laklak wrote:What has worked "so well so far" is corporate taxation. It's also been a major reason for corporations moving overseas.
Which just goes to show how much corporations care about the population: Not at all. They are just profit machines holding the population hostage under the threat that if they're taxed, they'll just move overseas. There has to be another solution than concession and letting them run the show however the fuck they want, which is what they're doing. It would be cool if it was possible to legislate such that they're not allowed to move their shit to another country to dodge taxes.
Oh wait, that IS possible, but it doesn't happen because the legislators are bought. How do we fix this? Maaaaaybe we should stop voting bought legislators into office? Nah, lets just give up and pray the mob boss will drive through town next month and throw a few coins at us.
We absolutely should start voting non-bought legislators into office. Problem is, where do we find them? They seem to be rather thin on the ground, and the ones that are obviously not bought are either a piss take or clinically insane.
I was looking over the likely slate of local candidates the other day, for county commission, state legislature, etc. Fuck me what a bunch of clowns. If I didn't have such a, well, checkered past I'd consider running. At least I can string a sentence together, which is more than most of these idiots can do.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
laklak wrote:Corporations aren't some inherently selfish alien life form
True, they are nothing like any life-form. And they don't have to be inherently selfish to be acting selfishly. They can only exist if they can make money and they will by the competitive nature of markets always seek to maximize profit.
The people on top will just find ways to rationalize their actions. In a competitive market they will always be trying to to make their products more affordable so they can sell more then the competition, which means cutting corners on quality, number of people employed, their salaries, time and money spend on safety etc. etc. If they don't do this, their product will be way more expensive, fewer people will buy it, if any, and then the corporation will eventually run out of business because it simply gets outcompeted and dies.
They will entirely on their own, eventually, devolve into total exploitation of their workers with zero care for environment, safety or anything if they're not somehow kept in check with things like minimum wage, consumer protection, product safety, environmental regulations etc. etc.
This is the very reason companies try to move their stuff overseas, to china for example, because there are almost none of these regulations.
And they're extremely good at not giving a fuck, which is why they move their corporation overseas when profitable and convenient if they're taxed "too high". If they really gave a fuck, they would not be moving their corporations into tax havens and their production lines to china so they can escape taxes and pay their workers a slave's salary while taking a shit on the enviroment.
On the one hand we (leftists, progressives, Bernie voters etc.) are accused of being unrealistic and naive about wanting a candidate to try to fix the system, yet the accusations are coming from people who seem to believe that corporations will just magically decide not to move their production and company offices into 3rd world tax havens out of the goodness of their hearts if we just reduce or abolish their taxes. I think there's a serious disconnect there.
laklak wrote:What has worked "so well so far" is corporate taxation. It's also been a major reason for corporations moving overseas.
Which just goes to show how much corporations care about the population: Not at all. They are just profit machines holding the population hostage under the threat that if they're taxed, they'll just move overseas. There has to be another solution than concession and letting them run the show however the fuck they want, which is what they're doing. It would be cool if it was possible to legislate such that they're not allowed to move their shit to another country to dodge taxes.
Oh wait, that IS possible, but it doesn't happen because the legislators are bought. How do we fix this? Maaaaaybe we should stop voting bought legislators into office? Nah, lets just give up and pray the mob boss will drive through town next month and throw a few coins at us.
Do you think this is true of people as well? I'm thinking back to a recent article in which some conservatives poked fun and make accusations of hypocrisy at Bernie Sanders for only paying 13% on his tax rate of a little over $200k income. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -hypocrisy
Though I think even those who were not inclined to support Bernie defended him as there being no hypocrisy for wanting to change the rules of the game while still playing by the current rules.
I don't necessarily disagree, but is that not what we do to corporations and a lot of other people who use tax havens? I'd imagine a lot liberals who stuck up for Sanders are anxious to see if any loopholes are revealed on Trump's taxes.
I don't know, I just have been kinda struck by the oddness that it seems the people who complain most about corporations avoiding taxes were liberals who were generally okay with Bernie using the code to reduce his burden.
Bernie, like everyone, including corporations and billionaires, should be forced to pay a fair and workable portion of their earnings to keep a humane, functional society with social welfare programs and that help and protect the running. I wonder whether they're "okay" with it or just don't know about it. Regardless, whether he himself is benefiting from the way others have set up the system isn't a very good argument for not voting in a candidate that has been working his entire life to fix the broken system.
Macdoc wrote:LakLak et al, you have swallowed the 1% Koolaid. Bernie at least is on the correct track but it will take a New Deal level of commitment to get it sorted as other countries have done....you seem to have no idea how far off base you are for an egalitarian society.
You are completely in the thrall of moneyed interests and not only that.....have bought into their nonsense.
