the Fed increased their repo lending.

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:
Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

How is it the humans that create a corporation's wealth are commodities and human investors are its owners?

Parasite, implies that you are giving nothing, to get something.

If you are spending your rightfully earned money, to invest in something that produces goods and services, how is that being a parasite?

A parasite would be like Elon Musk, getting money from the government for green-energy grants that produce absolutely nothing for the the majority of the population. That's being a parasite.

A parasite would be Solyndra collecting millions from the government under Obama, and then just disappearing.

But if you are spending your hard earned cash, to make a risky but prudent investment, and having that investment pay off.... why is that being a parasite?

And along those lines, your ending question makes no sense. Investors are the owners, because they are investors. That's why they are the owners, because they invested.

Most employees today, are also investors. I am investor myself. I own shares in about two dozen companies. Now where I currently work, I don't have stock in that company, because I don't think it's a wise investment, but other companies I've worked for, I did have stock in. So I was an employee and a part owner at the same time.

Again, if you want to take part in the profits of the company.... buy stock. Stop whining about it, and buy stock in the company.

But if you are spending your hard earned cash, to make a risky but prudent investment, and having that investment pay off.... why is that being a parasite?

Because, unless your risky investment is made in an IPO it is speculation that contributes nothing to the corporation behind the stock. It's like buying a new car vs buying a used car. In the former case, your money goes to the corporation that produced the vehicle; in the latter your money goes to another consumer.

Why would that make a difference.

Say you bought a car for $10,000. And then your mother pays you $10,000 for that car. She effectively made the original purchase.

If I buy a share from someone else who bought that share in an IPO... either way, that share represents an investment into the company.

Whether I directly bought it during the IPO, or from someone else who bought it during the IPO, doesn't matter.

Further, unlike buying a car, buying a share is an investment into a company, which entitles you as part owner of the company.

Again... we've been over this before. You can't complain about shareholders, and then complain people shouldn't buy stock to be shareholders.

You can't sit there and say cake is bad, and terrible, rots your teeth, makes you fat, and people shouldn't eat cake, and then turn around and complain the rich have all the cake, and they should share the cake.

 

[Andylusion]

Any business that isn't in business to make money, isn't in business long.

If you don't want to be an employee ... then become an employer. Sponging off the productive members of society isn't (or at least shouldn't) be an option.

f you don't want to be an employee ... then become an employer. Sponging off the productive members of society isn't (or at least shouldn't) be an option.

Are those who make money from money sponging off productive members of society?

The Fed Has Made Jamie Dimon $250 Million Richer Through Its Repo Loans

"As Wall Street On Parade has previously reported, JPMorgan Chase has been fingered as the bank that contributed to the Federal Reserve having to intervene in the overnight loan market on September 17 of this year, and every business day since then..."

"But as it now turns out, few individuals have personally benefitted as much as Jamie Dimon as a result of the Fed’s actions.

"Jamie Dimon is one of the largest individual shareholders in the stock of JPMorgan Chase. Those shares are the sole reason Dimon is a billionaire.

"On October 10, 2019, the shares of JPMorgan Chase closed at $114.21.

"On October 11, the New York Fed announced a dramatic escalation in its plans to flood money to Wall Street’s trading houses."

You were free to buy JPM before the Fed increased their repo lending.

You were free to buy JPM before the Fed increased their repo lending.

Wouldn't that make me a parasite?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"The Principle of Property:
Like a feudal estate, a corporation is considered a piece of property — not a human community — so it can be owned and sold by the propertied class."

How is it the humans that create a corporation's wealth are commodities and human investors are its owners?

Parasite, implies that you are giving nothing, to get something.

If you are spending your rightfully earned money, to invest in something that produces goods and services, how is that being a parasite?

A parasite would be like Elon Musk, getting money from the government for green-energy grants that produce absolutely nothing for the the majority of the population. That's being a parasite.

A parasite would be Solyndra collecting millions from the government under Obama, and then just disappearing.

But if you are spending your hard earned cash, to make a risky but prudent investment, and having that investment pay off.... why is that being a parasite?

And along those lines, your ending question makes no sense. Investors are the owners, because they are investors. That's why they are the owners, because they invested.

Most employees today, are also investors. I am investor myself. I own shares in about two dozen companies. Now where I currently work, I don't have stock in that company, because I don't think it's a wise investment, but other companies I've worked for, I did have stock in. So I was an employee and a part owner at the same time.

Again, if you want to take part in the profits of the company.... buy stock. Stop whining about it, and buy stock in the company.

A parasite would be like Elon Musk, getting money from the government for green-energy grants that produce absolutely nothing for the the majority of the population. That's being a parasite.

A parasite would be Solyndra collecting millions from the government under Obama, and then just disappearing

Do you see any significant difference between your examples and fossil fuel subsidies that carry the additional stigma of poisoning the planet we all call home?

G7 Fossil Fuel Subsidy Scorecard

Government can serve a legitimate economic function when it provides cheap infrastructure like roads and schools and energy sources that lower the cost of living and doing business for its population.

Because it's not true. It's all lies.
Just factually, it's not true.