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.
Fine. I won’t argue with you. Whether you are selling your labor or your own products, it’s the same thing. Instead of one boss, you have a thousand.
Please go on.
Good.
So, let me reiterate what we came in agreement with so far.
In order to not die from hunger any person whatsoever has only two real options:
1) Work for someone else (at least for some initial time).
2) Rely on parents.
So far we are in agreement.
And here is the catch on how you use "voluntarily" word.
The option to "rely on parents" is by no means related to person itself. The reason? He/she didn't choose parents, so this is absolutely nothing "voluntarily" in relying on parents. They can be rich, the can be poor, they can be totally absent - whatever they are (or not are), this reliance (or absence or any reliance) is not "voluntarily" for the person.
Digest this for a moment.
And now - the final part.
Since the only "voluntarily" option left is to work for someone else, it stops being "voluntarily". Simple as that. We came full circle here to my original statement:
The "choice" between "die" and "be enslaved"/"be exploited" is by no means a "choice". And, therefore, "being enslaved"/"being exploited" is by no means "voluntarily".
Bingo.
In next series I will describe you the trap of your "parents" statement.
Stay with us, don't switch your channel (c).
Good.
So, let me reiterate what we came in agreement with so far.
In order to not die from hunger any person whatsoever has only two real options:
1) Work for someone else (at least for some initial time).
2) Rely on parents.
So far we are in agreement.
And here is the catch on how you use "voluntarily" word.
The option to "rely on parents" is by no means related to person itself. The reason? He/she didn't choose parents, so this is absolutely nothing "voluntarily" in relying on parents. They can be rich, the can be poor, they can be totally absent - whatever they are (or not are), this reliance (or absence or any reliance) is not "voluntarily" for the person.
Digest this for a moment.
And now - the final part.
Since the only "voluntarily" option left is to work for someone else, it stops being "voluntarily". Simple as that. We came full circle here to my original statement:
The "choice" between "die" and "be enslaved"/"be exploited" is by no means a "choice". And, therefore, "being enslaved"/"being exploited" is by no means "voluntarily".
Bingo.
In next series I will describe you the trap of your "parents" statement.
Stay with us, don't switch your channel (c).
Firstly, voluntarily means nobody is forcing you. Your own predicament is a problem between you and your parents.
Secondly, working for other people is not being exploited. The only way you would work for other people is you think the money you receive is worth more than any other options.
Read and read again until it sinks in.
Last edited by lifeexplorer; 12-29-2020 at 06:36 PM..
Status:
"Do not pass GO, do not collect $300 (used to be $200)"
(set 10 days ago)
Location: TN
600 posts, read 274,235 times
Reputation: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by J746NEW
There was a CitiGroup Memo put out many years ago to a select group of very wealthy clients. It was leaked to the internet and pissed off a lot of people.
It basically spelled out the current world structure.
Pretty interesting; it aligns with some conclusions I've reached over the years.
More generally, I doubt there's any logic argument that will convince people to give up a substantial part of their net worth. Those at bottom would do well to either quit trying, or perhaps buy pitchforks instead; I dunno.
Firstly, voluntarily means nobody is forcing you. Your own predicament is a problem between you and your parents.
Secondly, working for other people is not being exploited. The only way you would work for other people is you think the money you receive is worth more than any other options.
Read and read again until it sinks in.
Seems like we are back at square one.
If I put a gun to your head and say - "give me your money or die", your "choice" - in your terminology - is voluntarily. I'm not forcing you to choose one over another. You are absolutely free to choose out of those two options.
Pretty interesting; it aligns with some conclusions I've reached over the years.
More generally, I doubt there's any logic argument that will convince people to give up a substantial part of their net worth. Those at bottom would do well to either quit trying, or perhaps buy pitchforks instead; I dunno.
I think the best defense we have against the corrupt Oligarch in this country is to expose them in every action they take.
The apologists which you can spot a mile away try and twist and change the narrative to those against them wanting their money.
No, what we want is their influence and power out of our government.
This needs to be repeated over and over and over again to break the apologists narrative.
Here are more cases of corruption by the wealthy Oligarch.