I suggest both of you suspend your rut and listen....this is on Netflix
and the Economist
the mess the Republican Party has got itself into may present Mrs Clinton with a chance to reshape the nation. What a shame if her ideas were too small to seize it.
You need a fucking revolution ....either make it happen in a controlled manner or watch it happen.
The Guardian has a good summary
How America's rich betrayed their fellow citizens Anthony J Gaughan In the past, wealth came with responsibility. Today’s rich avoid taxes, military service, and charitable giving. No wonder we’re seeing a populist backlash
It should not come as a surprise, therefore, that middle-class and working-class Americans are so angry at political and economic elites. Until the Buffett and Gates families become the rule and not the exception, it seems likely that populist fury and class conflict will remain the dominant theme of American politics for years to come. The 2016 election is just the tip of the iceberg.
You are living in an oligarchy rapidly sliding to fascism.....
And Americans have one chance this election to make the change to fix that. That window is rapidly closing so if they want 8 more years of the rich getting more then carry on voting Clinton but don't say you weren't warned.
Chomsky has said he's supporting Clinton against Trump.
Plus, want to support your deranged claim "that window is rapidly closing"? How does Bernie Sanders win, precisely?
Show your work.
Chomsky supports Clinton over Trump? So? Is that a surprise to you? He absolutely doesn't support Hillary in general, and fortunately today he was on DemocracyNow, where he goes on and on discussing facts that go against almost anything you'll ever manage to hear on MSM, or out of Hillary's mouth. He rather specifically exposes some serious lies she's been spreading lately, lies that are insidious, dangerous, vile and worse, DemocracyNow.org, he's the only story past the news, todays show.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.” -George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
Rumraket wrote:Bernie, like everyone, including corporations and billionaires, should be forced to pay a fair and workable portion of their earnings to keep a humane, functional society with social welfare programs and that help and protect the running. I wonder whether they're "okay" with it or just don't know about it. Regardless, whether he himself is benefiting from the way others have set up the system isn't a very good argument for not voting in a candidate that has been working his entire life to fix the broken system.
I'm not making any argument as to who to vote for. I'm just asking if you think its unethical for companies to look for ways to minimize their tax burden as evidence their lack of care for society, if you hold people to the same standard.
Its not even really a Bernie specific argument I'm using. He is just my example because his were released recently so I recall the number off the top of my head and his supporters in particular seem most inclined to go after businesses/people over similar actions.
I myself have found myself pondering this question. I was at first sympathizing with the argument that its fine playing by the rules that exist currently, but idk that I would buy that in other instances.
Rumraket wrote:Bernie, like everyone, including corporations and billionaires, should be forced to pay a fair and workable portion of their earnings to keep a humane, functional society with social welfare programs and that help and protect the running. I wonder whether they're "okay" with it or just don't know about it. Regardless, whether he himself is benefiting from the way others have set up the system isn't a very good argument for not voting in a candidate that has been working his entire life to fix the broken system.
I'm not making any argument as to who to vote for. I'm just asking if you think its unethical for companies to look for ways to minimize their tax burden as evidence their lack of care for society, if you hold people to the same standard.
Companies are actively trying to avoid paying any taxes at all. They buy politicians to make up the rules in their favor and if and when they can't do that, they try to leave the country and place the company in a tax haven, while moving their production to (if possible) borderline slave-wage 3rd world countries with no environmental regulations or worker safety laws.
To hold them to the same standard is difficult if they're not guilty of the same crime or action. I'm not faulting companies (or individuals) for simply paying the level of tax that happens to be legally required, I'm faulting them for corrupting politicians to make those laws full of holes in the first place and I'm faulting the politicians that are letting themselves be bribed and bought. In fact I mostly blame the politicians. The companies do what they do to stay on top in the markets, it's unavoidable, it's in the nature of the way the competition works. They will always try to maximize their profits. That means we have to legislate to keep a balance on it before it gets out of control, but we can't do that if they buy the politicians. So the most morally failing party are politicians.
crank wrote:There are those who dismiss Chomsky out of hand, without any real justification, the best they typically cough up is a lame 'it's Chomsky'.
Chomsky is a supercilious dishonest disingenuous ideological illogical imbecilic icon of the far left, and Bernie is not much different. Chomsky can't even figure out that James Madison was a defender of the landed ruling class not its opponent. Chomsky takes quotes from Madison that are imploring for a life long senatorship to be pro-populace sentiments. When Chomsky declares that we are living through the worst period in American history anyone should be able to recognize that Chomsky doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
Chomsky claims people feel they have no hope for the future, and shakes his head as if for the loss of optimististic determination. Never wanting to acknowledge that it is he and those like him and Bernie that have been teaching and preaching that there is no hope for the future for 30 years and longer
They're like those guys standing on the corners, in all corners of the world, for thousands of years. Guys that since for, fucking ever, have been predicting and preaching the end of the World. The "end" that is always just around the corner but never seems to come.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.
Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
laklak wrote: Personally I'd abolish ALL corporate taxes.
... And then an angel will come and make the bridges and hospitals etc. etc. and out of the goodness of it's heart and using it's magic powers it will prevent sick and disabled people from dying of starvation and lack of healthcare when there's no social safetynet or public healthcare. And when those desperate people who can't find money or jobs turn to crime to provide for themselves and their families, we'll just increase the prison sentences for selling, making, and trafficking drugs and stealing, this will cause them to stay away from crime and just die off like they should, lazy fucks.
It's worked so well so far.
You went and bought the whole deluxe package, didn't you.
There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher will not say it - Cicero.
Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead - Stephen Hawking
crank wrote:There are those who dismiss Chomsky out of hand, without any real justification, the best they typically cough up is a lame 'it's Chomsky'.
Chomsky is a supercilious dishonest disingenuous ideological illogical imbecilic icon of the far left, and Bernie is not much different. Chomsky can't even figure out that James Madison was a defender of the landed ruling class not its opponent. Chomsky takes quotes from Madison that are imploring for a life long senatorship to be pro-populace sentiments. When Chomsky declares that we are living through the worst period in American history anyone should be able to recognize that Chomsky doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
I tried to not respond but it was beyond me. It helps that you worked so hard to prove what I keep saying about you in general and what the expected response to a post with Chomsky in it. Plus, I can't let such a gross misrepresentation of Chomsky go uncorrected. The first sentence is the rather typical lame assault on Chomsky's character and intelligence, here going so far as to call him an imbecile. Chomsky, an imbecile? That right there is enough to prove delusion.
Now, lets take a look at what you say Chomsky thinks of Madison. OldSkeptic takes the position that Chomsky was stupid enough to think Madison was a populist. Well, surprise surprise, not only does Chomsky think the exact opposite of OldSkeptics snarky assertion, but it's one of his more common quotes and examples of what America has been about from the beginning. And, it's right there in the video, about 1:30, even shows the text and underlines it FFS. Where Madison claims "They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."
You can watch a different video with him explaining this in more detail but quite concisely, and you can find the main Madison quote here, the relevant text [highlighted for those with reading problems], the whole paragraph should be read to get a better feel for what he's saying:
The man who is possessed of wealth, who lolls on his sofa, or rolls in his carriage, cannot judge of the wants or feelings of the day laborer. The government we mean to erect is intended to last for ages. The landed interest, at present, is prevalent; but in process of time, when we approximate to the states and kingdoms of Europe; when the number of landholders shall be comparatively small, through the various means of trade and manufactures, will not the landed interest be overbalanced in future elections, and unless wisely provided against, what will become of your government? In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of the landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be jsut, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability. Various have been the propositions; but my opinion is, the longer they continue in office, the better will these views be answered.
Does Chomsky think "we are living through the worst period in American history"? No, that isn't what he said, which is "it's like the worst periods in American history." Another false accusation that you hang your argument on, experience tells me you won't admit what a buffoon you've made of yourself,, or even admit to making an error, but it's obvious to any who read this. You've done this repeatedly, hang an entire argument on a false claim, when this is proven, you go away. I wonder what you'll do after this post? If you do your usual cowardly slinking away, no one will be surprised.
Oldskeptic wrote: Chomsky claims people feel they have no hope for the future, and shakes his head as if for the loss of optimististic determination. Never wanting to acknowledge that it is he and those like him and Bernie that have been teaching and preaching that there is no hope for the future for 30 years and longer
They're like those guys standing on the corners, in all corners of the world, for thousands of years. Guys that since for, fucking ever, have been predicting and preaching the end of the World. The "end" that is always just around the corner but never seems to come.
This is all utter nonsense, lies or mischaracterization about Chomsky's positions. Yep, more of the same BS. Like I said, that's all you can expect of those who attack Chomsky, lies, mischaracterizations, and ad hominems as far as you can see. It should be noted, again, that this too is something that Chomsky often talks about, how he is optimistic that things will get better. Why the fuck do you think he keeps going around the country talking to people , like he's done for 5 decades? He's urging them to get together and make the government change. He's got to be one of the most optimistic guys out there. What a fucking idiot you'd have to be to claim the opposite, either an idiot or someone who doesn't have a clue what they are talking about and who doesn't know a thing about Chomsky yet feels the need to explain how wrong he is.
So, I had to respond. OldSkeptic came through as always, proving he's clueless, spouts breathtakinginanity when he isn't lying or deliberately and/or foolishly mischaracterizing other's positions. And doing a fantastic job demonstrating what your typical Chomsky hater is, clueless about Chomsky. Plus, you're making it too easy OldSkeptic, and you're making me look good, thank you, but I can't take credit for that, it's all you and your so predictable bullshit.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.” -George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
laklak wrote: Personally I'd abolish ALL corporate taxes.
