Warren and the Divine Right of Capital: Accountable Capitalism Act

[georgephillip]

NAKED KEYNESIANISM: Ernesto Screpanti on Marx's Labor Theory of Value and The 'New Interpretation'

When a wealthy minority appropriates and distributes a surplus produced by the majority, social goals like liberty, fraternity, and equality are undermined, no?

Then explain Venezuela again.

All the wealthy people left Venezuela. But all the labor is still there.

If you are right, and the labor creates wealth, and the rich people just horde it... then explain Venezuela? All rich people left. All the labor is still there. Why isn't Venezuela now leading the US in wealth? They have all the labor, and no capitalists. They should be the most wealthy people on the face of the planet.

So what's going on? Why is your system not working?

When a wealthy minority appropriates and distributes a surplus produced by the majority, social goals like liberty, fraternity, and equality are undermined, no?

Then explain Venezuela again.

All the wealthy people left Venezuela. But all the labor is still there.

If you are right, and the labor creates wealth, and the rich people just horde it... then explain Venezuela? All rich people left. All the labor is still there. Why isn't Venezuela now leading the US in wealth? They have all the labor, and no capitalists. They should be the most wealthy people on the face of the planet.

What happens when the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World prevents a small minority of Venezuelans from distributing the surplus they have appropriated from their productive majority?

The rich parasites leave the country, as thousands of Venezuelans die from the consequences of illegal economic sanctions:

Economist Jeffrey Sachs: U.S. Sanctions Have Devastated Venezuela & Killed Over 40,000 Since 2017 | Democracy Now!

"It started with sanctions in 2017 that prevented, essentially, the country from accessing international capital markets and the oil company from restructuring its loans.

"That put Venezuela into a hyperinflation.

"That was the utter collapse.

"Oil earnings plummeted.

"The earnings that are used to buy food and medicine collapsed. That’s when the social, humanitarian crisis went spiraling out of control.

"And then, in this year, with this idea, very naive, very stupid, in my view, that there would be this self-proclaimed president, which was all choreographed with the United States very, very closely, another round of even tighter sanctions, essentially confiscating the earnings and the assets of the Venezuelan government, took place."

It's interesting to me.... that every single country that is based on Capitalist Free-market ideals, is wealthy.... and every country that is based on Socialist ideals, is impoverished and dying....

Yet isn't it amazing that regardless, it is somehow always those Free-market Capitalists that are to blame for the Socialists dying.

Why is that? Can you explain to me, how if the Capitalists are to blame..... how is it that every country overwhelmingly flooded with Capitalists has food to spare, and higher standards of living for even the poorest people, and at the same time every country almost devoid of Capitalists, has starvation and people living in utter poverty?

If you were right, and it was the evil Capitalists, that caused all the suffering in the world.... shouldn't the US be facing the most starvation and impoverishment? Shouldn't we see floods of people going to Venezuela where there are barely any capitalists left?

Yet somehow.... just somehow.... it's still the fault of Capitalists.... Just amazing how that works...

t's interesting to me.... that every single country that is based on Capitalist Free-market ideals, is wealthy.... and every country that is based on Socialist ideals, is impoverished and dying....

Have you considered the possibility that is due to the amount of violence capitalists inflict on civilian populations around the globe? Maybe the Kurds could help you understand?

The Turks are killing Kurds because.....capitalism?

The Turks are killing Kurds because.....capitalism?

Could Trump's Financial Ties Have Influenced His Phone Call With Erdogan?

 

[ScorpioRising007]

I love Elizabeth Warren's plan

Seems like a brilliant idea to me, gives me more reasons to vote for her.

 

[Andylusion]

Capitalism treats people as commodities subject to the same exploitative forces as serfs and slaves. Productive employees form the vast majority of the economy, yet the surplus they produce is appropriated by a small minority of employers. When the workers who produce the surplus control their workplace democratically, socialism will be the result. If that frightens you, move to China or Russia.

Really? That's funny, given how wages increase in Capitalist economies, and generally do not in socialist ones.

Again, reality contradicts your theory.

I've often thought of socialism as "democratic serfdom".

I've often thought of socialism as "democratic serfdom".

What are your thoughts on capitalism's wage slaves?

The Widening Gap Between the Super-Rich and Other Americans

"According to the AFL-CIO, the CEO-to-worker pay ratio at Walmart (America’s largest private employer) is 1,076 to 1, at Walt Disney Company 1,424-to-1, at McDonald’s 2,124-to-1, and at Gap 3,566-to-1.

"At 49 S&P 500 firms, noted an Institute for Policy Studies report, half the work force―that is, 3.7 million employees―received wages below the official U.S. poverty line for a family of four."

I worked at McDonald's. I quit and got a better job.

If those people are unhappy with their pay.... that's on them to get a better job.

I don't have any problem with how much the CEO's are paid. Again, I have gained far more benefit as a working man, from Walmart and McDonald's, than I ever have from someone like you.

I worked at McDonald's. I quit and got a better job.

If those people are unhappy with their pay.... that's on them to get a better job.

It's not about you.
It's about the 3.7 million US workers whose wages fall below the official US poverty line for a family of four, and their understanding of how their pay is influenced by a CEO-to-worker ratio of 2124 to 1 at McDonald's.
You are obviously content with table scraps.
Not every worker is so timid.
Man up or learn Mandarin.

Again.... go get a better job. You keep saying it isn't about me.... but if I can do it.... why can't anyone else? I failed out of college. I didn't drop out. CEOs of fortune 500s drop out. I failed out. I have no degrees. No certifications. No training. Nothing. If anyone in this country should be completely stuck and unable to ever escape minimum wage (according to your theory), it should be me. Yet, I have been able to find higher paying jobs, without any qualifications, many times. Many times!

If an immigrant from Mexico, can start a company, and become a millionaire.... when he didn't even know how to speak English yet.... how can someone born in this country not at the very minimum, get a better job?

You say 3.7 Million workers whose wages fall below the office poverty line..... Get a better job. There are tons of jobs in this country. You can be driving a truck, and earning $40K a year, by the end of the month. Paid training. Paid CDL license.

You can get a job at Walmart, and use the tuition reimbursement program, to get a degree. Had a friend who worked at Walmart, and now she is a civil engineer. Used the tuition reimbursement program at Walmart to get her degree.

You can move up the chain at whatever company you are working for. Take McDonalds for example. You can enroll in McDonald's management training. Walmart also has free management training, which from what I understand, can count towards a degree at a community colleges.

When I worked at Advance Auto Parts, we had people who enrolled in the companies management training program, and ended up store managers.

