What to do about the super-rich and the rich..

[TappingAss]

I just read a depressing article in the paper which said that since the 1970's the rich and super rich have been tripling their worth and income versus the middle and working classes which have barely budged incomes (adjusted for inflation).. Alot of this is due to Globazation of the workforce and mechazinized captialism..Huge $300 million bonuses to CEO's etc..

The economists say that americans don't mind "inequality of incomes" so much as a "fair" playing field in which to win big. Well it's pretty fair as things go but your kids are probably going to be working middle class losers and their kids are going to be sporting around Italy in ferraris (as it should be you say, as it should be they say).

Of course, economists say any attempts at re-distribution of wealth would lead to "stiffling innovation", such innovation lead to bottled water and drugs that'll keep you craping your pants alive from 75 untill 84.

What should be done?

[djthebandit]

communism!

lol.

[TappingAss]

Communism doesn't work.. what else

LET'S THINK BIG PEOPLE!! THEY ALREADY OWN THE CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT!!

And they're rich too, everyone in congress is a millionaire..

they're are 2,227 new millionaires created in the u.s. annually

they're are over 1,000 billionaires in the u.s.

[djthebandit]

Why not?

Increase taxes of the riches to 80% and lower the poor peoples taxes to non.

[meeotch]

We should post on message boards! That's what we should do! Yeah!

[James Capricorn]

YOUR M0M! WE'LL DO YOUR MOM!

[burnt]

tag their billboards.

If Wal Mart executives are going to go out of their way to supress mom & pop stores all over america - and get rich doing it - buy Krylon, spray their shit up, and force Wal Mart to give back to the economy by hiring painters often and buying lots of paint.

steal the Krylon from Wal Mart for bonus points.

[Mad Vinnie]

-Get rid of the special status and protection that is granted to Corporations by the government.

-Hold share holders responsible for the actions of the businesses they own.

-Campaign finance reform! And I wouldn't end there. As long as government officials hold the money bag our taxes go into, there will be an incentive for big business to bribe them. I would shrink the federal government and grow the responsibilities of local governments where politicians can be held more accountable for their actions.

I think one of the only reason you see such drastic extremes of poor vs rich is because we have a corporate elite and a political aristocracy that are colluding to pick our pockets. Our government needs to work for the people, not for special interests. This is happening on a global scale. Thus, "Globalization."

[Enkidu Kind]

Originally posted by meeotch
We should post on message boards! That's what we should do! Yeah!

Best suggestion yet.

[k1e0x]

- Learn how money works!
You must educate yourself first! see Money as Debt (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279&q=money+as+debt)

- Stop Fractional Reserve Banking!
This is how they make there money.

- Kill the Federal Reserve and the Income Tax!
This is how they take our money.

- Elect Ron Paul and back the money on Silver & Gold!
So they can never do it again.

[travail420]

Don't hate! Make your own.

[Headphones Dude]

Can you imagine all the Ceos of big corporations saying america is Playa hating?






































I can......

[burnt]

personally? I want to be moderately rich. I'm trying to get there. its tough work.

if I was super super super rich, like Bill Gates rich, I have a great idea to vastly reduce the crippling economic situations that keep brokeass homeless and tweekers, broke. and I'd get even richer by taking business away from Rent A Center, Goodwill Stores, Inc and pretty much most pawn shops. but thats if I was super super super rich, and kind of bored.

in the meantime, the plan is just to get moderately rich.

my definition of rich is - well, I went to Fred Meyer's today after work, and picked up some chicken, some mushrooms, some beer, and a soda for my kid. then I had to stop.

my definition of rich is, going to the grocery store, and getting pretty much whatever you want to cook for dinner, a snack for later, and maybe breakfast the next day, plus a couple of impulse items. every single time you go. without worrying about it, without thinking about a budget. thats my defintion of rich. thats "good enough" for me.

so I guess six figures. more than $100k/year, but I don't need to be a millionaire.

I'm working on it. its hard work. people get real real fucking competitive and petty once you start grasping at the bigger, shinier brass rings.

but I wanted to come back to this, and seriously answer the question. what do you do, Tapping Ass? you take business away. thats what you do. you invent a superior product to provide to the public, you invent a superior operational process to develop and deliver your product, you keep a lid on it until you're prepared to unleash an incredibly aggressive marketing campaign.... and then you buckle up and prepare to start swinging back on motherfuckers because we all know the richies don't like giving up their perks and will fight dirty to stay on top. look no further than Paris's little hissy fit this last week for proof of this.

but you put that shit together, and then you take someone else's money. legalized theft. if Wal Mart did it to the traditional mom & pop business model, someone could do it to Wal Mart - lobbyists be damned. thats what you do to the rich and the super rich. take their money and become rich or super rich, your self.

[ILYA]

six figures every year would be just right for me too...

[burnt]

yea there's just something about it that *sounds* comfortable, huh?

or like - you're heading down the highway, and some fucker almost clips you so you have to swerve and you hit a bolt, and you get a blowout.

so you have to call a towtruck and get a new tire. and of course its going to be a pain in the ass getting the new tire that matches your existing ones. you'll probably end up "selling" your existing 3 for down payment on a new set of 4.

get home late. dirty. grumpy.

and the only thing you're bitching about is the time and discomfort. fuck the towing fees, fuck the new tires - that wasn't a problem, you had that covered in one of your savings accounts, days ago. its only one or two thousand...

yea, that rich. not billionaire rich. not so rich I might as well put a hot tub in the back of a limo because its a Monday night and I'm bored... - hell, I'd even keep working just to sustain a nice, trim six figures.

[No_Spin]

Originally posted by TappingAss

The economists say that americans don't mind "inequality of incomes" so much as a "fair" playing field in which to win big. Well it's pretty fair as things go but your kids are probably going to be working middle class losers and their kids are going to be sporting around Italy in ferraris (as it should be you say, as it should be they say).




they're are 2,227 new millionaires created in the u.s. annually [/QUOTE]

not that i'm saying there isnt a problem, but i've also read recently that a large majority of those "new millionaires" each year were born into families that were relatively poor.

what should be done? educate all children, encourage philanthropy for those that go into business, teach people to appreciate each other, force corporations to be 'responsible,' and i'm for people with money being taxed more. also the money from taxes should be used on more important things than they are now.

