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.
This is question to libertarians and market fundamentalists: We know that income and wealth inequality will skyrocket by design under these type of policies. This is embraced as "fair" and "great" because the market is just super great. But who will write the patent laws, trade deals, anti-trust legislation and so much more in an economy where the ultra rich have so much wealth and power? Your answer is that if we just shrink the government everything will be fine, but who will write the patent laws, trade deals and anti-trust legislation? The ultra wealthy would basically have full control over this process and will steamroll over 99.99% of the population. What is so great about that?
The ultra wealthy only get extra power when the government gives them more advantages. We are more regulated than ever, and in your other thread you tell us how the ultra wealthy are continuing to out-earn everyone else.
The big corporations and government power brokers sure play you like a fiddle.
Listen Skippy, I lived and worked in Washington. I did it to take advantage of all that was available there. The patent attorneys I had as clients were extremely wealthy. The rank and file government employees that work at the patent offices have incomes way higher than most locales. Your thesis is unnecessarily deep, and sounds like you are frustrated with the system.
Life is a game. If you don't know the rules, you won't advance.
Whining about unfairness is a waste of your time. But have at it.
Bye Bye
The one thing I take issue with here is that you make the false implication that things are the way they are and there's absolutely nothing that can be done about it. Not true.
As an example, the way to make money today is not at all the same as it was 100 years ago. Things changed. Granted, the OP might only be concerning himself with one aspect of it which may not be wise, it's at least equally unwise to say he should just accept your perceived truth as absolute.
Joe Sixpack claiming to be rich again? This is pathetic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike
So you have no arguments. Just claims that you are so rich that you can buy politicians and think it is great that democracy is becoming a meaningless joke. This is just pathetic posturing.
Although one would probably assign me as 'libertarian', I'm not a fan of them either as much of their message is often 40 year old college arguments. No substance.
Well, at least we can both confidently say neither of us are libertarians.
The one thing I take issue with here is that you make the false implication that things are the way they are and there's absolutely nothing that can be done about it. Not true.
As an example, the way to make money today is not at all the same as it was 100 years ago. Things changed. Granted, the OP might only be concerning himself with one aspect of it which may not be wise, it's at least equally unwise to say he should just accept your perceived truth as absolute.
So basically you are claiming that we can promote policies that transfer wealth and power to the ultra rich, through the tax system, the declining power of the people can enact policies that strengthen the people's power over the political system?
How, pray tell, does that transfer to the ultra rich?
An original good question, generally, but now it's followed by venting. Cite some specific policies you want addressed.
The super rich you speak of do not directly influence people. They influence government which then will steamroll anyone they ask. I want to remove that power from government. Government at each level should stick to their specific powers as defined in their chartering documents and nothing more. That takes away the majority of the influence you speak of.
Also, I provided a specific example. Can you provide one and how you want things changed?
Your example is that the people should demand a law which increases consumer power. This goes directly against the fact that wealth=power. The more lopsided wealth and income becomes, the less democratic the system becomes.
I want policies that are proven to DECREASE income and wealth inequality and INCREASE power and opportunity for the people. Not go full steam ahead towards aristocracy. It can become IMPOSSIBLE to get rid of such an aristocracy if they gain enough wealth and power.
Well, at least we can both confidently say neither of us are libertarians.
The closest I can assign is an 'originalist'.
This election cycle is moving me towards an anarchist! Lol
It truly seems many can only think incrementally these days, and incrementalism is what has led to gov creep.
I don't hate the government. It's not evil. It's extremely inefficient as currently set up.
Besides the irs, I'd like to:
1. A pres candidate cannot declare until December 31 before the election year. 10 primaries a month for 5 months. This eliminates almost 16 months of election cycle bs
2. Repeal the 17th amendment. This eliminates money into senators pocket
3. Term limit the house to 3 consecutive terms (6 years in a row is enough)
4. Cap Supreme Court appointments to 20 years
5. Eliminate the lifetime benefit of congress
6. Repeal the war powers act
7. Pass an amendment that any force must require a declaration of war (that is a compromise because I understand the need for some flexibility but it's been so over used I'd like them to start back from scratch)
8. Petition to sunset nato
9. Abolish the TSA
10. Abolish homeland security
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.