Speaking of QAnon......

[auburnatl1 6,293]

50 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Maybe you should dismiss all of the distractions and, realize what is constant,,, real politics (history provides an amazing context), human nature (good and bad), power structures, fundamental economics. 

There aren't really any "sides".   There is only truth and justice (for all).  Naive and idealist???  So be it.

Respectfully,  I’m not sure what you’re actually saying so I have no idea if you’re idealistic. You write a lot about what’s wrong and then lay out goals like  truth and justice (and the American way?). Which yes are kinda good things.  

It’s easy to face palm, it’s harder to succinctly put out a crisp solution.  

[icanthearyou 4,468]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

Respectfully,  I’m not sure what you’re actually saying so I have no idea if you’re idealistic. You write a lot about what’s wrong and then lay out goals like  truth and justice (and the American way?). Which yes are kinda good things.  

It’s easy to face palm, it’s harder to succinctly put out a crisp solution.  

No.  It's really not.  All you have to do is recognize what has been happening since the 70s.  Understand how the power of capital has conspired to privatize government, hold wages down, suspend many benefits, deregulate, financialize the economy, feed off of government programs and, ultimately produce unsustainable, destructive, extreme inequality.  You have to understand the $50,000,000,000,000 accumulated by/transfered to, a very few since the 70s by virtue of coordinated power.  You have to understand how that inequality is accelerating and, the longer it continues, the more disruption we will ultimately will occur.

All you have to do is impose tax policy that will reward REAL investment and, punish the hoarding of wealth.  The largest hurdle is,,, that will never happen as long as money controls politics and government.

We have to restore ethics to government and, some sense of morality to capitalism.  We have been moving to the political right for 5 decades.  It is time to steer to the left.

If we continue to foster an over class, we will end up in modern feudalism.  Now is the time to begin the restoration of capitalism.  Now is the time to begin restoring the balance between the interests of capital and, the interests of society. 

 

[auburnatl1 6,293]

2 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

No.  It's really not.  All you have to do is recognize what has been happening since the 70s.  Understand how the power of capital has conspired to privatize government, hold wages down, suspend many benefits, deregulate, financialize the economy, feed off of government programs and, ultimately produce unsustainable, destructive, extreme inequality.  You have to understand the $50,000,000,000,000 accumulated by/transfered to, a very few since the 70s by virtue of coordinated power.  You have to understand how that inequality is accelerating and, the longer it continues, the more disruption we will ultimately will occur.

All you have to do is impose tax policy that will reward REAL investment and, punish the hoarding of wealth.  The largest hurdle is,,, that will never happen as long as money controls politics and government.

We have to restore ethics to government and, some sense of morality to capitalism.  We have been moving to the political right for 5 decades.  It is time to steer to the left.

If we continue to foster an over class, we will end up in modern feudalism.  Now is the time to begin the restoration of capitalism.  Now is the time to begin restoring the balance between the interests of capital and, the interests of society. 

 

As I’ve I’ve said before, I think you’re missing the impact of globalization . Not coincidence it began in the 70s. Nonetheless, we agree the tax code is a mess. Imo its time for a reboot, blown up, simplified, and incentive  investment over generational hoarding.  Also, while wall street and “feudalism” id an issue - the advent of technology empires now hold the greatest valuation of wealth and that will accelerate (AI and crypto will be even more destabilizing). 

Anyway, I now understand your pov. Thanks 

[Gowebb11 10,035]

23 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

I've got two kids on active duty. The theories about woke and CRT damaging our readiness are correct. Morale is low due to these and poor leadership at many levels.

Congratulations on your children serving our nation in uniform. I salute their service and pray for their safety and success. 

[Gowebb11 10,035]

23 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

When the woke and qanon labels are being tossed around this extensively, this early - this thread statistically has a +/- 85% chance to go bat ass crazy. 

I’m convinced an increasing amount of people cannot have a discussion without assigning labels to everyone. 

[jj3jordan 2,172]

2 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

Congratulations on your children serving our nation in uniform. I salute their service and pray for their safety and success. 

Thank you for your sentiment. It is much appreciated.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

14 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

As I’ve I’ve said before, I think you’re missing the impact of globalization . Not coincidence it began in the 70s. Nonetheless, we agree the tax code is a mess. Imo its time for a reboot, blown up, simplified, and incentive  investment over generational hoarding.  Also, while wall street and “feudalism” id an issue - the advent of technology empires now hold the greatest valuation of wealth and that will accelerate (AI and crypto will be even more destabilizing). 

