Ultra-rich man's letter: "To My Fellow Filthy Rich Americans: The Pitchforks Are Coming"

originally posted by: Chiftel

I say no half-measures. Take it all.

I agree.
Take it all.
Then stake it through the heart. Then burn it to make sure it doesn't infect anyone else.
Paper collecting. A horrible disease.

originally posted by: Chiftel

originally posted by: fartsmeller46
It`s true that the ultra rich feel untouchable and they don`t fear any sort of peasant uprising against themselves because the scyops in govt. are steering ideologically opposed groups like the far left and far right against each other,making each side look bat # crazy to the other side.If all goes to plan the rich will still get there reset due to a catastrophic collapse of society but unlike incidents of the past like the French revolution where the royalty and the rich were the vermin being killed and fought against in order to achieve freedom,this time the collapse will be caused by the all out civil war between the liberals and conservatives.The uber rich will just tuck away till it`s over and then proceed to lay the groundwork on how they will # over the next manifestation of civilization.
The super rich look at us as disposable and something to use for there own wants and needs.They payed off congress and the potus to pass NAFTA and CAFTA,which has completely destroyed American industry,and now even though unemployment is 4% in Mexico the hoards of illegals are streaming across the border taking most remaining jobs away from Americans or planting there fat asses on the couch collecting benefits that they have no right to.Congress wants amnesty because there overlords want cheap labor and they continue to lobby for it despite overwhelming disapproval for amnesty by the public.They figure if they have enough money for campaigning they can just bombard there constituents with misleading attacks on there opponents or simply lie to them about there intentions and that will be enough to sway the stupid masses into re-electing them,and unfortunately in a lot of cases it an accurate assessment. (Thad Cochran anybody?)

Bull#.

The right has always been for the interests of the rich and ultra rich to the detriment of everyone else's and nothing else.

Always.

Against humanity, against the well being of the many, the poor, the weak, the frail, the downtrodden, the environment, the commons (if, when and is as much as the right countenance to tolerate there being such a thing as commons).

Always for those who own against those who (actually) work or neither can work or find work, nor own anything worth mentioning.

Always.

You are either knowingly perpetuating propaganda that the left and the right are the same or ... you actually believe what you're saying.

Which is tragic and a testament to the sophistication and effectiveness of the right's propaganda.

That so many people buy it.

Perhaps you all secretly believe and hope you'll be one of the rich some day as well, if only you root for them long and hard enough. So that is why you disown and betray your own class's interests.

Well, you aren't.

The longer capitalism goes on the greater the divide in wealth and power of the few and the money and the smaller percentage of the population that aren't poor.

And you perpetuate the myth of the left that conservatives are all racist and rich with no regard for the downtrodden.This is of course left wing propaganda and it is a sweeping generalization of the many based on a few.This sort of generalization is wrong when used against any group not just when it fits your point of view.I am conservative and have worked a blue collar job for 25 years.It has more to do with maintaining a moral standard in society and giving a man a hand up rather than a hand out.If a man does well in life through hard work and dedication then that man should be admired not crucified.I believe in people and i think most can rise to the occasion and make a living if they work hard and forget the poor pitiful me thought process.
If you think for a minute that ultra rich crooked bankers and CEO`s who steal and embezzle to the detriment of society are all republicans then you need to get out of the vacuum you live in and learn some facts.Many of the top billionaire crooks in this country are democrats and it has nothing to do with party lines and everything to do with greed.

Have to admit if I saw 50% of the 99% rising up with pitchforks that I would probably join them in the effort if for no other reason that self preservation. Its what our founders did after all, so it cant be considered anti American to do it.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

I totally empathise with your statement, although I think it may have come to mind because you have not read the whole article, or indeed comprehended it, since surely, you might have had more to say if you had.

Firstly, the author of the article is a Seattle based businessman, which means that people who work for him in Seattle already get paid one of the highest minimum wage packets in the USA, so you could say that he has already put his money where his mouth is, and you can see that if he has time to be writing articles for news media publications, he probably has not suffered any ill effects from that.

He is merely urging others who find themselves in a financial position similar to his own, to back measures that he is ALREADY involved in, to address the imbalance between the richest and the poorest, and it has to be said, measures which appear to work in places where they have been tested, and are the only alternative being offered to continuing as normal until such time as things go to hell.

Frankly, this gentleman is the sort of person that I would want to work for if I lived in the US, because he recognises that his success, is dependant on the ability of those who work for him, to be consumers as well as workers, that having a poor workforce stagnates economies, rather than enlivening them, and he recognises the importance of having workers who actually get to live, rather than survive.

