red team
Tax cut = Handout = Feudalism? That's a good one.
Good. You've learned your place.
Results 1 to 20 of 43
It's inevitable, but as the Capitalist system degenerates, nothing surprises me anymore.
Bow to the kings and barons of Capital if you don't want to end up homeless, sick and/or starving. Hereditary ruling class here we come. Can anybody here say "Feudalism"?
the emergence of a hereditary upper class
Oh, and since I'm posting in the Opposing Ideology subforum, it would also be appropriate for me to say: "All Hail Tungsten", "Long Live Overlord" and "God Save ummProfessional" (replace their tags with their family names if this tax law passes). We wouldn't want to get on Lord Tungsten's bad side would we...
red team
Tax cut = Handout = Feudalism? That's a good one.
Good. You've learned your place.
Naomi Klein proves that free markets are inherently violent and militaristic: The phrase "right wing think-tank" contains the word "tank".
this angers me greatly
what about king raven the brave?
"NO! Please don't kill me! I'm worth more to you alive than dead!"
-Che the Coward, prior to his death
I'd comment here but I don't understand what that red team guy's dancing about? Does he want to be a better cappitalist?
Redteam
yeah... I like this... YEAH! now you're talking! Long live the new KINGS! MUAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Why not? Capitalism might allow this. Anyone can become a king if they work hard enough. The only one holding them back is themselves.
Unrestricted inheritance obviously leads to hereditary rulers. We already see it, sure occasionally some of the hereditary rules drop down the social scale and some other person rises, but most of the time it is static.
This is true, but is someone wants it, really really really bad, its probably going to happen.
Look at the hard facts - Those in the lowest income segment have less than a 2% chance of reaching the top. That does not sound like a system of vast oppurtunity. You capitalists hold on to this image of the 'american dream' - that anyone can make it if they work hard enough. In fact, the reverse is true - some people manage to remain rich by doing absolutely work at all through the hereditary ownership of Capital. This legislation would merely enhance the restriciton of the 'trickle down' effect, as bourgeois economists refer to it.
Update: After some brief searching, it seems even the New York times, part of the Capitalist media, admits this is the case! And Turns out society is becoming more stratified, not less!
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/natio...C/index_03.html
So someone who works a 14 hour shift on a noisy assembly line is inherently lazy? They are not trying hard enough?
WTF?
OK I think you mean this,
"What you (being apathy maybe) said is true. If someone wants to become really really rich it will happen."
OoooKkkk then...
And why should we let them exactly? It would be different if it had no affect on the rest of us, but it does affect us. Why should we let someone rule over us?
Bobkisseshiskittensass:
Well, if they save up, invest wisely, why can they not become rich? What's stopping them?
Your facts are sound. It is your interpretation which I disagree with. Why should everyone be rich? Ever read Aristophanes. I've read everything he ever wrote. Read 'Wealth' if you havn't done so. I could go further but won't spoil it.
HAHHAHA! You didn't know this? US Income tax=30% Dividend tax=15%. I actually disagree with this. Everyone's should be like 2%. Capital owners still pay more, but a smaller percentage, which may lead to revolution in like 50-100 years if unchecked.
Of course, the more money you have the easier it is to take more. Famous quote: "To increase $100 to $104 requires work. To increase a hundred mil to $104 is inevitable."
APATHY MAYBE:
Did the people of Europe 'let' lords and ladies rule over them?
This has already been discussed several times before, and if you remember in the thread 'Destiny over one's own life' I illustrated the fact that share ownership follows the same trends as General MoP ownership - concentration in the hands of a minority. Ordinary Workers do not have the time, investement capital, or expertise to invest. Furthermore, if workers followed your scheme, and rapidly invested in Stocks and Shares, this could potentially result in the occurance of a bubble, resulting in another crisis in what is already a vastly unstable economic system.
Not everyone should be rich. Capitalists and people who are solely Stock Investors, for example derive the benefits of the commodities that are produced by workers, despite the fact that they have in no way contributed to the production process except through ownership of the MoP - A 'contribution' that is in no way necessary.
The Us has a flat tax rate, right? In that case, your argument makes no sense. If the tax rate if flat, it does not not affect income distribution (I think) Capitalist society is grossly stratified and unequal, you have failed to rebutt that. In fact, you basically agree that Capitalism leads to vast differences in wealth based upon the hereditary ownership of Capital.
Yes, there would indeed be a bubble since the stock market is at present an indirect auction system.
You think everyone who is rich inherits? HAHHAHAHHAAHHAHA! In that case where did the first rich come from? How do people get rich in their own lifetime? Are you saying it doesn't happen? Now, you think these capitalists expended no effort in getting money? You think running a business is not an ongoing job? You really have no idea.
Why would I rebut what is true. Capitalism tends towards oligarchy and aristocracy. This is what I want and you and no-one else on this forum have the power to stop it.
bobkindles
You're making too big a deal out of this and I know why.
You don't need to be at the top to have opportunities (opportunity to do what?) or anywhere near it.
The New York times is a socialist rag. You'd better get clued up on who your allies are, kid.
How many times must this be repeated? No, hard work will not guarantee sucess. You need to work smart and have the drive for it. Hard work is not enough.
Naomi Klein proves that free markets are inherently violent and militaristic: The phrase "right wing think-tank" contains the word "tank".
The responses of the Capitalists to our criticisms comrades. I become more confident of my belief in Socialism every day!
I am a socialist! You expect me to understate the oppression of the masses?! Are you out of your mind? This is basicaly the divide between Capitlaism and Socialism: You are focused upon profits and benefit for the minority. We are about the emancipation of the proletariat and Human needs.
Want to discuss? Show some respect and dont adress me as 'kid'. I bet you were really insecure as a child huh?
bobkindles
Maybe he's just taking the piss out of you. It's hard to resist the temptation sometimes.
Financial inequality doesn't equal oppression.
I don't think that's what you've got in mind. The fact that you see money as power suggests that you're more motivated by envy of the rich and a desire to claim the unearned.
You're a minor. Aka a kid (and a bloodthirsty one too.)
Naomi Klein proves that free markets are inherently violent and militaristic: The phrase "right wing think-tank" contains the word "tank".
What I don't get is why even the ordinary, not-too-wealthy supporters of capitalism support this. If you have an estate of less than $4 million (or no estate at all), you simply getting screwed.
The only explanation I can think of is that you people actually harbor hopes (and expectations) that one day you will yourselves up at that rung of the social ladder.
Why you would think that is beyond me....
My blog:
https://citizencokane.wordpress.com/
My most recommended reading material:
https://critiqueofcrisistheory.wordpress.com/
You can say that again. If this guy gets into a position of power in some regime Vlad the Impaler's record might be well be in jeapordy. But he or RedBlood still hasn't said how he intends to torture me. I want details! I've only asked half a dozen times.
Four million not enough for you? Invested at 10% div that's $400,000 per annum. HAHAHAHHA chickenshit fortune anyway.
They used to, now they don'. My point is that rich people affect others by their purchasing power.
Would you voluntarily let someone rule over you? Boss you about, tell you to jump and you do?
If you did not want someone to rule over you and they did, would you care?
Well I care.
Source?
Apathy Maybe
You might care but as a wageslave to the new kings what would you be able to do about it? Not much I would expect. Capitalism is returning to heal a sick world and nothing can stop it.