Anyway, I now understand your pov. Thanks 

No.  Globalization is a major factor.  However, it is not predominant.  For the last 50 years, productivity is booming, with globalization.  Still, wages have remained stagnate.  The returns are going to fewer and fewer individuals.

Actually, technology and financialization are much bigger factors (they have created tremendous economies of scale).  And, you have to understand that inequality is not just a occurring here but, everywhere else in the world.

We have to stop looking for the assignment of blame.  We have to stop thinking about loyalty to an economic system or, political ideology.  We do have to think about where we are, the technology that is coming and, what it all means, particularly in terms of the relative values of labor and capital. 

Please understand, I am not demonizing capital because capital is too successful.  I am demonizing capital because, in it's current manifestation, current trajectory, it cannot be sustained.  Extreme inequality has never been sustainable.  It inherently creates social, global conflict.  I do blame capital for becoming totally fixated with shareholder return, void of any social (local, national, even global humanitarian) conscience.  I do blame capital for corrupting the government for the sole purpose of furthering nothing but their own interests.  The point is not blame.  The point is to acknowledge and correct. 

We must learn (again) to balance the interests of society and capital.  In terms of REAL politics,,, we have to think about how to move to the left.  It is the only rational, viable choice. 

 

[auburnatl1 6,293]

20 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

No.  Globalization is a major factor.  However, it is not predominant.  For the last 50 years, productivity is booming, with globalization.  Still, wages have remained stagnate.  The returns are going to fewer and fewer individuals.

Actually, technology and financialization are much bigger factors (they have created tremendous economies of scale).  And, you have to understand that inequality is not just a occurring here but, everywhere else in the world.

We have to stop looking for the assignment of blame.  We have to stop thinking about loyalty to an economic system or, political ideology.  We do have to think about where we are, the technology that is coming and, what it all means, particularly in terms of the relative values of labor and capital. 

Please understand, I am not demonizing capital because capital is too successful.  I am demonizing capital because, in it's current manifestation, current trajectory, it cannot be sustained.  Extreme inequality has never been sustainable.  It inherently creates social, global conflict.  I do blame capital for becoming totally fixated with shareholder return, void of any social (local, national, even global humanitarian) conscience.  I do blame capital for corrupting the government for the sole purpose of furthering nothing but their own interests.  The point is not blame.  The point is to acknowledge and correct. 

We must learn (again) to balance the interests of society and capital.  In terms of REAL politics,,, we have to think about how to move to the left.  It is the only rational, viable choice. 

 

I understand your inequity concern though I don’t think it’s all because “the game is rigged”.  I still believe talent and drive generally wins. As for moving further left - I get your thinking. But the EU countries,(who are much further left), with a 40% larger population, have a gdp that’s barely moved compared to the US’s and are now basically dependent on us to protect them. There’s no panacea. 
 

Im not saying you’re wrong,  I’m just saying actions have consequences.  Baby steps - the Sandinista thing has been tried. 

[DKW 86 7,946]

Quote

“The idea that the FBI would somehow be involved in suppressing references to the lab-leak theory is somewhat absurd,” Wray answered, pointing a finger, “when you consider the fact that the FBI was the only — the only — agency in the entire intelligence community to reach the assessment that it was more likely than not that that was the explanation for the pandemic.”

Loved reading that.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

I understand your inequity concern though I don’t think it’s all because “the game is rigged”.  I still believe talent and drive generally wins. As for moving further left - I get your thinking. But the EU countries,(who are much further left), with a 40% larger population, have a gdp that’s barely moved compared to the US’s and are now basically dependent on us to protect them. There’s no panacea. 
 

Im not saying you’re wrong,  I’m just saying actions have consequences.  Baby steps - the Sandinista thing has been tried. 

Yeah, one step left is "Sandinista" territory.

Enjoy being over taxed as the over class is grotesquely under taxed. 

 

Edited July 15, 2023 by icanthearyou

[aubiefifty 18,444]

On 7/14/2023 at 2:52 PM, auburnatl1 said:

I’m playing with you. Apologies. My main  point is that  there is a reason there are liberals and conservatives (I see progressive and maga as more populist  oriented) - both are legitimate ideologies. Labor vs Tory, whatever you want to call them, they are historical and both based on rigorous thinking. It’s not all because of  power, greed, manipulation, corporations run amok, ect. It’s different people with different priorities solving the word problem in different ways. Imo What causes our mess is when one group systemically demonizes and belittles the other. It’s inaccurate  and imo both sides are whacky guilty. Politicians are just reflections of us - if we just pulverize and can’t hear the other side, then gov won’t function either.

at the end of the day the libs did not try to steal an election that got people hurt and deaths caused because of it to pacify some crooks ego at losing to someone he thinks is beneath him. sorry the repukes sold their soul and until they have a major change of heart i will have nothing for them. in fact the repuks leader trump posted the obama's address and they caught an armed crazy stalking his neighborhood. trump seriously should be locked up and i am dead serious.