He is thinking about this the right way, and he should be supported in that, because he, and people thinking along these lines, are the only ones who have learned the lessons of history with regard to the issues playing into the stability of nations and their economies.

originally posted by: fartsmeller46
And you perpetuate the myth of the left that conservatives are all racist and rich with no regard for the downtrodden.This is of course left wing propaganda and it is a sweeping generalization of the many based on a few.This sort of generalization is wrong when used against any group not just when it fits your point of view.I am conservative and have worked a blue collar job for 25 years.It has more to do with maintaining a moral standard in society and giving a man a hand up rather than a hand out.If a man does well in life through hard work and dedication then that man should be admired not crucified.I believe in people and i think most can rise to the occasion and make a living if they work hard and forget the poor pitiful me thought process.
If you think for a minute that ultra rich crooked bankers and CEO`s who steal and embezzle to the detriment of society are all republicans then you need to get out of the vacuum you live in and learn some facts.Many of the top billionaire crooks in this country are democrats and it has nothing to do with party lines and everything to do with greed.

Sorry but your reply is simply a diatribe of right wing platitudes and falsehoods.

No one gets right through their hard work alone.

There is no way you can become rich without appropriating other people's labour or the fruits thereof.

It's as simple as that.

You see, the rich man didn't design or built the cars he owns, the mansions he owns, the yachts he owns.

He doesn't work in his factories.

He didn't build his factories.

You think you can become rich through hard work?!

Tell that to the working poor. Tell that to the homeless who became such through no fault other than themselves or someone in their family falling ill.

Wow. There really is a fundamental disconnect here.

What I do not understand, is what kind of world do they want their families to live in? I guess it is possible to love money more then the safety of your family and their future. Maybe they think they can keep putting their families in gated communities and such, but how is that living Free?

a reply to: Chiftel

What does any of what you have just said, or indeed what fartsmeller46 just said, directly have to do with the issue at hand?

The issue at hand is that a filthy rich man, wants workers to be paid a living wage, and offers damned good reasons to people who occupy the same social and economic strata as himself, why they ought to want that too!

It does not mean that right and left are all alike, but it does mean that they are not as important as coming together for common cause, that being to stabilise the economy of the United States in a way which allows growth AND brings people to a point where they can be part of that growth, no matter what end of the process of business, they happen to be involved in, is more important than red and blue divides. It is a measure which makes work profitable and that is to be commended.

It is not the return of an old system, it is the entrance of a NEW one. It is not the decimation of greed, it is the realization that it is better satiated through other means.

It is the focused pursuit of real world value rather than fiat money and "bank account measuring contests." The former leads to a greater quality of life for everyone and yet still maintains the idea that when you work hard, you are rewarded even further. The measuring contests are, simply put, unsustainable.

There are different and better ways to run a society, period. The only thing holding us back is ourselves. Its not JUST the rich, not JUST the poor. Its all of us, and how we go about achieving a greater quality of life for our own.

Things only appear to be a paradox when our understanding is limited enough to paint such a picture.

here's a better idea. for every dollar the employer pays his employees above minimum wage, the employer gets more in tax write offs. however for that to work, the laws that allow the super rich to pay no taxes at all, have to be removed. that's the fly in the ointment.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Chiftel

What does any of what you have just said, or indeed what fartsmeller46 just said, directly have to do with the issue at hand?

The issue at hand is that a filthy rich man, wants workers to be paid a living wage, and offers damned good reasons to people who occupy the same social and economic strata as himself, why they ought to want that too!

It does not mean that right and left are all alike, but it does mean that they are not as important as coming together for common cause, that being to stabilise the economy of the United States in a way which allows growth AND brings people to a point where they can be part of that growth, no matter what end of the process of business, they happen to be involved in, is more important than red and blue divides. It is a measure which makes work profitable and that is to be commended.

Alright, so after that lovely, fabulous little pep talk about how the left vs. right divide is not real or the left and the right can supposedly come together to do what's right and what not, answer me this.

Can you find me one Republican / Conservative / Tea Partier in favour of this rich dude's proposal?

That is to say, a $15/hr federal minimum wage?

originally posted by: undo
here's a better idea. for every dollar the employer pays his employees above minimum wage, the employer gets more in tax write offs. however for that to work, the laws that allow the super rich to pay no taxes at all, have to be removed. that's the fly in the ointment.

Why?

That's basically the government DIRECTLY subsidizing the employer. They already indirectly subsidize the employer. You want to make it bold-faced official like.

What? Why should government subsidize private employers? Are you actually openly advocating fascism now?

Why not just pay unemployment assistance for that money? Or employ the people itself and # the employers?

And, pray tell, where is the money going to come from for the tax rebates for the employers?