[Cedwyn]

yes and no. the system is NOT "fair enough." if a single parent is having to work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet, somethin' ain't right. now, people can get all judgemental 'til the cows come home and say she shoulda kept her legs together or whatever, but that accomplishes nothing. the reality is that we, society, have a single mother right here, right now. what best serves society's interest - that she be able to support the two of them on an honest week's work, allowing her to spend time with her child or suppressing the minimum wage (it recently saw its first hike in 10 years) so that she has no time to even supervise, let alone properly raise, her child? so much for "pro-life" and "family values"...

but i digress...kinda. the point is that is an inescapable fact that if one comes from money, one is presented with far more, and better, opportunities in life. just look at shrubya...

and please - i don't want to hear anyone nattering on about how that's bs...people are poor because they're lazy, they just don't try, etc. newsflash: not everyone can be an engineer, a doctor or a lawyer. besides the obvious points about market saturation, it is the gospel truth that some people simply do not have the mental wherewithal for the big money jobs.

so why in the world shouldn't every job pay a decent living wage? it doesn't prevent the a-list jobs from earning more. it just makes the system more...fair. poverty is a motherfucker of a vicious cycle. and way too many people ignore the link between poverty and crime. isn't there a folk saying, or a song or something, that says "a hungry man is an angry man."

we're just too lazy as a society to be pro-active; we'd much rather throw people in jail than spend a fraction of the cost to give them a leg up.

one quick and dirty example: federal funding for pell grants, and other college financial aid has both been cut and restricted in terms of eligibility.

as for the insane gap between workers vs. ceo's salary, there are economic analyses aplenty indicating that such a disparity is the sign of an economy in danger. it resembles that of the '20s. an economy is considered "healthy" with a raito of about 1: 70 - worker pay:ceo pay. ours is currently in the 100s.

[seattle science]

Become rich.

[StarLight]

Originally posted by Mad Vinnie
-Get rid of the special status and protection that is granted to Corporations by the government.

-Hold share holders responsible for the actions of the businesses they own.

DAMN FUCKIN' TOOTING!!! If workers want more money, then they are going to have to work it, and they will. Companies that don't allow stock shares to their employees are cocksukers!!! The 'normal' workers are the ones giving the CEO/President of the company their raises anyway.

I actaully saw the same report a few months back, and it used to be that CEO/President, etc would get 4 times more than the normal worker. NOW, they get almost 400 times more than the average worker. I also heard that a CEO of a company will make more in one day than an average worker will get in 1 1/2 years. FUCKIN' DISGUSTING!!!!

What really fries my frenches is that if something goes wrong in upper management (bad bookkeeping, scandal, etc) the fuckin' asshole(s) who are in question get a HUGE ASS severance package. WHY?????!!!!!

We have gotten to a point that if someone does something wrong, no matter how bad is fucks with other people (job layoffs, benefit cutbacks, etc) they just get paid off to 'go away'.

The corporate world is FUCKED UP!!! I need to stop talking about this or I am going to get really pissed off :mad:

[ILYA]

the corporate system is fucked... at this point, it seems like there is nothing else left to do but become one of "them" ;)

[corbettfields]

seems to me there are two issues here - economics and morality

Adam Smith showed how any government intervention tends to skew unfairness towards those that are less deserving (of course imo there needs to be a safety net also, but that's digression #1)

the thought of modern governments trying to fix this issue today appears to me to be like getting foxes to gaurd the chickens - they probably are the most irresponsible with other peoples money, and corrupt, etc

so if they remove more barriers to being super rich, i think thats the best thing they can do...

now if you ARE a super rich person, hopefully morality steps in... are you going to be a Paris Hilton or a Bill Gates? Bill seems to be grabbing global problems by the horns and generating real solutions with his billions.... id rather he spend them than the government!

my 2c

(edited to remove all the "seems"!)

[jelly_luv_1212]

stop giving them those big tax return things that fuck things up.

keeping the rich rich and the poor poor.

give the people on welfare jobs.

and kick all the rich guys in the nuts.

then take their money and run.

make them go live on a farm.

or in the ghetto.

take em all to rainer beach or renton.

then we can all laugh.

see how they like having to sleep in their car or the bus cuz they cant afford anywhere to stay.

have them go shack in up with some of my friends under the 405 bridge.

i know that rainer beach and renton arent that bad.

but it would be a start.

and at least we could watch.

yeah.

have a REAL simple life.

not that fuckin show.

you know they were given money.

they didnt learn anything.

take away all the rich guys's money and all their nice clothes.

hand em $20 and drop em off somehwhere.

no cell phone.

no credit cards.

nothing.

they'd prolly cry.

hahahahaha.

i'd fuckin laugh.

[LucyFurr]

Regarding the origonal post, there isnt a whole hell of a lot you can do about it. Its too far entrenced and most people dont really give a damn. They are more concenrned with whats going on in their favorite TV show. In my opinion the best strategy is to work from within the system. While the system has a lot of problems, it does provide the ability for someone to rise up if they are truly driven (or lucky). Ten years ago, I used to hate the rich too and wondered what could be done about them. My buddies and I would sit around in a squat and drink cheap beer talking about "The Man". I realized there are better ways (in my opinion) to spend your energy. After that my situation started improving. 5 years ago, I was a high school dropout with no money, car, skills. I had jack shit. In 5 years from now, if the last few pieces of my plan fall into place over the next 6 months, like they have been, my biggest worry will be what color should my new Lexus be. The system that keeps you down also provides motivated people a way to lift themselves up.

This is true, it does become competitive . I think they key is rather than taking a more common route look for a niche. I went after a pretty big and shiny 'ring' myself but its also an obscure one. While there is some competition it is certainly an order of mangitude smaller than what I would have to deal with going some other routes I considered.
Originally posted by burnt
so I guess six figures. more than $100k/year, but I don't need to be a millionaire.

I'm working on it. its hard work. people get real real fucking competitive and petty once you start grasping at the bigger, shinier brass rings.

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by LucyFurr
Regarding the origonal post, there isnt a whole hell of a lot you can do about it. Its too far entrenced and most people dont really give a damn. They are more concenrned with whats going on in their favorite TV show. In my opinion the best strategy is to work from within the system. While the system has a lot of problems, it does provide the ability for someone to rise up if they are truly driven (or lucky). Ten years ago, I used to hate the rich too and wondered what could be done about them. My buddies and I would sit around in a squat and drink cheap beer talking about "The Man". I realized there are better ways (in my opinion) to spend your energy. After that my situation started improving. 5 years ago, I was a high school dropout with no money, car, skills. I had jack shit. In 5 years from now, if the last few pieces of my plan fall into place over the next 6 months, like they have been, my biggest worry will be what color should my new Lexus be. The system that keeps you down also provides motivated people a way to lift themselves up.

