Old Money.

[AVG-JOE]

If your family has wealth that was acquired prior to 1930, when brutal exploitation of resources, including human-resources, was a VERY successful method of wealth accumulation, should you be entitled to maintain control over all of those ill-gotten resources?

Though certainly not the only one with paperwork, the extreme documentation of an example would The British Royal Family; who, in spite of the expen$ive wars they fought over 'The New World', profited handsomely from the brutality of its conquest and exploitation, and now control a LOT of the planet's resources as a direct result.

Who said "Crime doesn't pay?" ​

 

[AVG-JOE]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

 

[AVG-JOE]

The Stars await, Monkeys. You're THIS fucking close.​

 

[eagle1462010]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB9YIsKIEbA]I'm a Believer - The Monkees - YouTube[/ame]

 

[priceless]

If your family has wealth that was acquired prior to 1930, when brutal exploitation of resources, including human-resources, was a VERY successful method of wealth accumulation, should you be entitled to maintain control over all of those ill-gotten resources?

People are always thinking of reasons to redistribute money and wealth for various reasons but all that really matters is how resources are stewarded, not who owns them.

If some family acquired land and thus the control over the resources of that land, such as fuel reserves, they can still be driven by liberal spending to cash in those resources out of fear of falling behind in terms of revenues.

So really the question is how to prevent consumer demand and aggressive investing from driving the economy into such aggressive competition that it overuses and wastes resources trying to satisfy insatiable consumer demand.

This is quite difficult in an economy where GDP growth, revenues, income, and the pursuit of money generally tend to blind practically everyone to the bigger picture of economic health and prosperity through conservation and efficiency.

 

[jasonnfree]

If your family has wealth that was acquired prior to 1930, when brutal exploitation of resources, including human-resources, was a VERY successful method of wealth accumulation, should you be entitled to maintain control over all of those ill-gotten resources?

People are always thinking of reasons to redistribute money and wealth for various reasons but all that really matters is how resources are stewarded, not who owns them.

If some family acquired land and thus the control over the resources of that land, such as fuel reserves, they can still be driven by liberal spending to cash in those resources out of fear of falling behind in terms of revenues.

So really the question is how to prevent consumer demand and aggressive investing from driving the economy into such aggressive competition that it overuses and wastes resources trying to satisfy insatiable consumer demand.

This is quite difficult in an economy where GDP growth, revenues, income, and the pursuit of money generally tend to blind practically everyone to the bigger picture of economic health and prosperity through conservation and efficiency.

And also to consider is the millions of others in nations such as China and India, who are improving their economic wealth, and now want to take their place next to us in using up the world's dwindling resources.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If your family has wealth that was acquired prior to 1930, when brutal exploitation of resources, including human-resources, was a VERY successful method of wealth accumulation, should you be entitled to maintain control over all of those ill-gotten resources?

Though certainly not the only one with paperwork, the extreme documentation of an example would The British Royal Family; who, in spite of the expen$ive wars they fought over 'The New World', profited handsomely from the brutality of its conquest and exploitation, and now control a LOT of the planet's resources as a direct result.

Who said "Crime doesn't pay?" ​

If you are a shriveled old prune who is jealous of everyone who is smarter than you are should you be allowed to express your opinion that no one but you deserves money?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

How many times do I have to explain this to you? If you don't like the way the government fucks up the marketplace, get the government out of the market place. ll don't get why anyone with an IQ above the freezing point of Helium wants more government after the way the government screwed up everything over the last few decades, but you seem to insist that it is the only possible answer.

 

[priceless]

And also to consider is the millions of others in nations such as China and India, who are improving their economic wealth, and now want to take their place next to us in using up the world's dwindling resources.

Well, there's a lot going on. Certainly I've heard that power plants are being built across Asia but the question is how much of the power is demanded for the sake of producing goods for export and how much is being used to pump up consumerist waste for the sake of pursuing western-style consumerism and the investment returns that come with that.

Still, as much of a problem as energy/fuel waste is, I think the bigger problem is land development. After all, the world could run out of fuel and people could survive using solar power and biomass energy but land can take centuries to return to a pristine state after being developed, if it ever does at all.

It's sad when you realize that the global economy can be divided into regions and then driven to compete for GDP by pushing them to develop more and more land into cities and suburbs that do little more than provide a private area to escape from the other areas that are degenerating due to unsustainable and exploitative economic activities.

What ever happened to the wars on drugs, crime, and other domestic problems? Now when we have a war on drugs, it's called 'Afghanistan' and if the war is on oil addiction, it's called 'Iraq' etc. as if it helps democracy to sum it all up as 'terrorism.' I suppose, though, that the media is so successful at whitewashing these global industries that it's nearly impossible to garner popular resistance to them without a majority of the public getting won over to the ethic of 'live and let live.' Of course, I'm for using the least violent means necessary, but these addiction industries are very aggressive and left unchecked, they gain power at levels that all but undermines the possibility of true freedom and democracy.

 

[AVG-JOE]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

How many times do I have to explain this to you? If you don't like the way the government fucks up the marketplace, get the government out of the market place. ll don't get why anyone with an IQ above the freezing point of Helium wants more government after the way the government screwed up everything over the last few decades, but you seem to insist that it is the only possible answer.

Since when does a fair and simple tax code equate to 'more government'?

​

 

[Quantum Windbag]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

How many times do I have to explain this to you? If you don't like the way the government fucks up the marketplace, get the government out of the market place. ll don't get why anyone with an IQ above the freezing point of Helium wants more government after the way the government screwed up everything over the last few decades, but you seem to insist that it is the only possible answer.

