It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why You Will Soon Be Living In Poverty

page: 8
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:09 AM

Originally posted by mnemeth1
That's probably because they didn't teach you to read very well in public school.

Or maybe it's because capitalism is inherently coercive and thus can not be a form of anarchism.

We have child labor laws now because of intervention and I happen to think that's a good thing...

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:11 AM

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:18 AM
reply to post by NoHierarchy

My only critique of that is that anarchism is anti-State. The State is authoritarian. Capitalism is Authoritarian. Therefore, anarchism is anti-capitalist.

Other wise, that was a good read!

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:29 AM
reply to post by mnemeth1

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by JohnJasper

I don't think I'm being naive.

I pointing out that the looting can not occur without government's involvement.

I can see that you believe this to be true but I'm not convinced that either history or common sense supports your point of view. In a monarchy, the government exists to manage the country's affairs internally and externally on behalf of the royalty. In a true democracy, the government would exist to do the same job on behalf of the population. But in almost all countries of the world today, the governments exist to manage the country's affairs on behalf of a corporate elite. Wherever the system get's out of balance and the head political figure starts working against the elite, they very quickly lose their head, figuratively or otherwise.

Take Zelaya in Honduras, Aristide in Haiti, and the short-lived coup in Venezuala against Chavez for recent examples. A maybe not-so-obvious example is Obama in the USA. Despite campaigning on a very specific "Change" agenda, as soon as he was in office, he started doing everything in his power to further the corporate elite's agenda both at home and abroad. The 'coup' was probably more against the American people but there's always the possibility that Obama had good intentions until someone showed him the writing on the wall.

Not surprisingly, Ahmadinejad in Iran is known for being disliked by that countries corporate elite so it's not really surprising that we hear the war drums beating in that direction.

History shows us that government interference is a result of the corporatist (aka capitalist) system and not a cause of it. I've never spent anytime studying Fascism so thank you for the introduction to Mussolini's work. If he's right, then Fascism would appear to recognise the problems of corporatism and instead of fighting it as the Socialist would, they just nationalise it. Clever but apparently no more successful than the Soviet Union's attempt at state capitalism.

You seem to be in a state of denial, yourself. I'd love to see your references to support these two comments.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by PriamsPride

Greenbacks almost destroyed this country once...

When people are allowed to chose currencies without anyone putting a gun to their head, they consistently chose gold...

I suggest that you've been sold the "Gold Standard" myth and will defend it till you're blue in the face. It's easy to understand as we've been fed this idea for decades.

Why not take some well-deserved time out and watch Renaissance 2.0 by Damon Vrabel which includes discussion on sovereign money. Then revisit this discussion with more robust arguments either for or against. I'll be interested to see what your inquiring mind makes of Vrabel's viewpoint.

Working together for a (better) future!

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 07:54 AM

Originally posted by 2weird2live2rare2die
we have too many fat, stupid, and lazy people in the world and from a biological viewpoint they don't really deserve to live.

I kind of agree with your post on a whole, but my caring nature refuses to let me relish the thought of my fat, lazy, stupid nephew being eliminated by a biologically natural process. He is a product of his society and his parents' attitudes. For example when he was a child, they overfed him and when he refused to eat they made him eat more and more. I really never understood it, and they wouldn't listen when we said they shouldn't do that. They also never made him do anything. Ever. He is 14 and has never learned any good work ethic. Left to himself I don't know how he will do. I feel bad for him. But again, I hate the thought of him suffering for all this.
I forgot to mention, he is the sweetest, nicest kid you could meet. He is forgiving and helpful if you ask him to do something (to the best of his ability). He has an amazingly creative and imaginative mind and is a pleasure to be around. So I do NOT see why he would deserve to die.

edit on 24-9-2010 by Ellie Sagan because: forgot something

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 12:14 PM

Originally posted by randyvs
Man what you just said with your heading. It's pretty much like, what are talking about soon for? I'm fricken there !
Totally screwed with the walls closing in. I'm not even one to complain but I'm waiting for charter to shut us off as we speak.