This is true, it does become competitive . I think they key is rather than taking a more common route look for a niche. I went after a pretty big and shiny 'ring' myself but its also an obscure one. While there is some competition it is certainly an order of mangitude smaller than what I would have to deal with going some other routes I considered.

sounds like the American dream... seriously, no irony... love it or hate it, there are few countries in the world today where you can do that

[No_Spin]

Originally posted by Cedwyn


newsflash: not everyone can be an engineer, a doctor or a lawyer. besides the obvious points about market saturation, it is the gospel truth that some people simply do not have the mental wherewithal for the big money jobs.

^^^ i'd like to think that most humans are on essential the same level in terms of mental capacity. large portions of the population are not encouraged properly though. this isnt to say "encourage them to become wealthy" but encourage them to use their full intellect for the better of other people around them.


Originally posted by Cedwyn

poverty is a motherfucker of a vicious cycle. and way too many people ignore the link between poverty and crime. isn't there a folk saying, or a song or something, that says "a hungry man is an angry man."

^^^ there is clearly crime and immorality among wealthy people too, which goes back to me believing that most humans are essentially the same.
theres something other than need that drives crime. we need to work on priorities and emotional/mental fulfillment, at all levels of the divide

[Mad Vinnie]

Originally posted by corbettfields
seems to me there are two issues here - economics and morality

Adam Smith showed how any government intervention tends to skew unfairness towards those that are less deserving (of course imo there needs to be a safety net also, but that's digression #1)

the thought of modern governments trying to fix this issue today appears to me to be like getting foxes to gaurd the chickens - they probably are the most irresponsible with other peoples money, and corrupt, etc

so if they remove more barriers to being super rich, i think thats the best thing they can do...

now if you ARE a super rich person, hopefully morality steps in... are you going to be a Paris Hilton or a Bill Gates? Bill seems to be grabbing global problems by the horns and generating real solutions with his billions.... id rather he spend them than the government!

my 2c

(edited to remove all the "seems"!)

Now that's what I'm talking about! Theoretically, in the absence of government intervention and in a true free market economy, the only poverty that exists would be voluntary poverty. That is, if you don't want to work hard, you don't get to be rich. Of course, we live in the real world, but any move toward economic liberty is for the better of all.

This doesn't magically do away with scarcity, of course. It will, however, provide people with the goods and services that are vital to life for prices that reflect the true cost of bringing those goods and services to market. Furthermore, the more "level the playing field," the easier it will be for people to afford things like health care, housing, food and clothing. At that point, if you have a middle class income and you buy a ferrari, you're not allowed to bitch and moan when you can't afford adequate health care because your car payments are too big.

[corbettfields]

the other thing is its a distraction to a great extent to talk about "the super rich" as "the problem"

exceptions noted, the richest 5% of americans pay 70%+ of the taxes, so they are lifting some heavy weights already

for example,

america has 40 million people un-insured... at $1000 (yeah right!!!) a year , at the end of the year you'd have 40 million +40 ex billionaires becoming uninsured .... problem put off for a year, thats all....

[Friskee1]

Increase the capital gains tax and eliminate the Federal Reserve.

[DJ DAMIEN D]

Originally posted by djthebandit
communism!

lol.
Agrees

[Friskee1]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-ehrenreich/banish-the-bloated-overcl_b_51814.html

[B_tech]

Originally posted by burnt
tag their billboards.

If Wal Mart executives are going to go out of their way to supress mom & pop stores all over america - and get rich doing it - buy Krylon, spray their shit up, and force Wal Mart to give back to the economy by hiring painters often and buying lots of paint.

steal the Krylon from Wal Mart for bonus points.
FTW!


.. however, i don't buy the 'tax the rich more, because they have more'. FLAT TAX is what we should all pay and we should bring some true equality to this country, since it's one of the premises that it was founded on.

[Cedwyn]

flat taxes are no solution, since they still tax the poor more disproportionately.

let's say somebody makes 12k a year - 20% of that would be 2,400. contrast that with someone making 150k a year, who pays 30,000. yes; the richer person is paying more in actual dollars, but still has 120k leftover when all is said and done. the person barely scraping by on 12k is now down to 9,600 for the year. it's not even remotely comparable. or equitable.

yes; we need a capital gains tax--why should investment be rewarded more than work--and to keep the estate tax intact.

[burnt]

flat taxes are ironic when you start talking about the poor.


"Give me $50 and I'll give you $55 in food stamps!"

hehehehe...

[B_tech]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
yes; we need a capital gains tax--why should investment be rewarded more than work--and to keep the estate tax intact.
I agree that the tax system is geared towards the rich, but I thought there was a capital gains tax on investments?

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by B_tech
I agree that the tax system is geared towards the rich, but I thought there was a capital gains tax on investments?

capital gains is taxed as income if held for 1 year

15% if held for more than 1 or 2 years

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
flat taxes are no solution, since they still tax the poor more disproportionately.

yes; we need a capital gains tax--why should investment be rewarded more than work--and to keep the estate tax intact.

flat tax = sales tax also

get rid of that for your same arguments (keep for onorus items such as gas,power, etc - use the income on this for tax breaks on better programs and discourage over-use)

get a progressive income tax going at state level

eg first 5k 0%, 5-15k 3% 15-55k 6% 55-94 7%, 94+ 8% etc

limit tax breaks.... why $1,000,000 on mortgage? why not say $250k (closer to median price of a house).. why $600 per kid?

tax health insurance from companies as income, give tax breaks if paying health insurance

tax breaks for education costs

make companies pay for government sevices - like product testing, etc

pay off the deficit over some reasonable time!! 50% of taxes pays INTEREST on national debt!!

if you dont reward investment, why invest? no investment = no work....

etc etc

bottom line, tax system is broken, cruel, and needs fixed... but "taxin the rich" will drive the rich out and you'll lose most of your taxpayers!!!!

[B_tech]

Originally posted by corbettfields

if you dont reward investment, why invest? no investment = no work....