Since when does a fair and simple tax code equate to 'more government'?

​

What the fuck is fair about a tax code that forces people you don't like to pay more taxes? I can see how you would think it is simple, since you are simple minded, but you should remember that, in the real world, you are part of that 10% that will pay that simple minded tax.

 

[eagle1462010]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnVf1ZoCJSo]Peter Gabriel - Shock The Monkey - YouTube[/ame]

 

[bripat9643]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

Democracy is just another form of "might makes right," and a "fair and simple tax code" would achieve exactly the opposite of what you intend: a world where everyone have roughly equal incomes.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If your family has wealth that was acquired prior to 1930, when brutal exploitation of resources, including human-resources, was a VERY successful method of wealth accumulation, should you be entitled to maintain control over all of those ill-gotten resources?

Though certainly not the only one with paperwork, the extreme documentation of an example would The British Royal Family; who, in spite of the expen$ive wars they fought over 'The New World', profited handsomely from the brutality of its conquest and exploitation, and now control a LOT of the planet's resources as a direct result.

Who said "Crime doesn't pay?" ​

Just ask Joe Kennedy.

His criminal enterprise got his sons a president and 2 senators and got one son out from a murder charge. Not to mention all the other nepotism of the Kennedy bunch

 

[Rshermr]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

How many times do I have to explain this to you? If you don't like the way the government fucks up the marketplace, get the government out of the market place. ll don't get why anyone with an IQ above the freezing point of Helium wants more government after the way the government screwed up everything over the last few decades, but you seem to insist that it is the only possible answer.

Since when does a fair and simple tax code equate to 'more government'?

​

You say something rational that 95% of the population understands and is capable of discussing on this board, and you get what you are getting here. A bunch of knuckle draggers who are incapable of discussions but in general follow a libertarian philosophy of economics. None can show you such an economy that works and exists, but they all believe it is a great plan. Poor ignorant tools. Best to simply ignore them.

 

[AVG-JOE]

How many times do I have to explain this to you? If you don't like the way the government fucks up the marketplace, get the government out of the market place. ll don't get why anyone with an IQ above the freezing point of Helium wants more government after the way the government screwed up everything over the last few decades, but you seem to insist that it is the only possible answer.

Since when does a fair and simple tax code equate to 'more government'?

​

What the fuck is fair about a tax code that forces people you don't like to pay more taxes? I can see how you would think it is simple, since you are simple minded, but you should remember that, in the real world, you are part of that 10% that will pay that simple minded tax.

Look at the profitability of the tax preparation industry. (H&R Block, Jackson Hewitt, Liberty Tax, etc.)

Now... Is there anything that makes us look stupider from space than the billions we spend to do the fucking paperwork required to work in the United States?


In this country today to succeed in business you eventually need a lawyer. Agree or disagree?


A complicated tax code like the one employed as of this date over-serves those who can afford attorneys and accountants and it under-serves those who cannot afford to seek professional assistance with America's paperwork. Basically the more complicated the code, the more the middle class can be screwed.


Basic question: Do you think we should preserve the current way taxes are collected, or do you think that the current system is in need of some adjustment?

 

[whitehall]

Say what? "Should you be entitled to maintain control over your wealth" if somebody says granddaddy was a crook? Let's put it another way. Should the government be entitled to confiscate your wealth because some socialist bastard says your great grandfather didn't earn it? This Country is going down hill fast when we entertain nut case crazy ideas like that.

 

[AVG-JOE]

An unfair marketplace and 'Might making Right' has been THE economic issue for Monkeys since the first Monkey collaboration led to control of resources and wealth accumulation via forced productivity under threat of violence, and the simple fact of Monkey Evolution that, religion and other made-up morals be damned, he who controls the swords is well-fed and gets to impregnate more female Monkeys.

Democracy is part of the answer.

The other 90% is a Fair and Simple Tax Code. ​

Democracy is just another form of "might makes right," and a "fair and simple tax code" would achieve exactly the opposite of what you intend: a world where everyone have roughly equal incomes.

How?

Those are pretty broad terms, 'fair' and 'simple'... now fair and simple are evil?


Have you no substance? What's this bullshit about what I intend? How the fuck can you possibly infer that?


Good luck arguing against simplification of the tax code.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Since when does a fair and simple tax code equate to 'more government'?

​

What the fuck is fair about a tax code that forces people you don't like to pay more taxes? I can see how you would think it is simple, since you are simple minded, but you should remember that, in the real world, you are part of that 10% that will pay that simple minded tax.

Look at the profitability of the tax preparation industry. (H&R Block, Jackson Hewitt, Liberty Tax, etc.)

Now... Is there anything that makes us look stupider from space than the billions we spend to do the fucking paperwork required to work in the United States?


In this country today to succeed in business you eventually need a lawyer. Agree or disagree?


A complicated tax code like the one employed as of this date over-serves those who can afford attorneys and accountants and it under-serves those who cannot afford to seek professional assistance with America's paperwork. Basically the more complicated the code, the more the middle class can be screwed.


Basic question: Do you think we should preserve the current way taxes are collected, or do you think that the current system is in need of some adjustment?

I am sure you think you have a point, but the fact that you keep supporting big government and regulations just proves you are full of shit.

 

[hipeter924]

Not sure, a lot of old money types aren't so bad. I would be more concerned at the new money types out of the financial industry that don't care about what happens in the long-term, so long as they can cream their short-term profits.