There is No class ... Rand Paul admits the rich control the economy

[RGacky3]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-M0c2diw5Y

"We all either work for rich people or we sell to rich people," there we go guys the rich run the economy and Rand Paul loves it.

Aparently no ones poor too, thats great..

[Nolan]

Thank you for stating the obvious, Mr. Paul. Only you mixed it with bullshit.

[RGacky3]

What I love about it is in the same sentance he tries to talk about how class does'nt exist AND how everyone either works for or sells too the rich.

[Revolutionair]

I think it is a very simple and linear line of thought he tries to explain.
People should NOT focus on class in the sense of class warfare. Sucking the bosses cock will make you richer.
Trying to IMPROVE standard of living of the working class will not work.

I have a Dutch article about that. If any comrade here wants to translate it, be my guest.
http://peterstormschrijft.wordpress.com/2010/04/16/laat-de-rijken-de-crisis-betalen-kan-dat/

[Havet]

I think you are giving him way too much importance. The only thread that I think he is worth talking about is the one where his supporters injured a woman. This? This is worthless.

[RGacky3]

Its just nice to hear some accidental honisty from capitalsts.

[Havet]

Its just nice to hear some accidental honisty from capitalsts.

Would you agree with him, then, that taxing the rich people's yatches is harmful to the working class?

[RGacky3]

No, the honesty was that "everyone either works for or sells to rich people," which is basically an admission of the obvious, the rich control the economy.

As far as that trickle down economics theory, obviously thats rediculous.

[Havet]

...which is basically an admission of the obvious

So why make a thread about it?


As far as that trickle down economics theory, obviously thats rediculous.

Is it? Is it not true that, within a capitalist system, if less people buy yatchs then the yatchs will be worth less, the market will shrink and the workers will suffer most of the consequences?

[RGacky3]

So why make a thread about it?


Because its a rare admission.


Is it? Is it not true that, within a capitalist system, if less people buy yatchs then the yatchs will be worth less, the market will shrink and the workers will suffer most of the consequences?

Are you saying that taxing yatchs will hurt yatch sales?? Are you saying that rich people don't have enough disposable income? That they arn't spending because they might run out of money?

[Havet]

Because its a rare admission.

Even Ayn Rand believed that. if you read Atlas Shrugged, you see how she believes the rich control the economy, especially by manipulating government in their favor.

Also, Warren E. Buffet (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/business/yourmoney/26every.html)

Not that rare of a confession, and in my opinion not worth a thread, especially since you're just giving credibility to Rand Paul. Its sort of like those annoying youtube comments regarding Justin Bieber. People hate him so much, and post that they hate him so often, that he's becoming more well known and popular as a result. Not something you'd like of Rand Paul, now would you?


Are you saying that taxing yatchs will hurt yatch sales??

Higher prices->Less demand->Less sales. Why do people complain when you raise the price of daily products such as food? First, because they need it, second, because it will cost them more time and effort to pay for the same amount of quantity. While rich people don't need yatchs, they still primarily want to get the most of something without wasting too much money. Of course, there's always the dumb rich people, who get rich too quickly, blow it all and then go back under.


Are you saying that rich people don't have enough disposable income?

That they arn't spending because they might run out of money?

If you tax yatchs so much in order to milk the rich people dry, eventually they will stop buying the godamn yatch and prefer to spend their money somewhere where they get more value per dollar. I'm not making any judgement out of it, im just stating a logical conclusion.

[RGacky3]

Not that rare of a confession, and in my opinion not worth a thread, especially since you're just giving credibility to Rand Paul. Its sort of like those annoying youtube comments regarding Justin Bieber. People hate him so much, and post that they hate him so often, that he's becoming more well known and popular as a result. Not something you'd like of Rand Paul, now would you?


It has nothing to do with rand paul as a person, and yes it is a rare confession IN NATIONAL MEDIA.


If you tax yatchs so much in order to milk the rich people dry, eventually they will stop buying the godamn yatch and prefer to spend their money somewhere where they get more value per dollar.

Really? Your afraid of the rich people running out of money? Honestly common.

[Havet]

It has nothing to do with rand paul as a person, and yes it is a rare confession IN NATIONAL MEDIA.

Fair enough. No need to caps lock at me!


Really? Your afraid of the rich people running out of money? Honestly common.

No, i'm afraid that poor people will become unemployed because they have been fired because nobody will buy the yatches. Remmember we are still in a capitalist framework.

[RGacky3]

No, i'm afraid that poor people will become unemployed because they have been fired because nobody will buy the yatches. Remmember we are still in a capitalist framework.

Except taxing yatchs won't make people not buy them.

[¿Que?]