Will you allow the government to conjure it up out of thin air, like the banking system did with every dolar, euro, pound, yuan etc. ever issued / that is currently in existence?

Hell, no!

Oh, I know! We can't have government doing what the private sector has been doing for centuries (conjure up money out of thin air).

Hint: the central bank is not the government or else the government would NOT need to borrow the money at interest and only through the intermediation of another private bank; all banks are by definition private as the government printing the money would not need to pay it back to itself with interest: duh...

You don't see money counterfeiters loaning themselves at interest their own counterfeit monies, do you?

Are you going to let the government borrow the money from the legal fraudsters and counterfeiters (the banking system in its entirety, not just the central bank) ?!

Hell, no!

Because you actually give a # about the debt, as if it's something real, that actually ever existed and that's really owed by the borrower to the lender, who actually had it when he loaned it and didn't just loan make believe into existence and everyone has to consider that make believe real.

As if the government couldn't at absolutely any moment in time, if it wanted to, pay down the debt entirely with a symbolic trillion dollar coin or something.

As if the debt will not be continuously paid off as we go, even under the current system, as the money supply grows.

Hint: the new money is created out of debt. So debt will always rise in tandem with the money supply, albeit somewhat faster. But as long as the debt, at maturity, never catches up the money supply, it's all good.

I don't know why I bother, really.

I think many if the .01 percenters count on it becoming a police state over a revolution. If people don't fight for there constitutional rights, then the fighting back will be lead by nothing more than pitchforks, which would be hopeless. I personally find nothing wrong with the entrepreneurs that came up with the latest thing that it just so happens, everybody wants. It's the people that have this country by the balls. The ones that own the government, and just about everything important that happens in this world. Most attendees to Bilderberg come to mind.

a reply to: Chiftel

Have you read the article?

Examples are in there if you are prepared to find them, and the examples are surprising on one level, although not perhaps, on others.

The difficulties presented by a requirement for right and left to work together, are not going to become any less of a problem if people are unprepared to even read an article fully before forming an opinion.

ETA

I will even help you out here... Last page of the article, top of the page.

a reply to: Chiftel

Can you find me one Republican / Conservative / Tea Partier in favour of this rich dude's proposal?

Yep.
Ron Unz. And HE named several more: Romney, Santorum, and Pawlenty...

On Friday, several top national Republicans including Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Tim Pawlenty all publicly declared their support for raising the federal minimum wage. Such a dramatic political breakthrough—obviously coordinated at the highest levels—greatly increases the likelihood it will actually happen, and tens of millions of low-wage American workers will see a large rise in their annual incomes.

When I first published my 12,000 word article almost three years suggesting a large hike in the minimum wage as a possible solution to a wide range of our social and economic problems, I stood very much alone.

I can’t think of a single significant Republican or conservative who publicly supported a higher minimum wage at that point.

and here's another article about it:
Split Appears in GOP as More Call for Raising Federal Minimum Wage

Several leading Republicans have called for raising the federal minimum wage and others are speaking more forcefully about the party’s failure to connect with low-income Americans — stances that are causing a growing rift within the party over how best to address the gulf between the rich and poor.

Both are from May, the second week in May.

Hanauer makes a PERFECT point - one that can honestly be said to be: "Better late than never."

He is absolutely correct, and I applaud him.

********************************

Also, to whomever on page 1 said he was "born into money" - no, he was not.
He was fortunate enough to be a friend of the guy who started up amazon back in the early 90s. At the time he was selling feathers and pillows to department stores, and he started to realize that those stores would go under if the workers couldn't afford to shop there. And he was right.

Sheesh, I wish people would READ articles like these rather than just drive-by ranting parroted vitriol.

I wrote a thread in April about the very issue:
The Terrible Fear of Paying the Poor Too Much

************************

Read up, people, and get with the freaking program already!




S/F to the OP!

He only speaks the truth.
Anyone with even the slightest inclination into the monetary policies of this society and the US in particular , would know that he only speaks the truth.

In a perfect world we would take from the world only what we needed.
But this is far from a perfect world.
we have people who in essence gained the world and are ever wanting more. 99% is in essence the "World".
And the world will keep on giving so long as we all have something to give.
Once they own everything, And trust me on this. Because 99% as stated above means they already do. They will want even our nothingness.
Prehapes then but probably not. We will all realize that enough is enough and break out the pitchforks.
And I do mean pitchforks because long long before anything like that happens they will come for our guns
and we would be lucky to get pitchforks....they would probably make a decree outlawing sharp pitchforks.

