It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

100% tax rate in the polls as we speak (France).

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus

Well the thing is corpoarations are parasitic.

Since you didn't directly answer my question, I am proceeding on the presumption that you agree corporations create jobs as is implied in the way I am reading your above-quoted comment.

Corporations which serve the public by offering a needed product or service are symbiotic, not parasitic. Yes, they need our markets, but we also need them in order to have the conveniences we are accustomed to. As an example, if Toshiba Corporation or Intel Corporation did not exist, I could not own this computer I am typing on. No one would have the capability to accumulate enough wealth by themselves to build the equipment needed to produce the microchips; to create the designs and circuit boards to make them operate; or to market them to people around the globe.

Making blanket accusations against all corporations does not advance your logic; it retards it, by emphasizing a refusal to accept facts and logic not in compliance with your final agenda. I happen to have family who own a private corporation, needed because there are now two generations of the family running their farm. Without corporate ability, the farm would have been split into a handful of smaller farms, each requiring more man-hours to produce the same amount of food because none of them could by themselves afford the necessary equipment to efficiently run the farm. Are they evil in your opinion? Would you blame them for the economic problems being faced by almost everyone due to the actions of corrupt and conspiring banks and governments? Do you call them, the people who produce the food you eat so you can pursue other goals, parasites?

I do not; they are doing nothing less than what I (or you, if honesty be demanded) would do in similar circumstances... and that is the definition of hypocrisy: condemning another for doing what one would do oneself.

Again, I ask you directly: who if not business are the "job creators"?

TheRedneck




posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   


They need our markets. We do not need them. All they do is monopolise markets and desroy opportunity. Its not just the low paid worker that suffers it is everyone. Small Business cannot compete. Fewer jobs mean's less at the top which is why you have so many college educated people working in the services industry and as janitors. This is why you have Tent Cities.
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


And how exactly does this not answer your question?

You know very well I answer your question.

The very market creates jobs.We own it if we can take it back.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus

What is going to happen is we burn the whole thing down. Burn it to the ground and salt the earth. Then we will rise like a pheonix. (peacfully of course/figuratively)

And have you considered the possibility that there may be those who do not believe the web you weave with your words? Have you considered there might be those who do not wish everything to be burnt to the ground?

That is the mark of a tyrant: promise of utopia, if only everything be changed to their personal liking. You speak of a world, sir, in which I do not wish to live. I value my freedom.


And I could not disagree more. The reason people like you can point to government and scare scared American's with words like 'socialism' and communisism' is because your governments are the corporations.

Are you reading my posts to you? I have already stated clearly this problem does exist.


They work for corporation's. Not for the people. That will end. And soon.

Ironic. You accuse me of fear-mongering while you yourself make veiled threats about coming events with no substantial proof.

Very ironic indeed.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
I hope they elect Marine Le Pen rather than this idiot. He will destroy the economy of France.

Incidentally, extremely high tax rates are nothing new. In mid 1970s Britain the top rate of personal income tax was 83%, combined with a 15% surcharge on investment and dividend income added to a 98% marginal rate for anyone earning over £155,247 / $246,097 (adjusted for inflation).



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


See this is why America is bankrupt and needs to steal money from place like Libya. Nationalization is the solution.
National Socailism is the solution.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I think people confuse the two different sides of financial inequality.

On the one hand you have insane wealth in the hands of a few, and they pay very little tax compared to the average working man. There are so many loopholes and avoidance schemes that even when a person of extreme wealth says they are in a certain tax bracket, they never mention all the little perks and deductions they get on top of it that you or I could never achieve.

They also fail to mention the billions they have in off-shore accounts, under property, or tied up in other special "arrangements".

There are two issues here in my opinion.
People are sick of the insane greed that comes with with wealth. People are not happy when they have enough. How much money is enough? Well, when you get to one individual having over a billion $'s there is no possible way they could ever actually use that money.

People are offended by that.

Then you have the tax system, as I mentioned above, that is VASTLY corrupt and unfair.

Personally, I think the first thing that we should be pushing for is an earnings cap within a corporation. The highest paid person should be legally capped to earn 20 x that of the lowest paid in the organization. This will encourage fair use of profits and encourage CEO's to actually pay their employees what they are worth.
If the top dog wants an increase, they have to increase the wages of those within the organization too.

No scumbag should be earning ten million a year for sitting behind a desk while half his staff are earning minimum wage! It's sickening.