Then get off the computer and get a job. .

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 12:32 PM
reply to post by mnemeth1

I don't know if this book has been brought up but it seems to pertain to the subject,

White House Tries to Discredit FORBES Over Obama Cover Story

The Obama war room kicked into high gear after Forbes published a cover story by D’Souza, outlining why Obama is bad for business. The article includes some highlights from the new book, including D’Souza’s take that to understand how Obama thinks, one must first understand Obama’s philosophical roots. D’Souza asserts Obama’s philosophical roots aren’t racial, and they’re not socialist in the traditional sense, but anti-colonialist--a philosophy that demands weak countries be strengthened at the expense of the strong. D’Souza points out this philosophy was strongly asserted by Obama’s Harvard-educated, Kenyan father in papers and articles he authored.

I think he is all of the above but it is not just Obama it goes much deeper,

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 12:53 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Obama is not anti-colonialist, he's not socialist, he is fascist.

Some minority junior state senator doesn't rise up to become President of the United States without some very powerful people helping to put him there.

He was bought and paid for by Goldman Sachs and the banking industry. He was also aided heavily by the oil companies and unionized labor.

The guy sold himself to the highest bidders.

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 02:20 PM
Quite simply the problem is that the world is like a big game of Monopoly. There's only so many properties and resources. Long ago there was a big grab and all has been claimed. What is needed, unless the owners share, is a reset button. That button is in danger of being pressed because the other billions of people on this planet are tired of having to pay no matter where they land in the game. They're ready to flip the table over!

This will happen unless technology enables people to really have a chance at that dream everyone has. Everything else is pretty much tied into a monopoly. Every now and again someone comes up with a idea that allows that 1:1000000000 person to become rich.

For most of us, we simply have to realize that what's happening is desired. America is that guy in your neighborhood who was the popular one during school but is still wearing that same 70's outfit and is wondering why everyone is laughing at him, when he used to be so cool.

America's time has come! We're so used to being the top and the stat quo, we don't realize that it's about more than America now. We live in a global community and can't compete. We're that guy who is used to making a 6 figure salary but everyones salary has been cut to 25K. He's going crazy wondering why he can't afford the things he once could and can't figure how to adjust. That's us. Gone are the days of an abundance of 6 figure salaries. Or even salaries over 40k per year. Reason is that with the world being global, jobs that were paying that figured it is easier on the wallet to just outsource the jobs to a country where someone will work for 1/4 of what a American will.

And that ladies and gentlemen is CAPITALISM. It has no friends or dedication. It's only dedication is to make a profit. So we may as well get readjusted to working for peanuts unless the working wage is raised EVERYWHERE.

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:31 PM
reply to post by NoHierarchy

"If we let the homeless find their own places of refuge and helped them habilitate those place (instead of rousting them wherever they settle), if we channeled to them the vast amounts of food that are discarded routinely every day (instead of forcing them to grovel for food at shelters), if we actively assisted them to support themselves on their own terms (instead of ours), just think--homelessness would largely cease to exist as "a problem."" -Daniel Quinn, Beyond Civilization

mankind civilization has had limited resources, thus to get real solution of povetry is just among fairy tales. however, insane waste of current possibilities leads humans to too vigorous method -- no humans==no the homeless

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 06:55 PM

Originally posted by SarK0Y
reply to post by NoHierarchy

"If we let the homeless find their own places of refuge and helped them habilitate those place (instead of rousting them wherever they settle), if we channeled to them the vast amounts of food that are discarded routinely every day (instead of forcing them to grovel for food at shelters), if we actively assisted them to support themselves on their own terms (instead of ours), just think--homelessness would largely cease to exist as "a problem."" -Daniel Quinn, Beyond Civilization

mankind civilization has had limited resources, thus to get real solution of povetry is just among fairy tales. however, insane waste of current possibilities leads humans to too vigorous method -- no humans==no the homeless

The point is, we should AT LEAST stop harassing and chasing away the homeless simply because they don't have a place to live. If we provide room for them to live the way they want, there will be less problems. In many places it is more or less illegal to be homeless, the laws create a de-facto ban of the homeless so they get chased away by cops in their own towns/cities. If this is truly the land of the free and public places are truly public then chasing the homeless away is absolutely counter to those notions.