You can find a way to make more money, if you try. Period.

It's a choice. You keep making these claims that somehow the system is bad, when people chose to live on a low wage. No, it is a choice.

I can think of a dozen people off the top of my head, that made a choice to live on a much lower wage, than they were capable of earning. That's not a problem with the system.

And we've had research on this before. They found that more than half the people who lived on the lowest 20% of wage earners, within 10 years, were in the top 20% of wage earners. That's a fact. People don't stay in the same income bracket throughout their life.

The top 20% doesn't stay the same people year over year, and the neither does the bottom 20%.

It's about the 3.7 million US workers whose wages fall below the official US poverty line for a family of four, and their understanding of how their pay is influenced by a CEO-to-worker ratio of 2124 to 1 at McDonald's.

Again... math. Do the math.

What does the CEO pay have to do with the worker pay? Nothing. NOTHING. How do I know this? Math.

If we confiscated the entire wage of the McDonald's CEO, that would be $21.8 Million. Divided that up by all the employees, what do you get?

21.8 million divided by 2 million employees, what do you get? $10.90. Per employee.... per year.

Is giving every employee a $10 bill, going to raise a family of four over the poverty line? No, it is not. So... what is your point? Oh, you don't have one.

You complaining about CEO pay, is just an argument based on greed, and envy. Not an argument based on economic facts, or helping the poor. It won't help the poor. $10 a year will not change anyone's life. What it might do, is cause a good CEO to leave the company, and a bad CEO to take his place, and end up running the store chain into the ground, causing all those people to lose their jobs.

That might change some people's lives, but not for the better, unless you consider unemployed with no hope, better.

You are obviously content with table scraps.
Not every worker is so timid.

I am content with honesty, and arguments based on math, rather than making baseless claims about people you don't know. I have walked off jobs that paid too little, in order to get jobs that paid more. So..... that doesn't seem to fit with your empty grasping attempt at a failed argument.

If this is the best you have for an argument, then you don't have one.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

People quit the government all the time, just ask John Bolton.

Under socialism, government is the only game in town. The only way you can avoid it is to get the hell out.

I wonder if you can actually address this point, or if you'll just keep ignoring it and posting irrelevant memes and quotes from your propaganda stockpile? I'll bet on the latter.

I wonder if you can actually address this point, or if you'll just keep ignoring it and posting irrelevant memes and quotes from your propaganda stockpile? I'll bet on the latter.

As I've pointed out on more than one occasion, socialism means society controls the means of production; government is one option, but so are worker self controlled enterprises.

but so are worker self controlled enterprises.

The workers ran United Airlines, how did that work out?

but so are worker self controlled enterprises.

The workers ran United Airlines, how did that work out?

Better than Enron.

And yet, not very well, eh?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then explain Venezuela again.

All the wealthy people left Venezuela. But all the labor is still there.

If you are right, and the labor creates wealth, and the rich people just horde it... then explain Venezuela? All rich people left. All the labor is still there. Why isn't Venezuela now leading the US in wealth? They have all the labor, and no capitalists. They should be the most wealthy people on the face of the planet.

So what's going on? Why is your system not working?

When a wealthy minority appropriates and distributes a surplus produced by the majority, social goals like liberty, fraternity, and equality are undermined, no?

Then explain Venezuela again.

All the wealthy people left Venezuela. But all the labor is still there.

If you are right, and the labor creates wealth, and the rich people just horde it... then explain Venezuela? All rich people left. All the labor is still there. Why isn't Venezuela now leading the US in wealth? They have all the labor, and no capitalists. They should be the most wealthy people on the face of the planet.

What happens when the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World prevents a small minority of Venezuelans from distributing the surplus they have appropriated from their productive majority?

The rich parasites leave the country, as thousands of Venezuelans die from the consequences of illegal economic sanctions:

Economist Jeffrey Sachs: U.S. Sanctions Have Devastated Venezuela & Killed Over 40,000 Since 2017 | Democracy Now!

"It started with sanctions in 2017 that prevented, essentially, the country from accessing international capital markets and the oil company from restructuring its loans.

"That put Venezuela into a hyperinflation.

"That was the utter collapse.

"Oil earnings plummeted.

"The earnings that are used to buy food and medicine collapsed. That’s when the social, humanitarian crisis went spiraling out of control.

"And then, in this year, with this idea, very naive, very stupid, in my view, that there would be this self-proclaimed president, which was all choreographed with the United States very, very closely, another round of even tighter sanctions, essentially confiscating the earnings and the assets of the Venezuelan government, took place."

It's interesting to me.... that every single country that is based on Capitalist Free-market ideals, is wealthy.... and every country that is based on Socialist ideals, is impoverished and dying....

Yet isn't it amazing that regardless, it is somehow always those Free-market Capitalists that are to blame for the Socialists dying.

Why is that? Can you explain to me, how if the Capitalists are to blame..... how is it that every country overwhelmingly flooded with Capitalists has food to spare, and higher standards of living for even the poorest people, and at the same time every country almost devoid of Capitalists, has starvation and people living in utter poverty?

If you were right, and it was the evil Capitalists, that caused all the suffering in the world.... shouldn't the US be facing the most starvation and impoverishment? Shouldn't we see floods of people going to Venezuela where there are barely any capitalists left?

Yet somehow.... just somehow.... it's still the fault of Capitalists.... Just amazing how that works...

t's interesting to me.... that every single country that is based on Capitalist Free-market ideals, is wealthy.... and every country that is based on Socialist ideals, is impoverished and dying....

Have you considered the possibility that is due to the amount of violence capitalists inflict on civilian populations around the globe? Maybe the Kurds could help you understand?

The Turks are killing Kurds because.....capitalism?

The Turks are killing Kurds because.....capitalism?

Could Trump's Financial Ties Have Influenced His Phone Call With Erdogan?

Gee, thanks for the link.

No answer?

 

[Andylusion]

Right... but you just made that reference, and I just proved it doesn't exist.

So if it does not exist, in the form that is defined, then you must have your definition.

Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk... what does "wage slave" mean to you? How do YOU define it?

Because the generally assumed meaning, simply does not hold to reality. I had one year where I earned $12,000 of taxable income for the year.

I just got another job. I wasn't somehow "enslaved" to this wage.

And honestly ANYONE can get a higher paying job. Anyone can.

So who is a slave? Where are these 'wage slaves' in a country where anyone can choose to work for anyone they wish? Or even to work for themselves?

The lady across the street was babysitting out of her condo. Charging $150 per kid per week, taking care of 5 kids a week. All she did was let them watch parental controlled netflix, and take them to the condo park, and microwave spaggettios. That and make them have a nap time around 2 PM.