[auburnatl1 6,293]

44 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Yeah, one step left is "Sandinista" territory.

Enjoy being over taxed as the over class is grotesquely under taxed. 

 

I’m beginning to see a day as almost incomplete without one of your face palms😇

[aubaseball 2,898]

22 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

No.  Globalization is a major factor.  However, it is not predominant.  For the last 50 years, productivity is booming, with globalization.  Still, wages have remained stagnate.  The returns are going to fewer and fewer individuals.

Actually, technology and financialization are much bigger factors (they have created tremendous economies of scale).  And, you have to understand that inequality is not just a occurring here but, everywhere else in the world.

We have to stop looking for the assignment of blame.  We have to stop thinking about loyalty to an economic system or, political ideology.  We do have to think about where we are, the technology that is coming and, what it all means, particularly in terms of the relative values of labor and capital. 

Please understand, I am not demonizing capital because capital is too successful.  I am demonizing capital because, in it's current manifestation, current trajectory, it cannot be sustained.  Extreme inequality has never been sustainable.  It inherently creates social, global conflict.  I do blame capital for becoming totally fixated with shareholder return, void of any social (local, national, even global humanitarian) conscience.  I do blame capital for corrupting the government for the sole purpose of furthering nothing but their own interests.  The point is not blame.  The point is to acknowledge and correct. 

We must learn (again) to balance the interests of society and capital.  In terms of REAL politics,,, we have to think about how to move to the left.  It is the only rational, viable choice. 

 

You do know that big corporations, wealthy people and others donate way more money to different causes and charities than any government.   

[icanthearyou 4,468]

1 hour ago, aubaseball said:

You do know that big corporations, wealthy people and others donate way more money to different causes and charities than any government.   

Do you realize how much they take from the government?  Do you understand they take more from the government than the poor?  Do you understand when and how the government began to be so costly?  Do you understand that they pay the lowest tax rates?

You cannot have oligarchs, capitalism and democracy.  It is not possible.  We've been there before.

 

[auburnatl1 6,293]

55 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Do you understand that they pay the lowest tax rates?

You cannot have oligarchs, capitalism and democracy.  It is not possible.  We've been there before.

 

The top 1% pay about 25% taxes compared to around 19% for $75/k. So not sure where you get that,  but it’s not lower.  However, whether that’s “fair”  - the tax rate for  the highest incomes is  around 40% but most top 1% get the majority of their income from capital gains not salary. So the only way to resolve that is to dramatically raise the capital gains tax rate. FYI every time (and there’s been a zillion) they’ve tried that the stock market went recessionary and the job market contracted.  To your point, inequity is a big issue - but unless you got some truly fresh ideas, this is very recycled stuff. Ps please don’t point to the Gilded Age or post ww2 again, those were radically different environments that dont map

Edited July 16, 2023 by auburnatl1

[icanthearyou 4,468]

2 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

The top 1% pay about 25% taxes compared to around 19% for $75/k. So not sure where you get that,  but it’s not lower.  However, whether that’s “fair”  - the tax rate for highest incomes is  around 40% but most top 1% get most their income for capital gains not income. So the only way to resolve that is to dramatically raise the capital gains tax rate. FYI every time (and there’s been a zillion) they’ve tried that the stock market went recessionary and the job market contracted.  To your point, inequity is a big issue - but unless you got some truly fresh ideas, this is very recycled stuff. Ps please don’t point to the Gilded Age again, that was a radically different environment that doesn’t map

The top "earners" in this country take most of their income as capital gains.  They pay no employment taxes.

Those in the upper middle class (those making over $300,000) become the truly over taxed level of income.  There is no where else to go to make up the difference (even then,,, the deficit, an insidious tax).  This was once a class that did much more in terms of employment and growth.

No.  The "Gilded Age" is a perfect example.  Extreme inequality, government controlled by a few, society controlled by a few, financialized gambling, unsustainable.

You cannot, should not, ignore humanity for the sanctity of the "free market".  It is not a free market.  Power structures do exist.  Power is real.  Power has no humanity.  It must be checked.