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 07:13 PM

Originally posted by Ex_MislTech

Originally posted by die_another_day
I think the new generation of Westerners need to experience this "poverty" so that they will learn their lesson.

China learned theirs.

Poverty is the result of bad management.

Wishing an ill fate on anyone is malice, evil, and all of this has been
engineered by design.

China's poverty was a result of bad management, if you look to their past they were
an amazing empire long before the British one tried to enslave the entire planet.

Now thru fractional reserve banking, the banksters, and maritime law they have
enslaved most of the planet and our puppet politicians are part of it.

I watched that whole video and it's amazing, truly amazing. But what the interviewer didn't ask or the path they didn't go down (maybe there is a longer video or since it's edited he only talked about things to tease people to buy the book) was his boss/company status in the system. Yes we know it was a real company but it had essentially a shadow structure. Was the company getting orders from the govt. to yea or nay this country and then his boss was telling him to push this country into debt? From the conversation he had with his boss firing the old guy that forcasted low for power, it seems that his boss didn't know. Because why bring him in and say the old guys numbers was lower than yours so fire him and tell him to make those hire. The boss would have told the hitman to make those numbers match yours without acting surprised that someone not in the game didn't do what they wanted.

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 07:23 PM
reply to post by NoHierarchy

ehh, my friend, i have Nothing against your point, but de facto, according to Capitalism rules, the homeless are complete, useless losers & no one among fatty wallets will move at least finger to help'em. on the contrary, they do/make anything to extinguish the homeless.

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 07:49 PM

Originally posted by SarK0Y
reply to post by NoHierarchy

ehh, my friend, i have Nothing against your point, but de facto, according to Capitalism rules, the homeless are complete, useless losers & no one among fatty wallets will move at least finger to help'em. on the contrary, they do/make anything to extinguish the homeless.

Well then maybe we should make the the fatty-wallets move their golden finger towards such a cause... or at least force them out of the way for a change.

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 07:51 PM
Reply to post by mnemeth1

It would except most of the laid off people go on E.I. OR become homeless. Just cause theirs robots doing all the work it doesn't mean the people at the top won't want more and more money. It would be like on Tatooine.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 08:01 PM
reply to post by NoHierarchy

Anything has own Time & they cannot to divert'ir Rueful Fate

posted on Sep, 26 2010 @ 06:39 AM

Originally posted by randomname
the easy way = work for somebody, the hard way = work for yourselves. its not capitalism thats the problem, the number one reason you have less money in your pocket is pure and simple, taxes. taxes are the form by which governments control inflation and economic growth. the government can pass laws and tax every single citizen 99% and they will find a way to spend every penny of it. imagine what your paycheck would be like if u deposited every single penny of the money you earned. very little people would be complaining and the economy would grow because you will spend it, you'll be so happy you'll go out for dinner, buy new clothes, drive around more. so the question you have to ask is, does america really need 170 bases around the world, does america really need 95% percent of the crap congress spends your money on? you work 30% for the government 40-60% for your home and 10% for yourselves if you're lucky.

I think taxes are part of it, but they are by no means the single element causing problems.

Consider the subtle issue that all manufacturing in the US has to adhere to EPA, OSHA,
and several other government agencies, but the importers into the US do not.

That is not "free trade" or "fair trade", its BS.

The US should not allow imports from countries that break US laws in the production and
shipment of said goods.

We cannot have fair trade on an uneven playing field.

Child labor and using political dissidents as slave labor is not an option.

Working in the Iphone plant in china is so bad they kill themselves to escape it.

10 so far and counting.

We merely outsourced our pollution and poverty level wage slavery.