$750 a week.

Now what is the difference between that chick, and the one working for minimum wage at Wendy's? Choice. One is not enslaved, and the other magically has the key to escape slavery.

It's choice. I don't want to put up with everyone's spoiled bratty kids. Yeah, I get it. But that's why you get paid less where you only have to put up with "do you want fries with that?".

You get paid less where your biggest responsibility and risk, is taking the fries out of the firer when the buzzer goes off.

Again, the company 1-800-GOT-JUNK was started by a teenager with a $900 pickup. Why wasn't he enslaved by wages? And if he can do that, why can't anyone else?

Again, the company 1-800-GOT-JUNK was started by a teenager with a $900 pickup. Why wasn't he enslaved by wages? And if he can do that, why can't anyone else?

For the same reason not everyone can win an Olympic gold medal or gain admission to MIT at 16. There is a "talented ten percent" and 90% of us are not among it.

Also, not everyone lives in Canada where having a sensible socialized health care system means you can quit school, quit your job, fire all of your employees, etc, and your wife won't fucking kill you because the kids still need braces and your doctor doesn't do Obamacare.
Also, not everyone has a liver transplant surgeon for a father who can no doubt be counted upon to cover any fuckup or shortfall in a GOT-CASH-TO-BURN minute.
Where in the U.S. can one just say they can't read, drop out of High School, and go right to College?
How does one afford College in the U.S. without a rich old man? How much student debt does he owe? Oh, yeah.. Canada,.. like the rest of the industrialized world,.. a place where people actually still largely care about each other, not just money.. Hmm, never mind.

I think many Americans are confused about who creates value in this economic system. Entrepreneurs like to call themselves "wealth creators" to justify their higher incomes, but their success may have more to do with convincing government they deserve high rewards for obfuscating the relationships between value, profit, and economic rent.

If value is defined by price and you earn a lot of money, then you must be a value creator; unless the word "value" has made it easier for value-extracting activities to masquerade as value-creating activities.

Economic rents (unearned income) get confused with profits (earned income) leading to a rise in inequality and a declining real economy. Some would argue huge private "earnings" from record levels of US debt should therefore be subtracted from GDP instead of counting as a positive contribution to the national economy?

I don't believe either major US political party can afford to deal with such fundamental economic contradictions.

Takers and Makers: Who are the Real Value Creators? - Evonomics

No, that would be wrong. Now there are people are rent collectors. We do have that. The sugar lobby for example. The Ethanol lobby for example. Green-energy companies.

So there is economic rent seeking going on.

My favorite example is Elon Musk. His SolarCity company has never turned a profit, and yet Elon made millions off it. How? Government subsidies. Taxing you, so Elon can drive his Tesla Roadster.

However, private earnings benefit all people. Everything that creates value, is a benefit to the economy, and thus the entire nation.

Every product or service, that costs less to produce, than how much it is valued on the market, creates wealth.

No, that would be wrong. Now there are people are rent collectors. We do have that. The sugar lobby for example. The Ethanol lobby for example. Green-energy companies.

So there is economic rent seeking going on.

My favorite example is Elon Musk. His SolarCity company has never turned a profit, and yet Elon made millions off it. How? Government subsidies. Taxing you, so Elon can drive his Tesla Roadster.

The reason why Tesla doubled its worth comes from printing twice as many shares which was underwritten by the Federal Reserve's rent-seeking activities in the stock and bond markets.

High Cost Economy | Michael Hudson

"What the press isn’t talking about is a central bank manipulation of stock and bond prices to keep them up, the enormous purchases of corporate bonds by the European Central Banks, by the Federal Reserve.

"The role of central banks today is to support inflation of asset prices, of stock prices, bond, and real estate and to deflate the economy.

"They want to make sure that labor does not get any share of the added growth. That’s the basic strategy of neoliberalism, which is the new orthodoxy."

That guy is clearly a moron. If I own stock, and they inflate the price of the stock, then my stock goes up in dollar value. How does that prevent me from from getting a share of the added growth?

Again... you are speaking in circles. You can't constantly say that stocks are all trash.... and the complain non-stop that the rich and wealthy have all the stocks.

If labor wants to own more of the added growth, they need to do what all the other rich and wealthy people do... namely buy more stocks. Have more investments.

You can't do this ridiculous circular logic where you say the Feds are manipulating stocks and people shouldn't buy them, and then complain they are somehow preventing labor from owning more of the growth, because they are manipulating stocks.

That makes no logical sense. Lithium dude. Get some.

 

[Andylusion]

Takers and Makers: Who are the Real Value Creators? - Evonomics
Interesting stuff.

In theory, no income may be judged too high, because in a market economy competition prevents anyone from earning more than he or she deserves. In practice, markets are what economists call imperfect, so prices and wages are often set by the powerful and paid by the weak.

In the prevailing view, prices are set by supply and demand, and any deviation from what is considered the competitive price (based on marginal revenues) must be due to some imperfection which, if removed, will produce the correct distribution of income between actors. The possibility that some activities perpetually earn rent because they are perceived as valuable, while actually blocking the creation of value and/or destroying existing value, is hardly discussed.

Growth is always presumed natural and good. Apparently value growth then as well. I dunno. Avoiding the extremes has always seemed what's logical to me. Growth to keep pace with the population makes sense. Not growth simply because inflation is deemed somehow inevitable or unstoppable. I think growth should diminish as population shrinks, a level of activity (GDP) deemed "sustainable" signaling the reasonable upper bound. Technological advance, on the other hand, is clearly inevitable. Simply replacing older means with new should be considered a wash. A plus if a net gain in decent employment results. A minus if good jobs are lost.

There needs to be something fun incentivising (rewarding) entrepreneurship. It need not be money or power. Many of the most creative and industrious have been poor.They still enjoyed it largely for its own sake. No one needs to be disgustingly rich to the point where they significantly corrupt governments to act on their behalf rather than in the best interests of the people in general. Those they are supposedly accountable to. Being able to vote them out is no longer any threat where they always make out far better by simply doing the bidding of the filthy rich.

No one needs to be disgustingly rich to the point where they significantly corrupt governments to act on their behalf rather than in the best interests of the people in general. Those they are supposedly accountable to. Being able to vote them out is no longer any threat where they always make out far better by simply doing the bidding of the filthy rich.