But the gains from investing is the reward. Why should the government award you for being smart enough to use your money to make money? Granted, investors help fuel the economy, which, in turn, helps the nation, but most investors right now are playing the Asian and European markets, so why reward THOSE people? The impact on the US is indirect, so the government reward should either be indirect or non-existant.

I don't agree with the state income tax ideaR. When I lived in Denver, we had Fed, state, county and CITY income taxes out of our checks and we had a 7%+ sales tax when other states were 6%. IMO, it's one or the other, not both.

[djthebandit]

Originally posted by burnt


so I guess six figures. more than $100k/year, but I don't need to be a millionaire.


Once you got six figures, you will want more..... that's how it goes. ;)

I am getting there, very, very slowly. hahaha




Yeah I wish.

[TappingAss]

technology has rendered authority obsolete

http://osiris.978.org/~brianr/photos/edits/kurt-assault-rifle.jpg

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by LucyFurr
Regarding the origonal post, there isnt a whole hell of a lot you can do about it. Its too far entrenced and most people dont really give a damn. They are more concenrned with whats going on in their favorite TV show. In my opinion the best strategy is to work from within the system. While the system has a lot of problems, it does provide the ability for someone to rise up if they are truly driven (or lucky). Ten years ago, I used to hate the rich too and wondered what could be done about them. My buddies and I would sit around in a squat and drink cheap beer talking about "The Man". I realized there are better ways (in my opinion) to spend your energy. After that my situation started improving. 5 years ago, I was a high school dropout with no money, car, skills. I had jack shit. In 5 years from now, if the last few pieces of my plan fall into place over the next 6 months, like they have been, my biggest worry will be what color should my new Lexus be. The system that keeps you down also provides motivated people a way to lift themselves up.

This is true, it does become competitive . I think they key is rather than taking a more common route look for a niche. I went after a pretty big and shiny 'ring' myself but its also an obscure one. While there is some competition it is certainly an order of mangitude smaller than what I would have to deal with going some other routes I considered.

You can do that.. or you can take my approach. Rich people are not always happy, so instead of attempting to become "rich" I have spent a large majority of my life trying to become happy and to my satisfaction, I have been rather successful at that.

Also in reference to my first post.. you wana get rich just do what most of the super rich people did.. start counterfeiting.

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by B_tech
But the gains from investing is the reward. Why should the government award you for being smart enough to use your money to make money? .

wooooah

there :)

they are rewarding??? no they are PUNISHING you

look, lets say you earn 50k in Oregon

you pay about 40% taxes, soc sec, fica,medicare + gas tax, etc etc

so you might have 30 k left.. you pay rent, student loans, download a few beatport tracks, have a pop on the weekend....maybe eat

and you manage to save say, $5000.00 'cause you're being prudent, worrying about future, etc...maybe kids? a mortgage later?

so you do your homework and you earn 10%!! woo!! $500!... er, no... about 34% will be taken away as your "reward" the first year.... so you have 325ish left... you keep it there..... 5325 + 10%!! = 532?!?!? erno.. - 15% cap gains.... thats $70 in tax on money that was taxed on income you were TAXED ON 2 YEARS AGO AS INCOME!!!!

jesus.....help... us

3 trillion deficit? 65 trillion deficit over next 70 years? a negative savings rate in the USA? wonder why.... :(

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by B_tech
. IMO, it's one or the other, not both.

yes, a progessive income tax that helps the poor and a few "nasty" sales tax like gas, electricity, electro-house, etc to make people conserve or limit purchases.. what about an engine tax? 4 cylinder 1800cc = $100, 6400cc = $1000?

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by corbettfields
3 trillion deficit? 65 trillion deficit over next 70 years? a negative savings rate in the USA? wonder why.... :(

Uhh.. I know why.. because government keep spending and they get loans from the Fed to cover it. We actually have more debt than there is money in existence to pay it off with.

This thread just makes me angry.. why are all you people sitting here trying to figure out how to steal other peoples money? :(

[Mad Vinnie]

Originally posted by corbettfields
yes, a progessive income tax that helps the poor and a few "nasty" sales tax like gas, electricity, electro-house, etc to make people conserve or limit purchases.. what about an engine tax? 4 cylinder 1800cc = $100, 6400cc = $1000?

Interesting idea.... but wouldn't you rather tax Trance? :)

edited to add:
Or do you mean there's a subgenre called "electro-house?" Tax the shit out of it!!!

[burnt]

Originally posted by k1e0x
Uhh.. I know why.. because government keep spending and they get loans from the Fed to cover it. We actually have more debt than there is money in existence to pay it off with.

This thread just makes me angry.. why are all you people sitting here trying to figure out how to steal other peoples money? :(

I never said I wanted to steal their money. just their business.

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by Mad Vinnie
Or do you mean there's a subgenre called "electro-house?" Tax the shit out of it!!!

i love you

[James Capricorn]

Originally posted by corbettfields
i love you

and here I thought I was special. Sheeesh!

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by k1e0x
Uhh.. I know why.. because government keep spending and they get loans from the Fed to cover it. We actually have more debt than there is money in existence to pay it off with.

This thread just makes me angry.. why are all you people sitting here trying to figure out how to steal other peoples money? :(
Originally posted by burnt
I never said I wanted to steal their money. just their business.

I'm talking about figuring out proper ways to tax people. Tax is theft. Its wrong.. I mean why don't we just force people to work for free? it's the same fucking effect.

However...

Business is one of the major ways people earn money.. If you take away the ability to start a business, you take away that ability to earn money.

[Mayo Finch]

First of all, lets quit looking at the individual tax payer for answers. Lets look to who really benefits from our current system and bring some real equality to our region.

In 2006, the Federal Government took in barely more money ($2,043 billion) than the top 10 companies on the Fortune 500 list ($1,983 billion).

Breaking that number down – the Federal Government received $8,023 per American, while Wal-Mart, Exxon Mobil, General Motors, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, General Electric, Ford, Citigroup, Bank of America, and AIG (the insurance company) combined took in $6,610 per American.

10 companies Profited nearly the same as the federal government.

There are still 490 companies that made amazing amounts of profit. The solution isn't tax the rich. Its tax the richest companies.

In Oregon, 8% of all state revenue came from business. The rest came from people like you and me. The wealthy can keep the money off of their investments, the major businesses, considered human entities according to the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, should be paying the same amount in taxes according to a progressive tax system that is similar to ours.

Tax corporations that show profits of over $250,000 that employ 30 employees or more at a living wage should begin paying a progressive tax.