We have 73 different Visas here int he US to bring ppl in and they often overstay their
visa and get jobs here and do not return home.

Crossing in from Canada and Mexico is relatively easy as well.

As for the bases around the world it is not 170, it is over 700 bases in over 130 countries.

As of 2004, according to Fox News, the U.S. had more than 700 military bases in 130 different countries.[53]

The Us is the new Rome and like Rome the empire is crumbling under its own weight
of playing policeman of the world.

A job we were never meant to do as indicated by Eisenhower in his farewell address.

We need a military for defense of our country, not the defense of multinational corporate interests.

A former marine corp general alluded to this.

Capitalism has run amok largely due to blind greed, and corruption has been one
of its foremost tools to subvert the government and the will of the ppl.

I honestly think it will take something like non-profits for most aspects of life to get this
country back on track like that of USAA Insurance.

The pay their workers, but nothing extravagant, and offer super low rates to former military
veterans and this could apply to other ppl with a good record and history claims wise.

Basically Co-operatives for Insurance, Health care, Dental, Car care, etc etc, and roll them out
one by one and for the ones that work keep it going, if it is deemed not to work then chart a
new course.

I honestly think it would solve most of our problems organization wise by removing the
government and the corporations from our lives.

The government and corporations have for the most part proven they cannot be trusted
and are pathological liars.

100% open and transparent FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE Co-ops have a much
better chance of working than the smoke and mirrors and forced votes without reading the bills.

Many tasks the government now holds and performs badly could be transitioned into
this model and if run like USAA we would thrive again.

The other big killer of our economy is our massive dependence on foreign oil.

We now know how to grow 100,000 gal/acre/year in the desert via Vertical Hydroponics
and algae and we could start a jobs program like the CCC to scale it out.

We have seen what works and what is corrupt.

Do we really need to keep shipping 100's of billions of dollars a year to nations that hate us ???

We can turn a huge portion of the trade deficit into a trade surplus and totally turn
the energy economy around.

The days of the fudging numbers to make shareholders rich and fleecing the common man
would come to an end in a 100% open and transparent Co-op system.

Again, the government and corporations have proven they cannot be trusted on multiple levels.

posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 01:53 PM
This video here (Quantitative Easing Explained) makes clear how the recent Quantitative Easing of the FED also will increase the poverty of the people.

I wouldn't be surprise if the European Central Bank will do something similar in the near future. The EU countries such as Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain are at the risk to going bankrupt and I suppose only money printing and hyperinflation can help to decrease the debts of EU countries.
edit on 16-11-2010 by Fenrin because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:43 PM

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I’ve noticed the socialist agitators out in full force recently, busy blaming the free market and capitalism for every economic problem under the Sun.

So people that are anti-state are socialist?

First, we need to understand just what capitalism is. Then we need to understand what it is not. Only through this will you be able to understand why the money in your pocket is about to become totally worthless.

We are do not have a real capitalist economy.

To economists, the word capitalism simply means “voluntary exchange of goods and services.” – nothing more and nothing less. To radical socialists, capitalism apparently involves all manner of fraud, theft, and government intervention on behalf of big business.

Government + powerful private interests/Big Business = fascism. The government is stealing from us. The government needs to be removed. Not capitalism.

Because the mass media and socialist academia have so distorted the meaning of the word capitalism, I shall simply use the term “free market” to mean “voluntary exchange of goods and services”, which is really the same as using the term “capitalism”

The mass media is owned by 5-6 Big conglomerates. They are not socialist. They are pro-elite pro-private interests.

“Free market” = “voluntary exchange of goods and services” = “free market capitalism”

we do not have a completely free market. so we are do not have REAL capitalism here in america.

All of those mean the SAME THING.

Free markets do not involve any government intervention at all. As soon as one starts introducing government intervention into the markets, the markets are NO LONGER FREE. Almost all government intervention is done on behalf of large corporate interests. Almost all regulations are created by big business to cartelize markets and drive out competition. When government engages in this kind of behavior, it is called FASCISM.