Revolution? gonna have another tea party?
This society has grown too soft too dependent on its own technology to ever even dream of something like that. We start to get uppety and they shut off the power. Then we will cry and cry because we all just cannot live without our Ipods and our galaxies. We care more about the stuff we create in the virtual digital society to ever care about the actual reality we live and breath in. And many don't even know how to grow something to eat for themselves let alone do it to feed a family or a community.

Say the entire population of Chicago decided to uprise and break away the chains. all 2.7 million of them uprise.The government isolates the city and decides to turn out the lights. The food runs out within days and now there are 2.7 million hunger angry revolutionaries. They storm the gates and bumrush the wilderness looking for food not unlike your typical zombie apocalypse. Except with more Cursing. now take that 2.7 million and multiply it till you reach 350-400 million(official pop. is 317m.) are you starting to see the bigger picture? We are too soft and compliant. Too docile and too dependent. Too passive aggressive as a whole to ever do anything about it.

a reply to: pheonix358

The slothful are the ones who won't work because they can't see a reason to support the society while it provides for them with massive handouts. These two groups when combined will bring society to its knees.

The "slothful" ones are primarily moms or single parents with children, or handicapped and a large percentage (at least prior to all the immigration and collapsing economies) of homeless was the mentally ill.

But there is another attitude, found often in grass roots people and natives, that I am 100000000000000.....% supportive of, to infinity and beyond, that is: you don't work as a cog for satan, you don't give into a system of such evil and inequality. If you work, work for yourself.

I truly believe this is inconsequential. Think about it for a moment.

There's over 7.2 billion people in this world (www.worldometers.info...) and it's growing every second.

They all need food and water and a way to provide this for their families and themselves (I am in there too). We all need energy for the trucks, planes and rail that deliver this food to us. If that stopped, our world would literally change in 3 days. That's when the food runs out.

At current consumption, we have 53 years of oil left (www.usatoday.com...).

An excellent blog that explains far better than I could with data states:
that the use of fossil fuels since 1820 has allowed GDP to rise faster than population, for pretty much the first time. Prior to 1820, the vast majority of world GDP growth was absorbed by population growth.

If we compare the later time periods to the earlier ones, Figure 11 shows a pattern of increasing growth rates for both population and GDP. We know that in the 1000 to 1500 and 1500 to 1820 time periods, early energy sources (peat moss, water power, wind power, animal labor) became more widespread. These changes no doubt contributed to the rising growth rates. The biggest change, however, came with the addition of fossil fuels, in the period after 1820.

Looking back, the question seems to become: How many people can the world support, at what standard of living, with a given quantity of fuel? If our per capita energy consumption drops to the level it was in 1905, can we realistically expect to have robust international trade, and will other systems hold together? While it is easy to make estimates that make the transition sound easy, when a person looks at the historical data, making the transition to using less fuel looks quite difficult, even in a best-case scenario. One thing is clear: It is very difficult to keep up with rising world population.

ourfiniteworld.com...

So, my point is that the wealth distribution world wide won't matter much for anyone's family, rich or poor in a generation or two. We are all in that boat and it's about to capsize.

Now, with that perspective, what would you do if you were part of the 1% or say the 0.01%. Read the Georgia Guidestones again and see what's coming. There's a few ways to correct an inequality. One would be to make both terms equal (share the wealth). But that won't happen. Human nature will make sure of that. Or eliminate one of the terms. This seems to be mankind's preferred method for survival.

How would this happen? Or could it even happen? Honeastly I don't know for sure. But I wouldn't be surprised. Remember this from 2009?

Czech newspapers are questioning if the shocking discovery of vaccines contaminated with the deadly avian flu virus which were distributed to 18 countries by the American company Baxter were part of a conspiracy to provoke a pandemic.

www.prisonplanet.com...

This would be one way.

So, there won't be any pitchforks in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd world countries, there will be "manageable populations"

a reply to: PainGod

i keep thinking we need some creative individuals to come up with a portable vertical hydroponic farm unit, that's super easy to put together, super cheap and easy to grow food in, even if you don't have a green thumb. then at the community level, encourage people with free time to donate their time to assemble these units and distribute them to any and all who are interested in sustaining themselves and their families in the event the system topples over, with easy instructions to follow.

we are not making preparations as a society, only as individuals, and that won't work, as those who were not made privy or who couldn't afford to prepare are just gonna come take the individual's stockpile, anyway.

this needs to be a community effort. people need to get over their prejudices and work together for everyone's survival. this would also work in places where the culture is suffering from poor economies.

a reply to: Chiftel

that is my husband's idea. he's writing a clarification of it, because he said, i didn't explain it right. lol in the meantime, stay tuned for his explanation.

a reply to: undo

Such systems, along with a plethora of others, are already in the works.

Distribution is tricky, not necessarily the design/manufacturing.