U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old Yesterday, 05:55 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,684 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
your definition of community cooperatives also means segregation... ever notice when the local mom and pops stores were prevalent that the communities were more segregated? mom and pop stores hire people they like, do business with people they like, build around people they like, etc

when businesses don't have to worry about a broader reach, they don't have to cater to a more diverse people, and they can't get larger without investments because no one has that much money, and banks won't loan that much either.
You can criticize plenty of things, but cooperatives are employee owned as well, and one person can not decide to exclude others.

That being said itís fine if choices are less in the market, read about behavioral economics, Iím fine with more regional segregation than a copy of the same stores everywhere.

And the consequence of having the latter is allowing corporate power decide the relative wealth of different places by investment decisions that means less freedom for others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 05:57 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,684 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254
Quote:
Originally Posted by FelixTheCat View Post
I don't need to read up on anything. Businesses sell stock in order to grow, which leads to more hiring and more production. Come on, this is very basic stuff. It's almost like you are trying to not make sense.
Thatís not what you said. You said land and stocks have nothing to do with each other, and I said they were both taxed by the CGT as non-inventory goods.

Anyways I know stocks funnel more value into corporations, and Iím saying an economy reliant or corporate wealth is neither free nor desirable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:57 PM
 
153 posts, read 23,337 times
Reputation: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
This is a right wing site.
LOL! That's a good one!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:01 PM
 
9,530 posts, read 4,039,336 times
Reputation: 14180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
You can criticize plenty of things, but cooperatives are employee owned as well, and one person can not decide to exclude others.
if you want ownership, buy yourself some company stock... employee owned doesn't mean they all get paid the same
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,684 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
nope, raising capital gains tax will only get politicians who approved the increase replaced in office by other politicians who will lower capital gains tax.

the thought of anything else happening is just stupid.
I agree, the government will never do it because the state invented capitalism to make more money and taxable economic activity. Raising the CGT will lower that taxable economic activity.

My point isnít whether the government WILL do it, but whether it is in the interest of the people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:05 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
7,684 posts, read 2,064,138 times
Reputation: 2254
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
if you want ownership, buy yourself some company stock... employee owned doesn't mean they all get paid the same
I know, and thatís not what I want, thatís the way it should be. Iím against the wage economy in the long term.

Either way if people work somewhere, they by nature own that place equally. Itís like being a citizen of a country, not everyone is equal, but everyone has a right to a vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:07 PM
 
889 posts, read 401,687 times
Reputation: 910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
I agree, the government will never do it because the state invented capitalism to make more money and taxable economic activity. Raising the CGT will lower that taxable economic activity.

My point isnít whether the government WILL do it, but whether it is in the interest of the people.
if it was, the people would demand it and vote in politicians who would do it.

That hasn't happened, what does that tell you (other than you're alone in your delusion that you know anything about what people want)?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:15 PM
 
466 posts, read 215,839 times
Reputation: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
Read the previous posts, it's related to that.
I have read your posts. We can just revert back to something that looks like Flintstones cartoon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 06:15 PM
 
9,530 posts, read 4,039,336 times
Reputation: 14180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
I know, and thatís not what I want, thatís the way it should be. Iím against the wage economy in the long term.

Either way if people work somewhere, they by nature own that place equally. Itís like being a citizen of a country, not everyone is equal, but everyone has a right to a vote.
HAHA, so when they get fed up and leave, you see employees walking out carrying their desks and chairs to take home with them?

you can be against wage economy, but your "cooperative" economy is running on pixie dust, you going to pay them with imaginary hamburgers so they don't starve?

the best case scenario is profit sharing, and that is still "wage" based
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:55 PM
 
Location: US
17,278 posts, read 16,794,583 times
Reputation: 13194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
It is only a tax on profits (so not total sale value).

I'm not supporting it from a tax revenue stand point, I don't care about that, but it would lower economic activity in the corporate sector and dissuade people from investing (and inflating) the stock market.

The materialistic profit motive that has driven our economy has built an authoritarian state where money buys you freedom, and the more money you have, the more freedom you have as well.

To create a freer society it must be more egalitarian and not based on increasing economic activity.

Also in the long run it will lower government revenues and slow imperialistic ambitions abroad.

Furthermore people will be happier not trying to become millionaires and building a life rather than making a living.

Yeah and any losses the government should give you 90% of whatever you lose back. While we are at it, let's forget about 401k, retirement accoounts, CD accounts, Savings Accounts. We should just print $300 billion a year and give a million to every person!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top