Economic serfdom?

Recently reading an Op/ED piece here (ATS) by Kano I was taken by the fact that what he was trying to get people to see is exactly what people do not want to lend credence to- a me versus them (he called it black-white, binary thinking).

I believe there is a cultural conspiracy at hand in America and perhaps much of the western world that marginalizes poor or less than successful people. In New Orleans (USA) during the mid-80s the oil industry broke up. This resulted in more than 20,000 immediate unemployed people. 20,200 is a goodly number of people. Most of these people had above average incomes previously, some had superb incomes and now all were unemployed.

Claims of laziness and lack of self-worth were thrown around. Sometimes those throwing the claims joined the ranks of the newly unemployed. I remember a multi-millionaire investor all too well. He was worth close to $30 million at the time of the crash. Loudly, and in the press, he bashed those without jobs or with low paying jobs. Within one year he was bankrupt and hiding from creditors.

Not too many years back many hi-tech job holders working for Nortel were braggadocius regarding the economic worth of �others.� After the massive Nortel lay-offs these folks stood in the same line for unemployment as anyone else. From the Enron accountant that now is not only unemployed but is lucky to get a job flipping burgers to the aerospace engineers suddenly without a profession when space flight was cut, economic disruption can hit anyone.

I could give hundreds of real life examples of the slip from the top but this doesn't address the conspiracy.

What I claim is this: there is an economic push by banking to shame those without material possessions. By doing this under many guises people tend to acquire debt beyond their means. The goal is to increase the debt load.

Who is worse off? The person without a new car or the person with the new car that is struggling to pay for it?

*As a side note: the ex-head accountant for a large oil firm in New Orleans was interviewed at that time. He lived under a bridge.

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

What I claim is this: there is an economic push by banking to shame those without material possessions. By doing this under many guises people tend to acquire debt beyond their means. The goal is to increase the debt load.

Interesting read Joe. ...My take - private debt provides banks with 'bread-and-butter' income. Credit has definitely been pushed in the last decade - despite the fact that banks get actuarial reports and KNEW a) jobs would disappear, and b) epidemic chronic diseases were striking Americans down at younger ages (and disappearing their incomes).

The credit load ensures that people keep supporting the banks, even after they have no income or way to generate one. Clever set up.



.

HOw can they collect money from someone who has no income, or can't work any longer, or well, to be quite frank, alot of us could probably paying until the day we die at the ripe old age of 99 and still not have paid it all back. They can't.

If they're lucky, the assests that the person has accumulated is worth at least enough to pay off his debts.

It's just as likely that the person will default and well, then cars, homes and whatever else, will be reposessed and hopefully sold off for the amount owed, or more. If there were a major economic upheaval, and a large percentage of the population were unable to meet their obligations, wouldn't the banks end up owing alot of property? For some, they would gain, since the people had paid down their mortgages and well, the amount they owed would be far less than what if was worth, in others they would lose.
By the way the banking system is operating, I think in the end, they think they will be big winners!!

most rich people are evil
they use charitys and stuff to "show they are nice"
its just a lie tho
they lie to get more $

i dislike them very much
rich people are less deserving than poor people

poor people deserve more than rich people

Originally posted by muzzleflash
most rich people are evil
they use charitys and stuff to "show they are nice"
its just a lie tho
they lie to get more $

i dislike them very much
rich people are less deserving than poor people

poor people deserve more than rich people

I really hope you were being sarcastic.
If not I feel very sorry for you.

National sales tax in America
A Nixon era try that died on the vine will most likely be enacted. Much like the VAT (value added tax) of Europe this silent tax will transfer more funds than the income tax ever could.

Lower income people and retired and fixed income folks will be hit hardest as a percentage of income. An income tax of sorts must remain so that deferrals and (as pointed out above) charitable contributions can be maintained.

Federal taxes exist on gasoline and many other goods at the present. By moving the tax apparatus into more goods an appearance of streamlining the tax system will easily obscure these movements.

And then it will be like in Europe. Taxes always increase. Taxes never die. They just change name. By assuming fixed expenses, the government will impose a situation where there can be no repealing of taxes because everyone tacitly admits that without the taxes there would be a "big problem". Usually this is why in Europe there's revolutions and civil wars from time to time (less so lately because the people are well fed). In the long run, this kind of stupid political system is no better than anarchy.