Smaller business would be protected from this tax structure to encourage entrepreneurship.

Companies that have giant profits while their employees are receiving public benefits such as food stamps and health services should be paying an increased amount of taxes for not providing people in our communities substantial wages and standard benefits that are then left to tax payers to cover.

Under this progressive tax structure, we could provide integral infrastructure support such as practical health services for all citizens, child care for all working families, environmental reforms that preserve our natural areas and also provide quality education to all children and adults.

What do we have to lose? We retain businesses that are dedicated to our region and provide a quality workforce.

This is what you can consider common sense.

[Mayo Finch]

k1e0x, your ideas have been expressed for a long time. The reason they have never taken hold is because they do not reflect the current state of our economy, but are rather developed around original intent.

Every parent intends to raise a child to be the best it can be. As the child grows, the parent changes perspective as the child develops.

There are tomes of lit that have buried the libertarian philosophies your expressing. Contemporary problems require contemporary and adaptive subsequent solutions.

[burnt]

Originally posted by k1e0x
I'm talking about figuring out proper ways to tax people. Tax is theft. Its wrong.. I mean why don't we just force people to work for free? it's the same fucking effect.

However...

Business is one of the major ways people earn money.. If you take away the ability to start a business, you take away that ability to earn money.

right - the 2nd half though, thats kind of what I"m saying. Wal Mart and other big box / franchise type businesses have taken business away from the mom & pop models.

you've got Wal Mart taking away from grassroots small business retail.
you've got McDonalds and other fast food joints taking away from grassroots small business food/service.
you've got the Hilton and the Marriott taking away from traditional "small" business hotels.
you've got Jiffy Lube taking away from traditional small business mechanic shops.
you've got Starbucks taking away from traditional coffee shops.

you wind up with hundreds of thousands of people who should be earning twice or three times as much, who should be involved in a small businesses profit sharing - instead they're working for minimum wage, living without health care.

every one of these corporations at the helm of these new(ish), huge corporations have hidden memos and mission statements declaring how if they see a small business in some district, thats an opportunity for them to set up a business across the street.

"they" - stole business. so I see nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong with picketing them before they set up shop (like the Sellwood neighborhood in Portland did when Wal Mart attempted to setup a store, or the Hawthorne district did when McDonald's attempted to setup a franchise), and "stealing" business from the big guys.

they took our money.
there's nothing wrong with taking that money back.

[corbettfields]

trouble is....

those big companies turn round and give there money to?!?!?!?

me.... and yer granny


i bought stock in them..so did yer granny.. for being old and infirm.. and when i'm sick...

and it's taxed again as dividends....AND as capital gains......

so please leave 'em alone?

[Mayo Finch]

capitol gains along with many other taxes, would be eliminated under my approach.

[burnt]

Originally posted by corbettfields
trouble is....

those big companies turn round and give there money to?!?!?!?

me.... and yer granny


i bought stock in them..so did yer granny.. for being old and infirm.. and when i'm sick...

and it's taxed again as dividends....AND as capital gains......

so please leave 'em alone?

my granny bought no stock in them.
lots of grannies bought stock in Enron though - and Tyco - and WorldCom - yea, that worked out well, didn't it.

you uh - you *SURE* you gonna get that investment back, Corbett??

I can think of a lot of grannies that Enron killed with their shady big box mega corporate business practices. I heard a tape from a phone conversation on the news where they were laughing about it.

yea..... I think, rather than advising the public to earn minimum wage working at Wal Mart and to make their money back investing in Wal Mart... I mean, that just sounds inefficient. I mean, at a glance, it just sounds easier to steal Wal Mart's business back, and let the people make twice or three times minimum wage doing the same thing.

problem is, that takes money away from CEOs. and trading/finance companies.

tragic..... so tragic....

;)

the funny thing is, the company I work for has pretty much done exactly that. we're a market research firm. we had contracts taken from bigger conglomerate research shops..... then one of our guys with a great relationship with some corporate tycoon type dude, sat down and showed him exactly why the big guys were sucking balls and how we were superior..... yea, and we stole some business back from the Gartner Group.

at this point, one of our biggest "clients" is a major global conglomerate research firm. they just sub work out to us, and pay us handsomely, because they know we do superior work, and they know we can - and will - prove it, to their clients. =)

[Mad Vinnie]

Originally posted by burnt
my granny bought no stock in them.
lots of grannies bought stock in Enron though - and Tyco - and WorldCom - yea, that worked out well, didn't it.

you uh - you *SURE* you gonna get that investment back, Corbett??



Here's the thing (and I'm not pinning this on you, burnt, just using your quote as an example,) a lot of the same people who bitch and moan about the rich raking in dough by just sitting around and watching their stock go up throw a tantrum when a company goes under. Then, all of sudden, it isn't rich people who are losing their investment, its poor old granny and your blue collar neighbor. Risk is a part of investing, and if you were dumb enough to put all of your money in one stock, then you're either going to come out really rich, or really poor. When all your money is in one place its like putting all your chips on black and rubbing your holy santos statue.

[Cedwyn]

Originally posted by Mad Vinnie
Here's the thing (and I'm not pinning this on you, burnt, just using your quote as an example,) a lot of the same people who bitch and moan about the rich raking in dough by just sitting around and watching their stock go up throw a tantrum when a company goes under. Then, all of sudden, it isn't rich people who are losing their investment, its poor old granny and your blue collar neighbor. Risk is a part of investing, and if you were dumb enough to put all of your money in one stock, then you're either going to come out really rich, or really poor. When all your money is in one place its like putting all your chips on black and rubbing your holy santos statue.
sure...the vagaries of the market are inherently unreliabe. but that's not what enron was about. they were cooking the books big time - seriously illegal stuff, hyperinflating the value, etc. what they did cost enron employees their pensions - all those people are fucked. fucked. so, yeah, a lot of granny investor types also bit it with enron, because they certainly looked to be on the up and up, thanks to their criminal behavior and the climate of deregulation that enabled it.

loooved the tax on trance proposal, though!

Originally posted by No_Spin
^^^ i'd like to think that most humans are on essential the same level in terms of mental capacity. large portions of the population are not encouraged properly though. this isnt to say "encourage them to become wealthy" but encourage them to use their full intellect for the better of other people around them.
all true, but again, the gospel truth is that some people, even at their fullest potential, will never have what it takes to be an engineer, doctor, astronaut, what have you. it's just an irrefutable fact of life. it's also true that some jobs simply require a certain personality type. not everyone has a programmer inside them, etc. and again - the market demand for those high-end jobs can only support so many of them. what is everybody else to do?