Talking about capital gains rates without discussing the loopholes, without analyzing how borrowing against assets can lead to NEVER actually paying taxes, is meaningless.  And, do not forget that these capital gains are not subject to any employment taxes.

[auburnatl1 6,293]

4 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

The top "earners" in this country take most of their income as capital gains.  They pay no employment taxes.

Those in the upper middle class (those making over $300,000) become the truly over taxed level of income.  There is no where else to go to make up the difference (even then,,, the deficit, an insidious tax).  This was once a class that did much more in terms of employment and growth.

No.  The "Gilded Age" is a perfect example.  Extreme inequality, government controlled by a few, society controlled by a few, financialized gambling, unsustainable.

You cannot, should not, ignore humanity for the sanctity of the "free market".  It is not a free market.  Power structures do exist.  Power is real.  Power has no humanity.  It must be checked.

Talking about capital gains rates without discussing the loopholes, without analyzing how borrowing against assets can lead to NEVER actually paying taxes, is meaningless.  And, do not forget that these capital gains are not subject to any employment taxes.

Again, I hear you. And I understand your passion about power and unrestrained capitalism.  I’m just suggesting that the Robin Hood thing of arbitrarily taxing the hell out of the rich sounds good but always has (sometimes nightmarish) consequences that require thought. My 2 cents: 1) implement term limits to eliminate professional politicians and lessen corruption. Lobbyists require more oversight. 2) completely rethink tax code to simplify and reward the behavior that actually drives the economy and equitableness 3) tax -reward corporations for moving jobs back domestically 4) rethink and overhaul education system. Improve pay and teacher quality, subsidize public institutions to make upper and skill based education more accessible. 

Id add (to make you happy) get rid of greed but unfortunately without meds  that’s just much of the species. Plus greed can be very very useful if it enables ambition.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

18 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Again, I hear you. And I understand your passion about power and unrestrained capitalism.  I’m just suggesting that the Robin Hood thing of arbitrarily taxing the hell out of the rich sounds good but always has (sometimes nightmarish) consequences that require thought. My 2 cents: 1) implement term limits to eliminate professional politicians and lessen corruption. Lobbyists require more oversight. 2) completely rethink tax code to simplify and reward the behavior that actually drives the economy and equitableness 3) tax -reward corporations for moving jobs back domestically 4) rethink and overhaul education system. Improve pay and teacher quality, subsidize public institutions to make upper and skill based education more accessible. 

Id add (to make you happy) get rid of greed but unfortunately without meds  that’s just much of the species. Plus greed can be very very useful if it enables ambition.

Your do not hear.  Your posts are built on your conditioning.  They are false.  Forget the "free market".  There is no "free market".  Economics and politics are inherently connected.  Political policy affects markets.  I am not suggesting "taxing the hell out of the rich".  I am suggesting removing many loopholes that create the huge difference between marginal rates and effective rates.  Extreme inequality is obvious.  It cannot be argued.  It must be dealt with.  Again, you cannot have oligarchs, an aristocracy, and, have democracy and capitalism.  You cannot allow the government to be "for sale".

Now.  Forget your single sided, ideological analysis.  There is no constant path.  Sometimes you have to go right, sometimes left.  There are times to favor capital.  There are times to favor society.  The answer is balance.  The "always has been" arguments are just dumb and deceptive.

Worshiping the idea of "capitalism", while ignoring all humanity is immoral and, ultimately stupid.  It is what we have been trained to do.  Greed without conscience MUST be restrained.  If capital removes all social conscience by virtue of deciding that it's only responsibility is shareholder return,,, then, a social conscience must be a part of political policy's influence over them.

Edited July 16, 2023 by icanthearyou

[auburnatl1 6,293]

8 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Your do not hear.  Your posts are built on your conditioning.  They are false.  Forget the "free market".  There is no "free market".  Economics and politics are inherently connected.  Political policy affects markets.  I am not suggesting "taxing the hell out of the rich".  I am suggesting removing many loopholes that create the huge difference between marginal rates and effective rates.  Extreme inequality is obvious.  It cannot be argued.  It must be dealt with.  Again, you cannot have oligarchs, an aristocracy, and, have democracy and capitalism.  You cannot allow the government to be "for sale".

Now.  Forget you single, ideological analysis.  There is no constant path.  Sometimes you have to go right, sometimes left.  There are time to favor capital.  There are times to favor society.  The answer is balance.

Worshiping the idea of "capitalism", while ignoring all humanity is immoral and, ultimately stupid.  It is what we have been trained to do.  Greed without conscience MUST be restrained.

