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.
the guy seems to just love his extremely flawed philosophical bs.
winterfall, id recommend you check out a liberty memes page on facebook. they will have fun with you and you may find someone to take your bait and go back and forth with you.
i wouldnt recommend a "being libertarian" though. well, it may work for you. i like it but there are too many conservatives there. its fun to mess with them.
First time I've seen Liberty Memes mentioned here. Love it. :-D
I only ask questions, do you think an economy reliant on growth and corporate investment is healthy or sustainable?
Absolutely
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Capital gains taxes raised to 90% will move us along the way.
As investment from the private (and public) sector becomes realized due to the 90% tax communities will build cooperatives to create wealth for everyone rather than everyone fighting each-other to make a buck.
No they won't
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
I don't want long term investment.
The goal is to lower all long and short term investments as not to inflate value and corporate wealth.
If society does not need to make money to survive, people would not be slaves to those with the greatest economic power.
Is life better when investments are growing the economy, or when people look after one another.
I don't like my neighbor, so I don't care what happens to him. If he croaks, there's more for me, especially if I can steal his stuff before his kids come by.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Corporate for profit investment does not have the best interests of the public in mind and in excess can hurt society.
But there are other forms of investment besides in the public and corporate sector. Community investment by credit union banks and electric cooperatives invest not for profit, but relative to the needs of the community, which the community controls.
Instead of investing in corporate wealth and widening the gap or trying to raise property value, people will spend there money in terms of self-sustaining living, not some artificial stored value in stocks or commodities.
Cool, you are back on your "let's return to short brutish lives of pain and agony" soapbox. I suggest you take some economics classes before posting more of this dreck. None of what you've suggested works at scale, and no community can exist as an island. My family came off the farm 100 years ago, thank goodness, and have done extremely well working for "the man".
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)?
Ahh, this is wrong.
The job of a state is to retain its power, which requires control of wealth. Capitalism is a useful tool to support government power.
There was a Princeton study that showed public opinion had zero correlation with public policy.
Yes people can influence certain aspects of government, but the fundamental goal of power, to retain that power will stay the same.
And that is not including propaganda used by the corporate media and elite think tanks to frame all discussions towards how to increase corporate investment. Democrats say we need to invest in public infrastructure to promote investments, Republicans say we should cut regulations, the goal is the same.
The job of a state is to retain its power, which requires control of wealth. Capitalism is a useful tool to support government power.
There was a Princeton study that showed public opinion had zero correlation with public policy.
Yes people can influence certain aspects of government, but the fundamental goal of power, to retain that power will stay the same.
And that is not including propaganda used by the corporate media and elite think tanks to frame all discussions towards how to increase corporate investment. Democrats say we need to invest in public infrastructure to promote investments, Republicans say we should cut regulations, the goal is the same.
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!
Who said anything about the government paying for losses. That would make the problem worse.
And yes corporate investment shouldn’t be the driver of the economy, and there are tools like the CGT that can be used to lessen its influence over economic activity.
Winterfall8324 is pretty good at baiting people into a discussion but gives little tangible information about himself. Nothing about himself..his occupation, his economic contribution to society, his investment methods, his asset accumulation, educational background......etc.
Winterfall8324 likes to pontificate...and little else.
Cool, you are back on your "let's return to short brutish lives of pain and agony" soapbox. I suggest you take some economics classes before posting more of this dreck. None of what you've suggested works at scale, and no community can exist as an island. My family came off the farm 100 years ago, thank goodness, and have done extremely well working for "the man".
I’m just going to respond to your last paragraph because the others weren’t serious.
I don’t want to remove modern technology or industry, I wanted to be applied on the basis of local desires, with shared production between independent industrial centers.
I don’t want it to be applied based on the needs of corporate investment, and I don’t want rural economics to be dependent on the demand of the urban areas, and conversely industry should serve the needs of each locality, not shareholders, profit owners, or state needs for tax revenue.
Winterfall8324 is pretty good at baiting people into a discussion but gives little tangible information about himself. Nothing about himself..his occupation, his economic contribution to society, his investment methods, his asset accumulation, educational background......etc.
Winterfall8324 likes to pontificate...and little else.
What does it matter, the discussion isn’t about me, it is about the country.
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.
And, you would be happy with people not having enough money for retirement??
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.
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.