Originally posted by No_Spin
^^^ there is clearly crime and immorality among wealthy people too, which goes back to me believing that most humans are essentially the same.
theres something other than need that drives crime. we need to work on priorities and emotional/mental fulfillment, at all levels of the divide
true...need and greed. need drives impoverished crime, greed drives its white-collar analog. but i'd just like to point out that citing a link between poverty and crime doesn't suggest that no rich people are criminals.

[budaho]

Originally posted by TappingAss

What should be done?

stop giving them your money

every dime you give them convinces them you have absolutely no problem with anything they are doing. if you don't want CEOs to earn so much, buy stuff from companies with CEOs that don't make as much. if you think businesses are acting unethically to make the profits they are making, don't give them your money. your dollar is a much more powerful ballot than the scantron thingy they tell you is power.

[corbettfields]

Originally posted by burnt
my granny bought no stock in them.
lots of grannies bought stock in Enron though - and Tyco - and WorldCom - yea, that worked out well, didn't it.

you uh - you *SURE* you gonna get that investment back, Corbett??

I can think of a lot of grannies that Enron killed with their shady big box mega corporate business practices. I heard a tape from a phone conversation on the news where they were laughing about it.

yea..... I think, rather than advising the public to earn minimum wage working at Wal Mart and to make their money back investing in Wal Mart... I mean, that just sounds inefficient. I mean, at a glance, it just sounds easier to steal Wal Mart's business back, and let the people make twice or three times minimum wage doing the same thing.

problem is, that takes money away from CEOs. and trading/finance companies.

tragic..... so tragic....

;)

the funny thing is, the company I work for has pretty much done exactly that. we're a market research firm. we had contracts taken from bigger conglomerate research shops..... then one of our guys with a great relationship with some corporate tycoon type dude, sat down and showed him exactly why the big guys were sucking balls and how we were superior..... yea, and we stole some business back from the Gartner Group.

at this point, one of our biggest "clients" is a major global conglomerate research firm. they just sub work out to us, and pay us handsomely, because they know we do superior work, and they know we can - and will - prove it, to their clients. =)

indeed indeed

i buy mutual funds... they spread risk etc..hopefully.. some govt bonds, etc etc...

enron etc was a disaster, but was "market corrected" and hopefully government will fix these things - this is where you DO need government for sure - enforcing laws, but i hate to say it...did enron survive longer (and lose more money) because of political input/gov corruption?

i believe a self regulated market is best. most money in the market is controlled by pensions funds etc and properly armed SEC free of government with reps from legal, pension funds, large mutual funds, a group that represents individual investors, AARP, etc could do better....

and i honestly believe at some point that walmart will either fail because they cant get good enough employees or they will have to offer benefits as part of the package....

I assume you get a decent benefits package because your company feels it needs to attract the best

eventually wal mart will

i wonder how many of the mom+pop stores paid health insurance, training, paid vacations etc like say a starbucks does?

there are also examples where downtown "fought back" by changing the types of small stores they had when walmart moved in and found walmart traffic + new stores = better business than before

it's about change i guess... smart folks evolve to adjust to reality

when portland city councillors stops walmart from coming here, one of the key groups punished are the poorer people who would benefit from lower prices... sad

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by Mayo Finch
k1e0x, your ideas have been expressed for a long time. The reason they have never taken hold is because they do not reflect the current state of our economy, but are rather developed around original intent.

Every parent intends to raise a child to be the best it can be. As the child grows, the parent changes perspective as the child develops.

There are tomes of lit that have buried the libertarian philosophies your expressing. Contemporary problems require contemporary and adaptive subsequent solutions.

If your trying to to tell me force works.. Your going to need more than books, you'll need guns..

The entire state and system is broken.. it does not matter how you "adjust" it.

edit: "state of the economy" Tell me.. what *IS* the "state of the economy" .. Your a fool, mouthing foolish words you heard on TV. Have you ever thought about it before? How is it possible that there can there be more debt than money to pay it back?

[k1e0x]

To the rest of you.

YOU CAN NOT TAX CORPORATE PROFITS!

Any tax you place on corporations is just rolled into the price of the product and passed to the consumer.

You make a widget that cost $5 to make. The government taxes this $2, you want a low price for your product so you get a markup of $1 per product sold. Retail cost of your widget is now $8. You make $1 per widget sold. If government doubles its tax to $4 then you must put your product on sale for $10. Guess what.. you still make $1 per widget sold.

What if the government charges $50 tax? Well then $56 is too much to pay for a $5 widget and the company wont bother selling it at all.

To KILL the corporations you must understand what they are. They are nothing more than fictional entities created by government for "legal protection". Without government laws allowing someone to incorporate they could not do this! They would have to be held personally responsible for their business practices. If that were the case these huge business could not (and thus would not) hurt customers because they would be sued penny less. That makes a natural limit on how big a business can get. CEO's wouldn't "step down" they would go to fucking jail.

[B_tech]

blame Canada?

[B_tech]

Originally posted by k1e0x

What if the government charges $50 tax? Well then $56 is too much to pay for a $5 widget and the company wont bother selling it at all.

Isn't that kind of the idea, though? You tax the shit out of the corporations that rape the country of resources, both natural and human? If the corporation gives up on building the widget, then a small business could take on that roll, because they are not taxed as much.

We need to tax the consumption of all things in this country. If we started taxing Hummer & SUV owners for consuming too much damn gas and if we started taxing corporations for consuming too much resources, then they will either stop said consumption or the Fed will profit off their stupidity.

There's a reason petrol is $10 a gallon in Europe (aside from fewer refining sources) and there's a reason public transpo is more widely used there... taxes on consumption and use.

[Cedwyn]

Originally posted by budaho
stop giving them your money

every dime you give them convinces them you have absolutely no problem with anything they are doing. if you don't want CEOs to earn so much, buy stuff from companies with CEOs that don't make as much. if you think businesses are acting unethically to make the profits they are making, don't give them your money. your dollar is a much more powerful ballot than the scantron thingy they tell you is power.
preach it, bruthah!

costco is a great company to support!