Separating private wealth from political influence in a capitalist economy seems like separating the white from the rice. There is something inherently corrupt about those who profit the most from an economy that concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation funneling virtually unlimited amounts of money to politicians responsible for regulating their business related perfidy. I suppose we could nationalize Wall Street and the New York Fed, and empower Treasury to replace commercial bank credit thereby becoming the (sole?) source of new money?

Nationalize the Federal Reserve | United Front Against Austerity

Nationalize the Fed?
How do you nationalize a part of the Federal government?

I'm telling you.... he needs lithium.

(I totally missed that on the first read though... absolutely hilarious.... nationalize.... the fed..... wow...)

(I totally missed that on the first read though... absolutely hilarious.... nationalize.... the fed..... wow...)

Nationalize the Federal Reserve | United Front Against Austerity

"Seize the Fed: Federal lending, not Federal spending
We propose to seize the functions of the Federal Reserve System and use it as a national bank to finance the long-term needs of the American people.

"The policy of federal lending, as distinct from federal spending, can be used to break the current political impasse. Federal lending allows us to make massive long-term commitments at modest short-term costs.

"For states and businesses, the cost of capital can be radically lowered – down to 0% for public infrastructure, and a competitive advantage of the United States in world markets can be secured.

"The overriding goal is the creation of 30+ million new jobs in production, with high capital investment, high energy intensity, high value added, and high technology.

"The theoretical basis and historical validation for the program advanced here is the traditional American System of Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List, Henry Carey, Henry Clay, Abraham Lincoln, the populists, and the New Deal.

"The method of transforming the central bank into a national bank to finance a recovery derives from the work of Woytinsky and Lautenbach, interpreted in the light of the experience of the US Lend-Lease Program."

Then why is the chairman of the Federal Reserve appointed by government? My company is owned by the shareholders. The CEO has never been appointed by government.

The Federal Reserve was created, and is maintained under Federal law. If it's private, why is that? My company exists, because private individuals acting in a private economy, created it. No law has anything to do with it.

If the Federal Reserve is a private system, how does it have the power to control the lending rate at other banks through the Fed Funds Rate? What private business, has the ability to dictate to literally every other bank in the country, at what rates they lend money?

If the Federal Reserve is a private system, how does it have the ability to dictate currency, or legal tender, to the rest of the entire country? Remember, prior to the Federal Reserve, we have several different currencies operating in the country, because any bank had the ability to print certificates of deposit, which were exchangeable.

Now I get it, that on paper.... only on paper, it's a private system... but that requires you to chop your brains into bits, and run it through a garbage disposal.

Any thinking person, who isn't ridiculously partisan, can see that the Federal Reserve is already owned and operated by the Federal Government. This whole line of thinking in this post, is just.... childish and stupid.

 

[Andylusion]

For the same reason not everyone can win an Olympic gold medal or gain admission to MIT at 16. There is a "talented ten percent" and 90% of us are not among it.

Also, not everyone lives in Canada where having a sensible socialized health care system means you can quit school, quit your job, fire all of your employees, etc, and your wife won't fucking kill you because the kids still need braces and your doctor doesn't do Obamacare.
Also, not everyone has a liver transplant surgeon for a father who can no doubt be counted upon to cover any fuckup or shortfall in a GOT-CASH-TO-BURN minute.
Where in the U.S. can one just say they can't read, drop out of High School, and go right to College?
How does one afford College in the U.S. without a rich old man? How much student debt does he owe? Oh, yeah.. Canada,.. like the rest of the industrialized world,.. a place where people actually still largely care about each other, not just money.. Hmm, never mind.

I think many Americans are confused about who creates value in this economic system. Entrepreneurs like to call themselves "wealth creators" to justify their higher incomes, but their success may have more to do with convincing government they deserve high rewards for obfuscating the relationships between value, profit, and economic rent.

If value is defined by price and you earn a lot of money, then you must be a value creator; unless the word "value" has made it easier for value-extracting activities to masquerade as value-creating activities.

Economic rents (unearned income) get confused with profits (earned income) leading to a rise in inequality and a declining real economy. Some would argue huge private "earnings" from record levels of US debt should therefore be subtracted from GDP instead of counting as a positive contribution to the national economy?

I don't believe either major US political party can afford to deal with such fundamental economic contradictions.

Takers and Makers: Who are the Real Value Creators? - Evonomics

No, that would be wrong. Now there are people are rent collectors. We do have that. The sugar lobby for example. The Ethanol lobby for example. Green-energy companies.

So there is economic rent seeking going on.

My favorite example is Elon Musk. His SolarCity company has never turned a profit, and yet Elon made millions off it. How? Government subsidies. Taxing you, so Elon can drive his Tesla Roadster.

However, private earnings benefit all people. Everything that creates value, is a benefit to the economy, and thus the entire nation.

Every product or service, that costs less to produce, than how much it is valued on the market, creates wealth.

No, that would be wrong. Now there are people are rent collectors. We do have that. The sugar lobby for example. The Ethanol lobby for example. Green-energy companies.

So there is economic rent seeking going on.

My favorite example is Elon Musk. His SolarCity company has never turned a profit, and yet Elon made millions off it. How? Government subsidies. Taxing you, so Elon can drive his Tesla Roadster.

The reason why Tesla doubled its worth comes from printing twice as many shares which was underwritten by the Federal Reserve's rent-seeking activities in the stock and bond markets.

High Cost Economy | Michael Hudson

"What the press isn’t talking about is a central bank manipulation of stock and bond prices to keep them up, the enormous purchases of corporate bonds by the European Central Banks, by the Federal Reserve.

"The role of central banks today is to support inflation of asset prices, of stock prices, bond, and real estate and to deflate the economy.

"They want to make sure that labor does not get any share of the added growth. That’s the basic strategy of neoliberalism, which is the new orthodoxy."

Not to mention, it's never been Elon Musk's company. His cousins started it and gave him a title in return for his investment, but it was their baby until Tesla bought it out. Now it just goes by the name Tesla.

Not all that relevant to the point though. Who put what, in what title, with what signature, is splitting hairs.

The point is, when people complain about rent-seeking, and having government fund big business, it is almost entirely left-wing socialists, pushing their pet projects, or their pet supporters.

I remember reading about Warren Buffet buying tons of stock in rail lines, after Obama got elected, knowing that a ton of money from government would flow to train subsidies... which happened exactly as he knew it would.

You guys bi!ch about rich people getting wealthy off government, and then vote for the very guys that want to dump money into green-energy subsidies, and then act shocked when BP oil, buys a bunch of wind farms, and starts collecting subsidies.

You cry and whine about oil companies, and then Al Gore gets the Elk Hills federal oil reserve rights, to his oil company that has hundreds of thousands in stock with.