... And then an angel will come and make the bridges and hospitals etc. etc. and out of the goodness of it's heart and using it's magic powers it will prevent sick and disabled people from dying of starvation and lack of healthcare when there's no social safetynet or public healthcare. And when those desperate people who can't find money or jobs turn to crime to provide for themselves and their families, we'll just increase the prison sentences for selling, making, and trafficking drugs and stealing, this will cause them to stay away from crime and just die off like they should, lazy fucks.
It's worked so well so far.
You went and bought the whole deluxe package, didn't you.
I'm only relaying what conservatives and hardcore ultralibertarians actually say. It is pretty clear to me that they really believe we could somehow do away with government and taxes almost entirely, and have some nebulous "free market" fix all our problems with competition. What a disgusting "survival of the fittest" society that would be. But I often get the impression that's what these people really want they just try to avoid being explicit about it. They really WANT a brutal society where people are just left to their own devices and if they can't find a way to make a decent living, they'll eventually just die off. They obviously usually think of themselves that they'd be among the strong ones that would make it. And fuck the rest, they're either lazy and thus deserve their shitty existence, or genetic degenerates we don't want polluting the genepool anyway. If I'm wrong and they don't really believe this, then they're making it very hard for me not to reach this conclusion.
It's what they have already created. with the connivance of the poor fools who swallowed their "land of the free" Koolaid. Public weal went the way of the Dodo a good while back in US of A
Americans in the most part and in particular in this thread are soooooo blinkered it beggars belief. They are getting it up the ass from the 1% and begging for more of the same.
They might notice something missing in the top 10 here of the Human Prosperity Index.
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote: We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
crank wrote:There are those who dismiss Chomsky out of hand, without any real justification, the best they typically cough up is a lame 'it's Chomsky'.
Chomsky is a supercilious dishonest disingenuous ideological illogical imbecilic icon of the far left, and Bernie is not much different. Chomsky can't even figure out that James Madison was a defender of the landed ruling class not its opponent. Chomsky takes quotes from Madison that are imploring for a life long senatorship to be pro-populace sentiments. When Chomsky declares that we are living through the worst period in American history anyone should be able to recognize that Chomsky doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
Your idiotic rant suggests you haven't actually ever read or listened to Chomsky.
Macdoc wrote:It's what they have already created. with the connivance of the poor fools who swallowed their "land of the free" Koolaid. Public weal went the way of the Dodo a good while back in US of A
Americans in the most part and in particular in this thread are soooooo blinkered it beggars belief. They are getting it up the ass from the 1% and begging for more of the same.
They might notice something missing in the top 10 here of the Human Prosperity Index.
I've always found these sorts of rankings disingenuous, it's all about the weights assigned each variable, and that's where personal opinion comes in.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
This isn't the latest, but it does seem to suggest there's room for improvement.
World Health Organization Ranking; The World’s Health Systems
1 France 2 Italy 3 San Marino 4 Andorra 5 Malta 6 Singapore 7 Spain 8 Oman 9 Austria 10 Japan 11 Norway 12 Portugal 13 Monaco 14 Greece 15 Iceland 16 Luxembourg 17 Netherlands 18 United Kingdom 19 Ireland 20 Switzerland 21 Belgium 22 Colombia 23 Sweden 24 Cyprus 25 Germany 26 Saudi Arabia 27 United Arab Emirates 28 Israel 29 Morocco 30 Canada 31 Finland 32 Australia 33 Chile 34 Denmark 35 Dominica 36 Costa Rica 37 USA 38 Slovenia 39 Cuba 40 Brunei
Nevertheless, in the efficient, profit-based system of healthcare you'd think the USA would be getting more bang for its bucks:
No other advanced country even comes close to the United States in annual spending on health care, but plenty of those other countries see much better outcomes in their citizens' actual health overall.
A new Commonwealth Fund report released Thursday underscored that point — yet again — with an analysis that ranks 13 high-income nations on their overall health spending, use of medical services, prices and health outcomes.
The study data, which is from 2013, predates the full implementation of Obamacare, which took place in 2014. Obamacare is designed to increase health coverage for Americans and stem the rise in health-care costs.
Unless the claim is that Americans are too incredibly stupid to be able to achieve what many other nations actually do year after year- better outcomes at less cost - I think it's clear the 'for profit' model needs to be scrapped for two reason:
1) Saving lives otherwise wasted under the current model
2) Put the money wasted to better use
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
It's amazing, isn't it? We spend a metric shitfuckton of money and still can't get it right. I think the answer is to shoot all the sick people, they're the ones costing us so much in the first place.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
by 
with the connivance of the poor fools who swallowed their "land of the free" Koolaid.