[Roddimus]

Originally posted by budaho
stop giving them your money

every dime you give them convinces them you have absolutely no problem with anything they are doing. if you don't want CEOs to earn so much, buy stuff from companies with CEOs that don't make as much. if you think businesses are acting unethically to make the profits they are making, don't give them your money. your dollar is a much more powerful ballot than the scantron thingy they tell you is power.
sorry, the dollars=votes equation is bullshit.
if you want to follow that logic, then someone like bill gates has about 90 billion more votes than i do. that kinda weights the voting system a little unfairly, doesn't it?
if a business is acting unethically or doing things in other countries that are illegal here, they should be punished within our legal system.
getting rid of limited liability and corporate personhood are good ways to make sure the CEO realizes there's a lot more at stake than marginally lower profits.

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by B_tech
Isn't that kind of the idea, though? You tax the shit out of the corporations that rape the country of resources, both natural and human? If the corporation gives up on building the widget, then a small business could take on that roll, because they are not taxed as much.

We need to tax the consumption of all things in this country. If we started taxing Hummer & SUV owners for consuming too much damn gas and if we started taxing corporations for consuming too much resources, then they will either stop said consumption or the Fed will profit off their stupidity.

There's a reason petrol is $10 a gallon in Europe (aside from fewer refining sources) and there's a reason public transpo is more widely used there... taxes on consumption and use.

Did you read what I wrote? The government CAUSES this by allowing them protection from the law. Why is it you cant see any solution other than more government? If you poison someone is the solution MORE poison?

[Roddimus]

the solution isn't either more or less government, it's better government. its government that holds individuals liable for their companies, rather than giving them limited liability. its government that refuses to recognize a corporation as a person, thus stripping it of its rights to property. its government that holds corporations to their chartered purposes, and revokes their charters if they violate them or the law. its not a more or less question, its a what and how question.

[B_tech]

No, I personally know other ways and impliment them in my own life. I think Wal-Mart is a disgusting corporation, so I refuse to even walk into one. I give my money to smaller stores and companies I approve of, like Target.

But the issue here is the almighty dollar. Since the average American is moer worried about saving 1-2 cents per gallon on gasoline, than get quality, they're the same type of people that will not bolster any change by ceasing their patronage of these stores. For that reason, the laziness of Americans, we need 'big brother' to help.

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by B_tech
No, I personally know other ways and impliment them in my own life. I think Wal-Mart is a disgusting corporation, so I refuse to even walk into one. I give my money to smaller stores and companies I approve of, like Target.

zOMG! you have free choice?! You don't HAVE to shop at Wal-mart?

But the issue here is the almighty dollar. Since the average American is moer worried about saving 1-2 cents per gallon on gasoline, than get quality, they're the same type of people that will not bolster any change by ceasing their patronage of these stores. For that reason, the laziness of Americans, we need 'big brother' to help.

So you need to take away that choice because your smarter than others... That exactly what makes me pretty much sick, ya know.. Why can't you just leave people alone? I see that as being just as bad as those zealots from Jesus camp.

[B_tech]

So how does that solve the problem?

Clearly there are people that see outside their microcosm and know they can choose to be a patron of the store of their liking, but if you don't want to impose restrictions, how do you expect to see change?

Unless society changes its ways, there will be no change, unless there is a parental figure telling them to do so. The problem with free will is that humans crave structure (although you wouldn't know it, by seeing some people).. yet some Americans want to just run free and to tell with the consequences. That's where we are today: People want to be free from 'the man', yet they don't want to do the 'right' thing.

So how do you expect to make change?

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by B_tech
So how does that solve the problem?

Clearly there are people that see outside their microcosm and know they can choose to be a patron of the store of their liking, but if you don't want to impose restrictions, how do you expect to see change?

Unless society changes its ways, there will be no change, unless there is a parental figure telling them to do so. The problem with free will is that humans crave structure (although you wouldn't know it, by seeing some people).. yet some Americans want to just run free and to tell with the consequences. That's where we are today: People want to be free from 'the man', yet they don't want to do the 'right' thing.

So how do you expect to make change?

You don't have the right to make me worship Jesus, or shop where you want me to.. or what the fuck ever else you want me to do. You do not possess this authority, and you will never get it.

Your solution seems to be total government control and that simply - will - not - work - without lots force, and lots of government thugs with guns.

[Mad Vinnie]

Originally posted by B_tech
That's where we are today: People want to be free from 'the man', yet they don't want to do the 'right' thing.

So how do you expect to make change?

Who defines "the right thing?" Because I know of a rather powerful political base known as the religious right that would like nothing more than to be your "parental figure" in politics. They are working their butts off and spending shit loads of money to pass laws that will limit your freedoms to try to make you to conform to their idea of "right." Will you do the same? Does winning make you right and them wrong because you threw enough money at a campaign and managed to convince the majority of a minority of Americans who vote that Wal Mart = bad and Target = good? What if they win?

I don't agree with passing laws intended to modify people's behaviors. Dance ordinances, definitions of marriage, prohibition of drugs, limitations on freedom of speech, and sin taxes are all examples of special interest groups passing laws to limit other people's rights in order to make them conform to their idea of "right."

I'm all for holding people responsible for the actions of the businesses they own. But I don't agree with people passing laws to limit wealth accumulation because they think being rich is evil.

[B_tech]

Originally posted by k1e0x
You don't have the right to make me worship Jesus, or shop where you want me to.. or what the fuck ever else you want me to do. You do not possess this authority, and you will never get it.

Your solution seems to be total government control and that simply - will - not - work - without lots force, and lots of government thugs with guns.
I know I don't have the right.

So tell me, if you don't want 'the man' overseeing the control of this land and we've established that 90% of Americans won't look at the bigger picture, how do YOU propose we impliment change?

Or should we just say "Don't blame me.. I'm doing X" to push off blame, rather than make change?

[B_tech]

Originally posted by Mad Vinnie
Who defines "the right thing?"
Well, we live in a Judeo-Christian society, so 'the right thing' is percevied to fall in line with that thinking... regardless of how you feel about that or if you think you're 'eastern religion', so that doesn't apply to you.

Humans have an inherent set of values WITHOUT the introduction of religion, that tell us what right and wrong are. That said, you may not think treating workers like shit is 'wrong'.. I and others do. You also might not think polluting the environment and wasting resources is 'wrong'.. i and other do.

You define your own value system, but there is, at the base, a 'right' and 'wrong' that we all acknowledge.