Yeah... Not socialism.

The term fascism was explicitly first laid out by the WWII Italian dictator Benito Mussolini in his work “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Mussolini‘s vision for Italy involved cartelizing all the trade unions and business into “corporate” divisions. These corporate collectives would then all have a seat at the government table. Mussolini’s vision of the State is almost identical to our current system of governance in America and in most western European nations.

Mussolini writes:

“Granted that the XIXth century was the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy, this does not mean that the XXth century must also be the century of socialism, liberalism, democracy. Political doctrines pass; nations remain. We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the ‘right’, a Fascist century. If the 19th century was the century of the individual (liberalism implies individualism) we are free to believe that this is the ‘collective’ century, and therefore the century of the State.”…

“Fascism is therefore opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle. Fascism is likewise opposed to trade unionism as a class weapon. But when brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State. (p.15)”

Mussolini is saying that he believes society prospers when socialist welfare (including corporate subsidies), trade unions, and corporate interests are harmonized in a system of government. Today we call this system of government “corporatism,” but in reality, there is no real difference between Mussolini’s vision of fascism and corporatism.

Socialism is NOT what he wanted nor do socialists adhere to his authoritarian values. He wanted complete control of society using the government to legitimize it. Thats not socialism thats fascism.

Economist Sheldon Richman writes, “Mussolini also eliminated the ability of business to make independent decisions: the government controlled all prices and wages, and firms in any industry could be forced into a cartel when the majority voted for it. The well-connected heads of big business had a hand in making policy, but most smaller businessmen were effectively turned into state employees contending with corrupt bureaucracies. They acquiesced, hoping that the restrictions would be temporary. Land being fundamental to the nation, the fascist state regimented agriculture even more fully, dictating crops, breaking up farms, and threatening expropriation to enforce its commands.”

“Fascism” = “Corporatism”

Fascism =! Socialism or Anarchy.

One of the most important pieces of the free market that needs to be wiped out and cartelized in this system of fascist policy is the currency and banking interests. Once we see how the banking industry and monetary system is cartelized, we can begin see just how the fall of America occurred and why you are about to be starved to death.

In free market capitalism, money is product of the markets. People will select goods to use as a medium of exchange. In the early days of America’s history, the frontiers men used beaver pelts as money. Money in a free market can range from rare sea shells to gold, but it is always some THING that has intrinsic value and can be easily traded for other goods. Almost always, this role of intermediating trade fell to gold or silver because they were rare, had a high value for their weight, and were easily transferable.

Early on in America’s history, Spanish gold coins were frequently used and accepted as money. No one cared if the coin was minted in Spain, Washington, or anywhere else. The coin had value because it was gold. It could not be reproduced by simply running a printing press.

The point I’m getting at here is that there is no free market in money. And as we will see, there is no free market in banking either. Money today is a product of debt. If there were no debt, there would be no money. This is a fact and it is a fact that should shock you. This “money” in payment of debt is forced upon the public at gun point through something called “legal tender laws” (which all violate the US Constitution by the way.) Legal tender laws simply mean that if a person offers to pay a debt in federal reserve notes, the courts will discharge the debt. No one is allowed to reject the fake federal reserve notes. Nor is anyone allowed to create a currency that competes with the federal reserve notes.

This government enforced monopoly privilege of money creation assures that the fed and the government can debase the currency by printing endless amounts of money, yet the public is still forced to continue using it even as it becomes worthless over time.

Money is debt because of our fraudulent fractional reserve fiat system of currency which is operated by the fed. When new loans are taken out by customers, new money is created. The banks don’t actually have a “reserve” stockpile of money they lend from. Money is simply credited to accounts when new loans are taken out. Thus, the more debt, the more money in the system. The more money in the system, the less value that money will have. This is simple supply and demand at work. As the supply of money goes up, the value of that money goes down.

This endless printing of money is why you will starve.