You guys are the problem in that political mirror. All you left-wingers are far more in the pockets of big business than right-wingers are.

 

[Andylusion]

It's not about you.

Interesting discussion of that phrase. It can possibly be interpreted as supportive, damning, or anything in between. Context is necessary, but I'd venture it generally means "you are not the intended focus nor have "you" been asked to represent those who are.

of that phrase. It can possibly be interpreted as supportive, damning, or anything in between. Context is necessary, but I'd venture it generally means "you are not the intended focus nor have "you" been asked to represent those who are.

I had not considered the ambiguity of the sentence "it's not about you" when I wrote my response to Andy's latest anecdote about his time at McDonald's. I wanted to convey my belief that millions of other workers who may have found it difficult to find a "better job" toiled as wage slaves in an organization that paid its CEO 2124 times as much as the vast majority of its labor force.

Obviously, Andy's decision to leave McDonald's was all about him...

How to parse "It's not about you"

"As far as I could understand, this phrase somehow means 'You're acting selfishly and you don't have the right to do this'. But I am having a hard time putting that into the words 'it's not about you'.

"On the surface the words are gibberish.

"Of course a decision I make for myself is 'about me'. Does the phrase mean "a personal decision that affects you should not concern you'? That also makes little sense."

I wanted to convey my belief that millions of other workers who may have found it difficult to find a "better job"

I get that. You, or them, are both wrong.

You are wrong sir. Because I know these people, I've worked with them most of my life, and the moment they lose their job.... it's amazing how they are able to find another, after saying for years that they can't.

They are wrong. You are wrong too.

The current CEO of Walmart, started off as a crew member. Hourly wage, unloading trucks for Walmart. You can move up the corporate chain. You can choose to enroll in management training.

Or you can whine and cry, and post on a forum, that you can't get a better job.

Whiners stay where they are, typically because no one promotes a whiner. If you are store manager, and you have a whiner crying that they evil CEO makes too much, and they can't find a better job, and they are a wage slave.... would you promote them, so you have to work with that whiner more? No. I know this myself, because when I had to choose people to work with, I specifically did not pick whiny people to be promoted with me.

No one does.

Again, where you are in life, is 90% your choice, and only 10% your circumstance.

 

[Andylusion]

Ironically the US census posted key factors in becoming wealthy.... hold a job, get married, and obey the law.

It's funny how stupid people mock how rich people end up rich... and then wonder why they are poor.

Ironically the US census posted key factors in becoming wealthy.... hold a job, get married, and obey the law.

It's funny how stupid people mock how rich people end up rich... and then wonder why they are poor.

How does the census explain unequal starting points when embarking on your quest for wealth?

Worsening wealth inequality by race

Pew found that in 2005, home equity made up nearly two-thirds of the net worth of Hispanics and 59% of blacks, but only 44% of whites.

Blacks and Hispanics are also less likely to have assets in the financial system, such as savings accounts or stocks, Kochhar said.

Looks like they should buy more stock.

Blacks and Hispanics are also less likely to have assets in the financial system, such as savings accounts or stocks, Kochhar said.

Looks like they should buy more stock.

By working a few hours more every day?

Maybe you could donate your job to a deserving black or brown worker so they could buy more stock?

Fuck black and brown workers. They can earn a living like everyone else.

Fuck black and brown workers. They can earn a living like everyone else

Dat's mighty White of you, Massa 92

Cram that up your butt.

I've worked 10 hour days, getting up at 3 AM in the morning, to get my butt to work by 5 AM.

That's what an adult does. I don't care if that Adult is black, white our purple with green stripes.

You minorities need to get off their butt, and work for what they want, like the rest of us. And I don't need your excuses for whatever happened to some black person years ago. I don't care about Angola Prison, or whatever other childish crap you want to point out.

I've had wrong things done to me, many times. Never thought that gave me an excuse to not work, and get other people to pay for my life.

Maybe that's because I had good parents, and you apparently didn't, but that's how life works. You want to have stuff in your life? Get up like the rest of us, and work for it.

 

[Andylusion]

You post that like it matters. Like you made some sort of point.

Years ago, I had a garbage vacuum sweeper. I found the sweeper I wanted, but at one store it was $70, and another store it was $60. I went to Walmart, and the exact identical sweeper was $47. I still use that sweeper to this day, now 10 years later.

Which is better.... to give out a some money to help people who refuse to work for a living? Some donation to a charity that helps people hooked on drugs by choice?

Or a company that provides goods and services cheaper to working people like me?

People like me, who don't have tons of money laying around to buys stuff, benefit a great deal from the Waltons. In fact, even those of us who don't shop Walmart have benefited from the Waltons, because more expensive stores, have lowered their prices, to compete with Walmart.

In contrast, who has ever benefited from you? No one.

MOVEOVER... your entire post is a fraud to begin with. Net Worth, has nothing to do with liquid cash. Just because someone has a large net worth, has nothing to do with how much cash they could give to charity.

For example, my parents are millionaires. But their retirement income is only a couple thousand a month. Just because they own a lake house worth $400,000, doesn't mean that when the roof spring a leak last year, that they just had piles of cash laying around to fix it. They had to save up money from their retirement income, and then fix the roof.

Similarly, I have no idea how much liquid cash income the Walton's have each month. But even if they were collecting $500,000 a year, and giving 50% of that to charity, it wouldn't be but a few tenths of a percent of their net worth.

Still a ton more than some left-winger like you has ever given.... so shut up sparky.

LASTLY....

What business is it of yours? Did you have parents that taught you to mind your own freakin business? Even if the Walton's were to give 50% of their entire networth.. it wouldn't help any working man, and it still wouldn't be any of your business.

Learn what your grand parents should have taught your parents..... MIND.... YOUR.... OWN.... BUSINESS.

Stop being a greed and envy driven prick.

People like me, who don't have tons of money laying around to buys stuff, benefit a great deal from the Waltons. In fact, even those of us who don't shop Walmart have benefited from the Waltons, because more expensive stores, have lowered their prices, to compete with Walmart

People like you are slaves.
Do humanity a favor and die.

Report: Wal-Mart Heirs Are “Phony Philanthropists”

“While the Waltons accumulate $8.6 million per day in Walmart dividends, Walmart workers are struggling to get by,” said Sarita Gupta, executive director of Jobs with Justice, in a press release announcing the publication of the report. “Many of them rely on taxpayer-funded programs like food stamps to provide for their families.”

“Workers have been calling on the company to pay a minimum of $25,000, offer full-time work, and end retaliation against workers who speak out for better jobs,” she added. “The Waltons could earn goodwill and public respect by improving conditions for workers and their families.”