4 Former ComEd Executives, Lobbyists Indicted In Bribery Scandal; Accused Of Trying To Curry House Speaker Michael Madigan’s Favor.
Former Republican House Speaker Larry Householder and four others are charged with racketeering for their roles in the alleged scheme, under a law federal prosecutors typically use to charge gang members.
GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy charged in bid to lobby Trump administration to drop 1MDB case.
I have never come across any poor people bribing or paying politicians but have come across thousands of cases of the wealthy doing.
Seems like we are back at square one.
If I put a gun to your head and say - "give me your money or die", your "choice" - in your terminology - is voluntarily. I'm not forcing you to choose one over another. You are absolutely free to choose out of those two options.
Read and read again until it sinks in.
Kanoka, I learned a long time ago it is a waste of time to discuss anything with Life Explorer because it will take you for a ride through spin and deflection until you end up where you started.
Life Explorer has no values or principles that are permanent.
I got into a discussion about the diamond mines using slaves and child labor and those products being sold here.
It said that it had no concern for the welfare nor force used against those people so, so standing up for freedom went out the door. The main thing is to protect those making money from the arrangement and that is all it cared about.
I spent years working for the man. He told me what to do and I got paid for doing it. Our arrangement was mutually beneficial. I never wanted the risk or the headache of being the owner.
Along the way I picked up a pension for my loyalty. I lived within my means and got the house paid off. The system worked fine for me. I'm not sure why we have to dismantle something because it doesn't work for a few people.
I say make it easier for more people to become business owners. Those are the folks that employ the rest of us. They should be held up not torn down. I don't want to take from the people that risk everything because a lot of them were poorer than me when they started.
I spent years working for the man. He told me what to do and I got paid for doing it. Our arrangement was mutually beneficial. I never wanted the risk or the headache of being the owner.
Along the way I picked up a pension for my loyalty. I lived within my means and got the house paid off. The system worked fine for me. I'm not sure why we have to dismantle something because it doesn't work for a few people.
I say make it easier for more people to become business owners. Those are the folks that employ the rest of us. They should be held up not torn down. I don't want to take from the people that risk everything because a lot of them were poorer than me when they started.
Just noticed facebook is spewing some ads like “ what apple is doing is bad for smallbusinesses” . What apple did was to give an option yo users not to see personalised ads.
Because its apple they can fight these type if propaganda. What will tom dick or harry do if they are up against such competion andlobbying? ( especially the jewish lobby in tech)
Kanoka, I learned a long time ago it is a waste of time to discuss anything with Life Explorer because it will take you for a ride through spin and deflection until you end up where you started.
Life Explorer has no values or principles that are permanent.
I got into a discussion about the diamond mines using slaves and child labor and those products being sold here.
It said that it had no concern for the welfare nor force used against those people so, so standing up for freedom went out the door. The main thing is to protect those making money from the arrangement and that is all it cared about.
May be shes pissed that the american welfare state demands more from people unlike the canadian welfare state and nothing is free here.
65% of western Europe is in support of socialism, and they seem to be doing much better than Americans when it comes to quality of life...
That's because they tax regressively, unlike the US, and therefore have adequate tax revenues to fund their social program goodies. The US taxes progressively, which yields a way too narrow tax base... Only 55% of all US 1040 filers are paying any Federal Income Tax at all. 45% of all US 1040 filers pay no Federal income tax. 27% of all US 1040 filers also pay no payroll taxes, either, due to refundable tax credits available only to the poor and middle class offsetting anything they pay in payroll tax.
Read and learn. Be sure to read the scatter plot chart and understand what it is telling us. There IS a distinct pattern: The progressivity of countries' tax codes is negatively correlated with the amount of redistribution they do via social program benefits.
There's even a link to the research on which the Washington Post article is based. It includes numerous additional citations.
Many Americans want... want... want... but FAIL to recognize and accept the need to actually PAY for what they want. They always want someone else to pay. The European countries prove it doesn't work that way.
Why don't we just tax regressively like European countries?
Last edited by InformedConsent; 12-30-2020 at 06:45 AM..
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.