Ok, so is this a Morpheus in the Matrix kinda thing? Regardless, either because of my conditioning, lack of intellect, greed, poor diet, whatever - I’m lost again.  And because of these limitations all I’m seeing from you is just looping through the same day after day punch list of the evils of free markets, oligarchs, greed, dictators, capital before humanity, and 3-4 more bad things I’m forgetting.  

Another one of my limitations is i can be A.D.D. - so non changing repetition isn’t one of my strengths. I appreciate your zeal. Thanks 
 

 

[aubaseball 2,898]

He’s like the teacher on  Charlie Brown, all you hear when he types is, whap whap whap whap whap.   
He talks a big game but really just goes around in circles.   Capitalism, bad!! Inequality, higher wages.      Meanwhile, the cost of Big Mac meal goes to $20.    The top 1 percentage of Americans pay 90 percent of the taxes.    

[homersapien 12,310]

On 7/14/2023 at 1:19 PM, auburnatl1 said:

I won’t bother with a link. Simply search for police abolishment movement. It’s extensive. The issue is when one side fixates solely on the nutty side of the other., little is accomplished Ps I will agree that on the certifiable crazy-meter. Qanon is in a league all by itself

I said Democratic legislators.  Not some wacko "movement".

 

[auburnatl1 6,293]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I said Democratic legislators.  Not some wacko "movement".

 

Half the country is now independent.. Imo in 5 years it’ll be 70%.  If the trend continues  ultimately it’ll be just be  the whackos remaining in the 2 parties. 

[homersapien 12,310]

18 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Half the country is now independent.. Imo in 5 years it’ll be 70%.  If the trend continues  ultimately it’ll be just be  the whackos remaining in the 2 parties. 

Maybe so. 

But parties are still essential for organizing candidacies.  If either or both current party fades out,  new ones will take their place.

Meanwhile we've got either Democrat or "Republican" legislatures.  (And I deliberately put "Republican" in quotes.  They've already evolved  into a different party, and it's not conservative.)

[CoffeeTiger 5,957]

On 7/16/2023 at 8:18 PM, aubaseball said:

He’s like the teacher on  Charlie Brown, all you hear when he types is, whap whap whap whap whap.   
He talks a big game but really just goes around in circles.   Capitalism, bad!! Inequality, higher wages.      Meanwhile, the cost of Big Mac meal goes to $20.    The top 1 percentage of Americans pay 90 percent of the taxes.    

Aside from that just slat out being false. (The 1% do not pay 90% of taxes), it's also misleading. 

The top 1% do pay a overall big percentage of overall taxes...but guess what?.....those same people also control over 30% of all the wealth in the United States.....that's a massive amount of wealth in the hands of a relatively small population of people. Of course their overall tax burden on it is going to be higher than most. 

They also are not burdened as much by FICA taxes that only tax up to $160,000 in income and not on any more than that. All FICA taxes are disproportionally paid by the middle and lower classes, and the rich can avoid the relatively progressive income tax rates by getting income and money through other means. 

The taxes on the rich were very high in the Clinton years....and the economy flourished. On the other hand, Trumps/Republicans major tax cut to the wealthy and corporations had overall little positive impact to the overall economy and has left us with less revenue to pay off the federal debt Republicans pretend to care so much about. 

 

 

[aubaseball 2,898]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Aside from that just slat out being false. (The 1% do not pay 90% of taxes), it's also misleading. 

The top 1% do pay a overall big percentage of overall taxes...but guess what?.....those same people also control over 30% of all the wealth in the United States.....that's a massive amount of wealth in the hands of a relatively small population of people. Of course their overall tax burden on it is going to be higher than most. 

They also are not burdened as much by FICA taxes that only tax up to $160,000 in income and not on any more than that. All FICA taxes are disproportionally paid by the middle and lower classes, and the rich can avoid the relatively progressive income tax rates by getting income and money through other means. 

The taxes on the rich were very high in the Clinton years....and the economy flourished. On the other hand, Trumps/Republicans major tax cut to the wealthy and corporations had overall little positive impact to the overall economy and has left us with less revenue to pay off the federal debt Republicans pretend to care so much about. 

 

 

I was off with the wording but this was from the tax foundation.  I believe the top 50 percent pay 97.7 percent of all the taxes.  It’s funny though that some claim that the rich don’t pay enough.  The problem is the government doesn’t know how to spend money.   Hell, I’m a retired government employee and I know how it works.   
 

In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90 percent paid $450 billion.