Communists can't handle dissent, and want the dissenters dead.

Communists can't handle dissent, and want the dissenters dead

Too much winning

Protip: If you had facts, logic, and reason on your side, you wouldn't have to put people in mass graves.

Protip: If you had facts, logic, and reason on your side, you wouldn't have to put people in mass graves.

Few killers have filled more mass graves than capitalism

You have the right to be wrong.

 

[Markle]

Georgephillip, and you other far left Socialists, between Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos they have acquired roughly a quarter of a TRILLION DOLLARS in my lifetime. Specifically how much has their earnings taken from your income and net worth?

 

[Andylusion]

Takers and Makers: Who are the Real Value Creators? - Evonomics
Interesting stuff.

In theory, no income may be judged too high, because in a market economy competition prevents anyone from earning more than he or she deserves. In practice, markets are what economists call imperfect, so prices and wages are often set by the powerful and paid by the weak.

In the prevailing view, prices are set by supply and demand, and any deviation from what is considered the competitive price (based on marginal revenues) must be due to some imperfection which, if removed, will produce the correct distribution of income between actors. The possibility that some activities perpetually earn rent because they are perceived as valuable, while actually blocking the creation of value and/or destroying existing value, is hardly discussed.

Growth is always presumed natural and good. Apparently value growth then as well. I dunno. Avoiding the extremes has always seemed what's logical to me. Growth to keep pace with the population makes sense. Not growth simply because inflation is deemed somehow inevitable or unstoppable. I think growth should diminish as population shrinks, a level of activity (GDP) deemed "sustainable" signaling the reasonable upper bound. Technological advance, on the other hand, is clearly inevitable. Simply replacing older means with new should be considered a wash. A plus if a net gain in decent employment results. A minus if good jobs are lost.

There needs to be something fun incentivising (rewarding) entrepreneurship. It need not be money or power. Many of the most creative and industrious have been poor.They still enjoyed it largely for its own sake. No one needs to be disgustingly rich to the point where they significantly corrupt governments to act on their behalf rather than in the best interests of the people in general. Those they are supposedly accountable to. Being able to vote them out is no longer any threat where they always make out far better by simply doing the bidding of the filthy rich.

No one needs to be disgustingly rich to the point where they significantly corrupt governments to act on their behalf rather than in the best interests of the people in general. Those they are supposedly accountable to. Being able to vote them out is no longer any threat where they always make out far better by simply doing the bidding of the filthy rich.

Separating private wealth from political influence in a capitalist economy seems like separating the white from the rice. There is something inherently corrupt about those who profit the most from an economy that concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation funneling virtually unlimited amounts of money to politicians responsible for regulating their business related perfidy. I suppose we could nationalize Wall Street and the New York Fed, and ...

You go girl! Nationalize every. God. Damned. Thing. Government is everything.

You go girl! Nationalize every. God. Damned. Thing. Government is everything.

Are you a fan of privatization?

Naomi Klein Quote

Yes, I am a fan of privatization. Nationalization was tried in Venezuela. Your system sucks. It's always amazing to see left-wingers flee away from all the countries that practice what they preach, and blame Capitalists in the process.....

But let me ask you sparky.... are you living in a primarily capitalists country right now? I wager yes you are.

Shocking.... the left-wingers they constantly run screaming from every left-wing country.... always end up living in the capitalist countries, they claim are so terrible.

 

[Andylusion]

Communists can't handle dissent, and want the dissenters dead.

Communists can't handle dissent, and want the dissenters dead

Too much winning

Protip: If you had facts, logic, and reason on your side, you wouldn't have to put people in mass graves.

Protip: If you had facts, logic, and reason on your side, you wouldn't have to put people in mass graves.

Few killers have filled more mass graves than capitalism

So, to prove how evil capitalism is, you post a graphic showing deaths caused by tyrannical government.

That didn't work out so great for you, did it?

So, to prove how evil capitalism is, you post a graphic showing deaths caused by tyrannical government.

Tyrannical capitalist government, you mean?

"Put on the U2 and The Cranberries and let’s down some green brew folks, it’s that time of year again.

"But while St. Patrick’s Day is cause to celebrate everything Irish-American, it’s also a good time to ponder just why more than a million Irish were forced to leave Ireland while another million were dying of starvation in such a short period of time in the first place.

"The answer, which also explains why millions of children are currently going without enough food in the U.S., has much more to do with market systems than Mother Nature."

EarthRx: The Irish Potato Famine Was Caused by Capitalism, Not a Fungus

LOL!

The first one..... Hurricane Katrina.

Mao deliberately instigated protests, and then had his military literally mow down students.....

Stalin deliberately labeled people enemies of the state and had them carted off to slave labor camps, to build his pet projects until they died of exhaustion....

But..... no no.... what really is terrible is Capitalism, because there was a hurricane......

First one on the list, proves you are mentally disabled. Get lithium man. You are sounding more like an inmate with every post.

 

[Andylusion]

Takers and Makers: Who are the Real Value Creators? - Evonomics
Interesting stuff.
Growth is always presumed natural and good. Apparently value growth then as well. I dunno. Avoiding the extremes has always seemed what's logical to me. Growth to keep pace with the population makes sense. Not growth simply because inflation is deemed somehow inevitable or unstoppable. I think growth should diminish as population shrinks, a level of activity (GDP) deemed "sustainable" signaling the reasonable upper bound. Technological advance, on the other hand, is clearly inevitable. Simply replacing older means with new should be considered a wash. A plus if a net gain in decent employment results. A minus if good jobs are lost.

There needs to be something fun incentivising (rewarding) entrepreneurship. It need not be money or power. Many of the most creative and industrious have been poor.They still enjoyed it largely for its own sake. No one needs to be disgustingly rich to the point where they significantly corrupt governments to act on their behalf rather than in the best interests of the people in general. Those they are supposedly accountable to. Being able to vote them out is no longer any threat where they always make out far better by simply doing the bidding of the filthy rich.

No one needs to be disgustingly rich to the point where they significantly corrupt governments to act on their behalf rather than in the best interests of the people in general. Those they are supposedly accountable to. Being able to vote them out is no longer any threat where they always make out far better by simply doing the bidding of the filthy rich.

Separating private wealth from political influence in a capitalist economy seems like separating the white from the rice. There is something inherently corrupt about those who profit the most from an economy that concentrates wealth into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation funneling virtually unlimited amounts of money to politicians responsible for regulating their business related perfidy. I suppose we could nationalize Wall Street and the New York Fed, and ...