OMG, I want to punch him in the face so bad. Here are some people I would love to see in the same room as Rand Paul and have a conversation/debate:

The Yes Men (in character)
Sacha Baron Cohen (in character of course)
Hugo Chavez (omg, that would be the shiznit)
David harvey
Slavok (and at the end he'd wipe his snot on Paul)
Noam Chomsky (I can see him thinking, "I'm too old for this")
Any violent Antifa

Anyway, enough with my wet dream. What I don't understand is when people post on a thread saying the thread should not have been made. I mean if the thread is unworthy of attention, why comment on it. Just to say it's not worthy of attention although I'm paying enough attention to comment to say that I'm not going to pay attention? Worthless. Plus, contrary to what people may think, all publicity is not good publicity. Rand Paul saying shit like this is gold in that it exposes how far to the right American discourse has gotten. In a sane country, shit like this would cause an outrage. In an insane country such as the US, it goes unnoticed, and it takes forums like these to expose this type of rhetoric so that we can have rhetorical ammunition should we ever need.

Not only am I reposting, I'm repping RGacky. Not thanking, repping with the full strength of my +5 rep power.

[Havet]

Except taxing yatchs won't make people not buy them.

How do you explain this then?


A ten percent tax was added to the cost of luxury yachts. Since a yacht today costs anywhere from $100,000 to $200,000, this means that at least $10,000 had to be paid to the government before a potential buyer could get his first whiff of salt air. With the economy already heading for trouble, this was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Ocean Yachts in Weekstown trimmed its workforce from 350 to 50. Egg Harbor Yachts entered Chapter Eleven bankruptcy, going from 200 employees to five. Viking Yachts dropped from 1,400 to 300 employees. According to a Congressional Joint Economic Committee Study, the boat industry nationwide lost 7,600 employees within one year. As Bob Healy, president of Viking Yachts explained on NBC News, “Every six or seven years, you have a down cycle. You might be off 20 percent, 30 percent, or 40 percent at maximum. Our industry is off 90 percent nationally.”

Source (http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/shipwrecked-in-new-jersey/) (This source was kind of biased). Other source of the info came from here:


This tale is reminiscent of the 10% luxury tax on yachts costing more than $100,000 that Congress passed in 1990. That tax, also passed in the name of social justice, nearly ruined the boat-building industry in states like Florida and Maine, because the rich went to the Bahamas and elsewhere to buy their boats until Congress repealed the yacht tax in 1993.

Source (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212180845105688.html)

Another quote from a seeming legitimate source here:


In 1991, Congress levied a 10 percent luxury tax which included boats valued above $100,000[...] Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, the tax was repealed in 1993.

Source (http://www.apj.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2301&Itemid=2)

[RGacky3]

The rich were still buying yacts, but just from somewhere else, yeah, thats a point, but its not that they were being "bleed dry" or running out of money.

But I think a better strategy is to lower sales tax, or consumption taxes and raise income taxes and capital gains taxes.

The fact is overall, supplyside trickle down economics does'nt work, coddeling to the rich does'nt work.

[Cham_Empire]

Rand Paul is a sycophantic ultra-right running dog. his bourgeois colors have been revealed to the working class, and he will be consumed in a burning red fire of righteous socialism!

[Revolution starts with U]

In america, the working class wears bourgeois colors.
(What's the matter with Kansas?!) :cursing:

[Schalmas_Chankar_ah]

In america, the working class wears bourgeois colors.
(What's the matter with Kansas?!) :cursing:

Colors don't mean anything. surely your mind has racist intentions?

[Property Is Robbery]

yay it turns out I'm not poor! :)

[Bud Struggle]

:thumbup::thumbup:
Rand Paul is a sycophantic ultra-right running dog. his bourgeois colors have been revealed to the working class, and he will be consumed in a burning red fire of righteous socialism!

Now THIS is the kind of Commie talk we like to hear around here! :thumbup::thumbup:

[Havet]

The rich were still buying yacts, but just from somewhere else, yeah, thats a point, but its not that they were being "bleed dry" or running out of money.

Yeah exactly


But I think a better strategy is to lower sales tax, or consumption taxes and raise income taxes and capital gains taxes.

Most rich people aren't rich because they have a high income, but because they have many and valuable assets (houses, land, MOP, etc). If you're after them, it would make more sense to tax those things rather than income. Of course, you'll always end up with the same "problem" (depending on the perspective): they will leave and/or buy from somewhere else.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

In america, the working class wears bourgeois colors.
(What's the matter with Kansas?!) :cursing:

He's the senator from Kentucky, not Kansas. And there is a lot wrong with Kentucky.

[RGacky3]

Most rich people aren't rich because they have a high income, but because they have many and valuable assets (houses, land, MOP, etc). If you're after them, it would make more sense to tax those things rather than income. Of course, you'll always end up with the same "problem" (depending on the perspective): they will leave and/or buy from somewhere else.

There are only so many things they can buy somewhere else, and where are they gonna lave too? Also taxing income creates a bigger incentive to reinvest in a company rather than just take it out for yourself.

The fact is you might have some capital flight, but you can control it, also its much better than the alternative, which is just giving them more power and control.

[Revolution starts with U]

He's the senator from Kentucky, not Kansas. And there is a lot wrong with Kentucky.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What's_the_Matter_with_Kansas%3F

It's a book.