I don't think what he is suggesting should be the first step. Close the loopholes, stop the criminality, set a fair taxation and then review it in five years.

All of his rhetoric is pretty meaningless until the loopholes are closed and the criminality ended.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Have you considered that people may not wish to worship corpoatism? Have you considered the misery that the IMF is inflicting on Europe? Have you considered anything beyond what your media tells you to think?

Have you considered not buying into the web they weave hook line and sinker? Have you considerd not helping them weave it?



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus

Yes, the market creates jobs. But what is the market? The market is people engaging in commerce, buying and selling from each other. The difference between our perspectives is that I prefer to address the pragmatic issue that people will band together to produce more using less resources. And that is what a corporation is.

You speak against the market, not for it. It is akin to saying if we make car manufacturers illegal, we will simply build more cars.


My question was who creates jobs. Your answer indicates the free market will do so. But your explanation states that the free market is evil and will be abandoned for some better plan, apparently with government in total charge of the economy.

So no, you do not answer my question. You only confuse it.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 





Ironic. You accuse me of fear-mongering while you yourself make veiled threats about coming events with no substantial proof.


The only people that I would assume would consider my comments to be veiled threats are corporatists.And look to Europe. Your thread is proof. Things are changing. People are looking beyond corporatism.

What you are asking for is Austerity and loss of sovereignty. If that is what you wish on the world then I consider you to be a traitor to the human race.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Seeing as the discussion here has developed to include the corporation concept, may I recommend this for a watch:
The Corporation

I'm of the mind that corporations, as in a government-chartered institution with all the legal rights and privileges of a person, should not exist.

A corporation's purpose is to generate wealth for its stakeholders. It has no other purpose and everything it does and every decision it makes is solely to generate more wealth for those people, those big players.

As an example, an airliners purpose is not to provide air travel, it uses air travel to achieve its only purpose which is generating wealth, making money. Not only that, a corporation has a legal obligation to do everything it can to generate wealth for its stake holders.

Generating wealth is not just about bringing money in, it's about the bottom line, including saving money. If a corporation has an option to save money, for example through overseas outsourcing, it has a legal obligation to do so and if it neglects such an opportunity it can and probably will be sued.

Corporations are just enormous and monstrous instruments of wealth and resource acquisition. And look at how many of them there are and how enormous even the small ones are.

There are so many problems with the fundamental concepts of corporations, too many to cover in a forum comment. They're just wrong through and through, and they're completely incompatible with sustainable human equality of any sort.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Germanicus

Yes, the market creates jobs. But what is the market? The market is people engaging in commerce, buying and selling from each other. The difference between our perspectives is that I prefer to address the pragmatic issue that people will band together to produce more using less resources. And that is what a corporation is.

You speak against the market, not for it. It is akin to saying if we make car manufacturers illegal, we will simply build more cars.


My question was who creates jobs. Your answer indicates the free market will do so. But your explanation states that the free market is evil and will be abandoned for some better plan, apparently with government in total charge of the economy.

So no, you do not answer my question. You only confuse it.

TheRedneck


I can see you are confused. I pointed that out in my third post. See the economy must be secondary. The capitalist idea of ever increasing profits is flawed as you can see. Almost every country in the West is bankrupt. Capitalism has failed.

And within the market is need. The need creates jobs.We create them simply by existing. We need stuff.. That creates jobs. If you brought back all the jobs that you have sent away,America would be fine. Autarky is the key.
edit on 15-4-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 


The last person that should be explaining how captalism works is a socialist, especially a hardcore marxist! We are not beholden to corporations. The problem is government regulation and (yes, you are correct) globalization. You tout a new leader that is coming, are you refering to an NWO? Unfortunately, you have this mentality that you will always be a servant, and you just want more for your services. The wealthy have no need for that mentality because when they stop recieving the desired restitution for their services, they will just stop. You are a slave and you look at everyone in the same way. I am an American and I am free to make my own choices. That is what my Founding Fathers wanted. Throw off your chains and you shall be liberated, yet you ask for a larger yoke- and I fear that you may soon recieve all that you desire.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Do you know what your income taxes go towards? For these corporations, their rate of taxation was actually below zero. If you have not seen this before, here's a snap shot (negative amounts as overhangs get credited to subsequent years):