You go girl! Nationalize every. God. Damned. Thing. Government is everything.

You go girl! Nationalize every. God. Damned. Thing. Government is everything.

Are you a fan of privatization?

Naomi Klein Quote

Nothing works as well as government, eh comrade?

Nothing works as well as government, eh comrade?

Your alma mater, maybe

Did you graduate?

Can't respond eh?

 

[Andylusion]

Socialism is the ultimate expression of slavery. It assumes people are a resource, owned by the state, to be used for the benefit of the state. I'm not an ant. I'll pass.

Socialism is the ultimate expression of slavery. It assumes people are a resource, owned by the state, to be used for the benefit of the state. I'm not an ant. I'll pass.

Capitalism treats people as commodities subject to the same exploitative forces as serfs and slaves. Productive employees form the vast majority of the economy, yet the surplus they produce is appropriated by a small minority of employers. When the workers who produce the surplus control their workplace democratically, socialism will be the result. If that frightens you, move to China or Russia.

Really? That's funny, given how wages increase in Capitalist economies, and generally do not in socialist ones.

Again, reality contradicts your theory.

Really? That's funny, given how wages increase in Capitalist economies, and generally do not in socialist ones.

Again, reality contradicts your theory.

Reality reveals how US wages have increased compared to average CEO pay since 1965; do you blame capitalism of socialism?

The Widening Gap Between the Super-Rich and Other Americans

"In August 2019, the Economic Policy Institute reported that, in 2018, the average pay of CEOs at America’s 350 top firms hit $17.2 million―an increase, when adjusted for inflation, of 1,007.5 percent since 1978.

"By contrast, the typical worker’s wage, adjusted for inflation, grew by only 11.9 percent over this 40-year period.

"In 1965, the ratio of CEO-to-worker’s pay stood at 20-to-1; by 2018 (when CEOs received another hefty pay raise and workers received a 0.2 percent pay cut), it had reached 278-to-1."

Again, I already covered this. The gap between rich and poor, SHOULD widen. Just using logic, it should. Because the lowest wage, is and has always been throughout all time..... Zero. There people who do not work, or work exceptionally little. I knew a guy years ago, who only mowed lawns, and thus only had work during the winter, and his yearly income was just $10,000.

So if the lowest wage is always Zero..... and the CEO wage is always increasing.... then the gap will widen.

And CEO pay will always continue to increase. Why?

Because they keep increasing what they do. If I own 5 stores.... and open 5 more, my pay will double. That doesn't mean the pay at an individual store will increase, because the customers are not going to pay twice as much for the same product, just because the CEO pay doubled.

Math sir. Learn math.

The Widening Gap Between the Super-Rich and Other Americans

"Thus, despite the soaring incomes of top corporate executives and other wealthy Americans, the median household income in the United States grew by only 0.2 percent during 2018―a decline from the three previous years.

"Commenting on U.S. wage stagnation, Sam Pizzigati, co-editor of inequality.org, observed that 'average Americans have spent this entire century on a treadmill getting nowhere fast. The nation’s median―most typical―households pocketed 2.3 percent fewer real dollars in 2018 than they earned in 2000.'"

Yeah, notice the word "households". Individual wages have not fallen.

Only household wages have fallen. No evidence whatsoever, that other wages have gone down.

Why is that? Because more and more people are living alone.

You take a husband and wife, both working, and they divorce.... you split the one household with a large income, into two households with much smaller incomes.



1:08 " The household thing is really a tip off. Whenever I see somebody quoting household income, he's trying to make things look bad"

1:24 " for example over a period of 30 years, household income only rose by 6%. Over those same years per capita income rose by 51%"

Household income is fraudulent statistic, used by stupid people, to promote left-wing nonsense.

You see those same people 10 years ago, were promoting Hugo Chavez as helping the poor, which are now dying. Bunch of nonsense from idiots.

 

[Andylusion]

Protip: If you had facts, logic, and reason on your side, you wouldn't have to put people in mass graves.

Protip: If you had facts, logic, and reason on your side, you wouldn't have to put people in mass graves.

Few killers have filled more mass graves than capitalism

So, to prove how evil capitalism is, you post a graphic showing deaths caused by tyrannical government.

That didn't work out so great for you, did it?

So, to prove how evil capitalism is, you post a graphic showing deaths caused by tyrannical government.

Tyrannical capitalist government, you mean?


"Put on the U2 and The Cranberries and let’s down some green brew folks, it’s that time of year again.

"But while St. Patrick’s Day is cause to celebrate everything Irish-American, it’s also a good time to ponder just why more than a million Irish were forced to leave Ireland while another million were dying of starvation in such a short period of time in the first place.

"The answer, which also explains why millions of children are currently going without enough food in the U.S., has much more to do with market systems than Mother Nature."

EarthRx: The Irish Potato Famine Was Caused by Capitalism, Not a Fungus

Your first item: "Hurricane Katrina (deliberate faulty construction): 1,836"

It's handy when your first item is bullshit. Makes it easier to dismiss the rest as worthless, too.

Your first item: "Hurricane Katrina (deliberate faulty construction): 1,836"

It's handy when your first item is bullshit. Makes it easier to dismiss the rest as worthless, too.

What makes you"think" it's bullshit?
Something Trump told you.

We don't need anyone anywhere, to tell us something that is BS, is BS. We can see clearly, that is the dumbest BS crap I've ever read.

That is idiotic. Period. If Trump, and Obama, and everyone you could list on this forum for the rest of your life, said that was not BS..... it would still be total BULL SH!T. We 'think' it is BS.... it *IS* BS.... and if you stand by that crap..... that just means you are full of BS too.

 

[Andylusion]

I don't understand this idea of "wage-slave".... I've had jobs in the past, that paid less than minimum wage.

I did the most unbelievable thing ever...... I got another job that paid more.

In fact, I've done this about 5 or 6 times.

So how do you define a "wage-slave" then? Is it someone who makes the free, voluntary, mental choice to work for a wage, that you just randomly determine is "slavery", and thus is a wage-slave?

When I don't feel comfortable with my own understanding of a term..

I do the most unbelievable thing ever...... I look it up in a dictionary.

OMG, duh.

Right... but you just made that reference, and I just proved it doesn't exist.

So if it does not exist, in the form that is defined, then you must have your definition.

Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk... what does "wage slave" mean to you? How do YOU define it?

Because the generally assumed meaning, simply does not hold to reality. I had one year where I earned $12,000 of taxable income for the year.

I just got another job. I wasn't somehow "enslaved" to this wage.