The government has currently committed to bailing out nearly 30 trillion dollars of bad investments (debt) using public tax dollars.

Government is a parasite. It needs to be removed.

In a non-criminal currency (ie. gold), inflation is caused by banks lending out more money than they have in gold reserves or by an increase in the gold stock. Business cycles are directly related to this fraudulent activity of excessive lending since the act of lending more paper money than the banks actually have in gold reserves artificially reduces interest rates, which leads to “booms” in the cycle.

In our current system, this same principle applies but the artificially low interest rates are a product of the federal reserve setting interest rates through manipulation of the bond market rather than a product of individual banks issuing more paper than gold they have on hand.

These “booms” are when the malinvestment takes place due to excessively “cheap” money (credit) being available. Since money is cheap, investors are willing to take more risk than they otherwise would. The cheap cost of borrowing also sends a signal to investors that there is more capital goods available for future production than actually exists. Producers see the cheap rates and assume people have lots of savings available to spend on future consumption so industry reorganizes itself into the production of long term goods. Only later is it revealed that consumers are broke and the existing capital stock of goods that producers were relying on to finish their projects does not actually exist.

The “bust” is the market trying to correct this excessive lending and return itself to a proper ratio of gold to dollars. The “proper” ratio can be considered a point where all bad debts (malinvestments) have been cleared through defaults and write-downs.

In a totally unregulated system of gold back currency, the normal behavior of the economy is to experience constant DEFLATION. As the economy grows and becomes more productive, the value of the currency will INCREASE over time. A piece of gold will buy more and more goods as productivity increases. We should see constantly DECREASING prices, just as we see in the consumer electronics industry, due to technological innovation, competition, and increased efficiency.

Of course, we don’t have a free market at all today in anything. Massive government regulation over all industries has turned all of the major industries into cartels. Competition is heavily suppressed through regulations and the tax code. It can take weeks to simply get all the proper licenses necessary just to operate a small business, and that is only one tiny fraction of the regulation the business has to deal with once it is running. The entire point of all the regulation is to keep people from starting their own business and competing with the large corporate oligopolies.

Stop buying thier stuff and see what happens.

We must also not forget government contracts. When a business is getting huge subsidies and contracts from the government, it sucks up resources that keep other businesses from competing with it. This further creates a monopoly situation.

All of these regulations, subsidies, government contracts, interest rate manipulations, fake money printing, bailouts, welfare, and limitless “defense” spending have wiped out the economy. Without the fed, government would have to tax before it could spend, such insanely high tax rates would cause a revolt. Without the fed, the banks would have no one there to bail them out or suppress interest rates which increases profits through increased lending.

The federal government, in conjunction with the private commercial banks, have racked up such an enormous debt through welfare, warfare and suppressed interest rate loans to the private sector that we have come to the end of the road. People can no longer afford to take out loans, this causes the economy to contract, as the economy contracts, consumers default on their loans causing banks to fail, this also causes government tax revenue to fall, as government tax revenues fall it can’t afford to pay off its debt, and when government struggles to pay off its debt, it prints money – this will be the cause of hyper-inflation.

In this process of debt implosion, we can see that the banks would normally be wiped out in the process since they are all inherently bankrupt. Rather than allowing this bankrupting to occur, the government has committed tens of trillions of public tax dollars to keep the banks solvent. It has shifted the burden of consumer defaults to the tax payers, rather than the billionaire bankers and hedge fund managers. By socializing these losses of the banks on to the tax payer, the government has increased its own debt burden enormously, further compounding its problems.

What we can see from this is that free market capitalism played absolutely ZERO role in the destruction of our country. People voluntarily exchanging goods and services do not cause massive economic chaos and disasters. Only when government and the banks have a monopoly privilege over money and lending can total chaos be created.

edit on 22-9-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

How about we remove the government and WE manage society. We collectively can tell Big Corporate to go f--- themselves. Then we'll see thier fake wealthy crumble away until they are just like us. Accountable.

top topics

<< 5  6  7   >>

log in