Honeywell
Profits: $4.9 billion
Taxes: -$34 million
Fed Ex
Profits: $3 billion
Taxes: -$23 million
Wells Fargo
Profits: $49.37 billion
Taxes: -$681 million
Boeing
Profits: $9.7 billion
Taxes: -$178 million
Verizon
Profits: $32.5 billion
Taxes: -$951 million
Dupont
Profits: $2.1 billion
Taxes -$72 million
American Electric Power
Profits: $5.89 billion
Taxes -$545 million
General Electric
Profits: $7.7 billion
Taxes: -$4.7 billion

Nearly all major corporate stake ties to these 3 groups:

Vanguard Group
State Street Corporation
BlackRock


Next up we have the "fat cats" with their monetary scheme:

Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
Lazares Brothers Banks of Paris
Israel Moses Seif Bank of Italy
Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam
Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
Chase Manhattan Bank of New York
Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York
Goldman, Sachs Bank of New York




We don't need a leader... We need a wake-up call.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus

Yes, I actually have. I have studied communism and socialism. In theory, the obvious best solution is communism, as everyone receives according to their needs and everyone gives according to their abilities. Socialism is an attempt to invoke some communistic properties into a capitalistic framework, providing basic needs.

In reality, communism does not work in reality save in small groups (most families are communistic in structure). This has been witnessed over and over again on the world stage: in reality, a select few are able to glean power and then have absolute power over the populous, a situation that inevitably turns into absolute corruption. The end result is always tyranny.

Capitalism has its flaws as well, make no mistake. The system works well save for the very poor, who can find themselves unable to participate even enough to improve their standing, and the very rich who can easily become tyrannical themselves. This is what we are actually experiencing right now in the US. But a certain amount of socialism can counteract those flaws in pure capitalism: social safety nets that ensure those who are disadvantaged have the ability to improve their position in life, and regulations on the size of those companies who threaten to become too powerful.

In our case, we have instituted social programs that are more traps than safety nets; we have placed regulations on companies that have caused them to leave and take their jobs with them, increasing the number needing social assistance; and we have ignored the necessary restrictions on company size and power. It is not that we don't need some amount of socialism; we do! It is that we have implemented the wrong kind of socialism and failed to implement the right kind.

You seem to keep stating that I "worship" corporations; allow me to state that is unequivocally false (not to mention insulting; I worship Jehovah exclusively). I do however attempt to understand problems before I decide on the best method to solve them, and I do live in a world of reality.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by onthedownlow
 





The last person that should be explaining how captalism works is a socialist, especially a hardcore marxist!


Why is that? You dont think a Marxist can understand capitalism? Why is that? Karl Marx predicted this.

And I am no marxist let alone a "hardcore Marxist!" And I really do not appreciate your mccarthyism. You are being silly.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Communism is a scam thought up by Bankers. Nothing more. Just like the book Winston reads in 1984.

the Communist Manifesto is nothing more than an arrogant aggresive appeal to the desperate.

That is not what I suggest at all.
edit on 15-4-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Germanicus
 


This series sort of makes information easier to digest:


edit on 15-4-2012 by Americanist because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   


and I do live in a world of reality.


You live in the land of unbridled demonic greed. A land that celebrates gross displays of wealth and spits on those in need.

I can understand American's will find all of this hard to take in.

Notice I didnt suggest the next great leader will emerge from America? That would be silly.
edit on 15-4-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)


And to be honest,I consider people like you to be a lost cause. America will not wake up until you have Austerity forced on you. Its sad.
edit on 15-4-2012 by Germanicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Americanist

Yes, I have seen those figures, and I find the entire concept abhorrent. Allow me to propose an unconventional idea for a solution, however.

Remove the corporate income tax altogether! As you have just shown, it is actually malfunctioning where large corporations are concerned anyway and is bringing in no income. On the other hand, the corporate income tax is a stumbling block to smaller corporations trying to provide the very things we need: competition and the jobs that come with it.

Remember that corporate income tax does not represent all the taxation that is imposed on that income. Corporate profits are paid out to individuals through dividends, and tax on that income is then levied against the individual. As there are both rich and poor participating in many larger corporations, this is a more equitable way to adjust the taxation percentage based on actual income.

A corporation is not a person; it is a group of people pooling resources. Tax the people, but do not tax the group and the people in the group at the same time. Especially when the group tax becomes a benefit rather than an obligation.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Americanist
 


Ha!



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join