And honestly ANYONE can get a higher paying job. Anyone can.

So who is a slave? Where are these 'wage slaves' in a country where anyone can choose to work for anyone they wish? Or even to work for themselves?

The lady across the street was babysitting out of her condo. Charging $150 per kid per week, taking care of 5 kids a week. All she did was let them watch parental controlled netflix, and take them to the condo park, and microwave spaggettios. That and make them have a nap time around 2 PM.

$750 a week.

Now what is the difference between that chick, and the one working for minimum wage at Wendy's? Choice. One is not enslaved, and the other magically has the key to escape slavery.

It's choice. I don't want to put up with everyone's spoiled bratty kids. Yeah, I get it. But that's why you get paid less where you only have to put up with "do you want fries with that?".

You get paid less where your biggest responsibility and risk, is taking the fries out of the firer when the buzzer goes off.

Again, the company 1-800-GOT-JUNK was started by a teenager with a $900 pickup. Why wasn't he enslaved by wages? And if he can do that, why can't anyone else?

Again, the company 1-800-GOT-JUNK was started by a teenager with a $900 pickup. Why wasn't he enslaved by wages? And if he can do that, why can't anyone else?

For the same reason not everyone can win an Olympic gold medal or gain admission to MIT at 16. There is a "talented ten percent" and 90% of us are not among it.

Two problems with that. First, there was nothing super smart about Brian. All he did was buy a truck, and start hauling junk. Are you saying that it takes Olympic physical skill, or an MIT degree to haul trash?

This is like Phil Robertson, being a drunk guy at a bar, who started whittling a duck caller, and saying that it takes MIT degrees or Olympic skills, to whittle a duck caller and sell it.

No, to both. The only reason either of these people became wealthy, was simply choice, and effort. That's it.

Take Warren Buffet. Warren was not particularly brilliant. He just was an investor. You go read his history. Before he was even 10-years-old, he was buying shares in companies on Wall St. It's no wonder he is wealthy today, when he started investing before he was 10. Instead of blowing money on baseball cards, and knick knacks, he was investing. His IQ isn't over 200.... he just made good choices, and put in the effort. It's that simple, and that hard.

The second problem I have with that, is that you are implying that somehow merit shouldn't be part of the economic equation.

If you are telling me that wealthy people are wealthy because they are super smart and/or have tremendous skill.... Isn't that good? Shouldn't we support such things? Why are you complaining about people who have wealth because they merit it? Why would we give wealth to the mentally incompetent, or physically unable?

If you are telling me that wealthy people are wealthy because they are super smart and/or have tremendous skill.... Isn't that good? Shouldn't we support such things? Why are you complaining about people who have wealth because they merit it? Why would we give wealth to the mentally incompetent, or physically unable?

Because we have a market system based on ability to pay instead of need. There Are Alternatives.

Yeah, we've seen your alternatives. They suck. All of them suck. That's why you are not living in a commune right now.... are you? No you are not.

That's why every country that has tried your alternatives, has fallen into ruins. Why are you not living in Cuba right now? Or any other purely "according to their need" system?

And don't give me this crap about Europe either. I've been to Europe. You know how the poor live in Europe? Like they are poor. You know how the rich live in Europe? Like they are rich. See these Lego Dutch multi-billionaires, with a private horse farm, because daddies daughter likes to compete in Pony Shows... and you have some idiot in the US talking about how they are so much more "equal" over there. Garbage.

Your system does not work. Never has. Never will.

 

[Andylusion]

How do you square this circle: The structure and legal basis of the modern MAGA corporation bears a great deal of resemblance to feudal estates, and this reality is at odds in an era that claims to value democracy over the Divine Right of Kings?

Warren has a plan:

Accountable Capitalism Act - Wikipedia

"The Accountable Capitalism Act, 115th Congress (2017-2018) S. 3348 is a proposed federal bill introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren in August 2018.

"It would require that employees elect 40% of a board of directors of any corporation with over $1 billion in tax receipts, and that 75% of shareholders and directors must approve any political spending.

"Corporations with revenue over $1 billion would be required to obtain a federal corporate charter.

"The Act contains a 'constituency statute' that would give directors a duty of 'creating a general public benefit' with regard to a corporation's stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, and the environment, and the interests of the enterprise in the long-term.[1]"

The US is among a minority of OECD countries that gives no representation to the workforce (majority) in corporate governance.

For years Warren has claimed "corporations are not people."

Now her Accountable Capitalism Act demands that corporations that claim the legal rights of personhood should be legally required to accept the moral obligations of personhood.

Everything is very simple: an insignificant part of the population, who made their capital by dishonest, and more often, by criminal means, protected their exclusive thieves position with the law that private property is sacred and inviolable

Prove the claim. Prove that everyone who is wealthy, only got so from 'dishonest means'.

 

[Andylusion]

How do you square this circle: The structure and legal basis of the modern MAGA corporation bears a great deal of resemblance to feudal estates, and this reality is at odds in an era that claims to value democracy over the Divine Right of Kings?

Warren has a plan:

Accountable Capitalism Act - Wikipedia

"The Accountable Capitalism Act, 115th Congress (2017-2018) S. 3348 is a proposed federal bill introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren in August 2018.

"It would require that employees elect 40% of a board of directors of any corporation with over $1 billion in tax receipts, and that 75% of shareholders and directors must approve any political spending.

"Corporations with revenue over $1 billion would be required to obtain a federal corporate charter.

"The Act contains a 'constituency statute' that would give directors a duty of 'creating a general public benefit' with regard to a corporation's stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, and the environment, and the interests of the enterprise in the long-term.[1]"

The US is among a minority of OECD countries that gives no representation to the workforce (majority) in corporate governance.

For years Warren has claimed "corporations are not people."

Now her Accountable Capitalism Act demands that corporations that claim the legal rights of personhood should be legally required to accept the moral obligations of personhood.

Everything is very simple: an insignificant part of the population, who made their capital by dishonest, and more often, by criminal means, protected their exclusive thieves position with the law that private property is sacred and inviolable

Everything is very simple: an insignificant part of the population, who made their capital by dishonest, and more often, by criminal means, protected their exclusive thieves position with the law that private property is sacred and inviolable

I'm tempted to suggest the US has a state religion and its name is capitalism:

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)

"Kelly uses some simple algebra to show that this formula could just as easily be re-written as:

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

We've already blown that link out of the water several dozen times.

I'm confused why you keep posting it. Do you think your lies, will magically become true, if you only repeat them enough? Or is this your way of showing us that you are openly admitting you have nothing to respond to our claims with anymore?