[TappingAss]

http://www.gospeltruth.net/wolfinsheep3



I mean the average janitor today has more information as their fingertips than all the kings and queens of 100 years ago did.. and what do they do? They play soliatare..

[Mad Vinnie]

Originally posted by B_tech
Well, we live in a Judeo-Christian society, so 'the right thing' is percevied to fall in line with that thinking... regardless of how you feel about that or if you think you're 'eastern religion', so that doesn't apply to you.

Obviously it does apply to me, because there's a long list of things that I will be put in prison for doing, even if doing them doesn't hurt anyone (smoking a joint, for instance.) The question is whether or not you have the right to discourage certain behaviors of mine that you don't like whether or not they harm you or anyone else directly. In this country, the answer is yes, without a doubt. People who don't like the idea of kids dancing are constantly trying to outlaw all ages dance events, usually using drugs as a convenient scape goat.


Humans have an inherent set of values WITHOUT the introduction of religion, that tell us what right and wrong are. That said, you may not think treating workers like shit is 'wrong'.. I and others do.

This is a matter between the employer and employee. If the employer has broken a law, then the employee can press criminal or civil charges. If we get rid of limited liability it will hold corporations and their shareholders accountable for any abuses they commit on their employees or third parties. Problem solved and I get to continue buying cheap, plastic crap from Wal Mart, whatever your opinion on them. Of course, in our country you can still lobby the legislature to selectively tax those businesses you don't like for whatever reason you want.


You also might not think polluting the environment and wasting resources is 'wrong'.. i and other do.


Again, criminal or civil cases can take care of most of these problems. Identify a polluter, identify those who have been harmed, and prosecute accordingly.


You define your own value system, but there is, at the base, a 'right' and 'wrong' that we all acknowledge.

How's this for a base for right and wrong: Do no harm to others. Other than that, do as you please. Where does implementing a "parental figure" to tell me where and where not to shop fit into that?

Here's what I'm getting at: If a business has done someone wrong, punish them through prosecution or through civil suits. Don't punish society at large by taxing profits and raising the cost of living for everyone. Identify the problem and deal with it.

All that said, I fucking love your music, B_tech. Keep it up!

[B_tech]

Originally posted by Mad Vinnie

This is a matter between the employer and employee. If the employer has broken a law, then the employee can press criminal or civil charges. If we get rid of limited liability it will hold corporations and their shareholders accountable for any abuses they commit on their employees or third parties.
But that's part of the issue. There's no law that employers have to offer health insurance or benefits, but the jobs at, say, Wal-Mart, pay so little, many of the employees can't afford adequate healthcare, so they rely on social systems. As for some of the other things you've mentioned, lobbyists for these large corporations fight tooth and nail to ensure that US/State laws bends to their whim. So what they do is not illegal, but it's often un-ethical.

So no, it's not illegal to do the things that some of these companies do, but it's morally 'wrong' and un-ethical, which is worse, IMO. Since they are spending and fighting for the laws to bend in their favor, why shouldn't WE are consumers and citizens lobby for the same? I guess I don't buy into the 'I don't want the government telling me what to do' argument I hear, because the feds already tell us this shit and they do so and the behest of the corporate lobbyists. I would think these activists/proponents would want to fight to balance the scale, rather than remove the scale.

(thanks for the kind words BTW!)

[budaho]

Originally posted by Roddimus
sorry, the dollars=votes equation is bullshit.
if you want to follow that logic, then someone like bill gates has about 90 billion more votes than i do. that kinda weights the voting system a little unfairly, doesn't it?


huh? i think you kinda missed the point. i never said anything about a person getting a vote for every dollar they have. where did you get that from?

everybody gets their individual vote for politicians. but the vote i'm talking about is the one that tells stock holders and boards of directors that they must be doing something right. its the only vote they care about, and so long as there's a strong enough vote telling them to keep doing it, nothing any politician does is going to have anything but a marginal effect on them.

politicians can make CEO's jobs alot harder, but usually the restrictions politicians implement by law force them to take even more extreme and harmful actions to get away with the less harmful action that the government was trying to get them to stop doing in the first place. you can punish individual leaders and people who decided to take criminal actions, but so long as there is demand for what they do someone else will take their place.

attacking the demand is the only thing that will have any effect, and individual action isn't enough. personally choosing not to give your money to entities you disapprove of is fine, and it makes alot of people feel better about not contributing to the problem. its not going to change anything though. mass boycotts and strikes will weaken their power though, and if alternative means of production and distribution are implemented, without the help of the government or the existing corporate structure, the crooks could be run out of town completely.

That’s the kind of vote i'm talking about having power. the false choice people are forced to make every november pales in comparison. it is important, i vote, and i think anyone who doesn't is a fool, but the things that action has the power to change are limited without other action. and i think it’s incredibly naive to think differently

[JungleJunkie]

Kill Kill Kill Kill Kill the poor Kiil Kill Kill Kill Kill the poor. Toniiiiighiiiihiiight!!!! Muwhahahaha!

[k1e0x]

Originally posted by B_tech
I know I don't have the right.

So tell me, if you don't want 'the man' overseeing the control of this land and we've established that 90% of Americans won't look at the bigger picture, how do YOU propose we impliment change?

Or should we just say "Don't blame me.. I'm doing X" to push off blame, rather than make change?

You don't, you just let it be, thats how freedom works.. Trouble is we *already* have force upon us, and that is what we must stop. I'm in favor of any step in that direction no matter how small.

See.. I think most of the people absolutely DO want change.. trouble is they all want different things. They ALL want to fix the world and they ALL know exactly what needs to be done, if only everyone else would just listen to *them*.

If we all keep voting for the tyranny of others.. what is the logical end? Eventually it tyranny for everyone.

Then.. go find out about the banks.. because thats the biggest crime in human history.

[budaho]

Originally posted by k1e0x
You don't, you just let it be, thats how freedom works.. Trouble is we *already* have force upon us, and that is what we must stop. I'm in favor of any step in that direction no matter how small.

See.. I think most of the people absolutely DO want change.. trouble is they all want different things. They ALL want to fix the world and they ALL know exactly what needs to be done, if only everyone else would just listen to *them*.

If we all keep voting for the tyranny of others.. what is the logical end? Eventually it tyranny for everyone.

Then.. go find out about the banks.. because thats the biggest crime in human history.

wize shit my friend, especially the little part.