The Capitalist End Game Engineered by the GOP (5 Viewers)

[Huntn]

The Capitalist End Game
Think about it, this is the “patriotic”, “traditional values”, “moral”, “Christian values”, “fiscal hawk” party who railed about National Debt in the 1990s and personal responsibility while robbing us blind. Their genius? Focused on whites, brought out the racist in us, pitting us against one another, preaching to us the virtue of “traditional values”, “fiscal responsibility”, LOL, fool’d ya white privilege types. What they were preaching “I got mine, I want yours” and you’re on the menu.

“The National Debt is Evidence of the Crime- The first shots were fired in 1981, when Republicans’ so-called supply-side tax cuts began a forty-five-year upward transfer of over $50 trillion in wealth that made billionaires fabulously rich while it hollowed out our nation’s Treasury. They stole $38 trillion from our government, and another $12 trillion (at least) from working class families via wage freezes and the destruction of unions.”


https://substack.com/@thomhartmann/...&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action

 

[TampaJoe]

Maybe, but I think it'll be a bit difficult -- they could move to a couple of tax havens, but the US has some recourse for that as well... if their wealth is tied up in US assets, the US has some play there. The US can also start issuing sanctions on countries that act as tax shelters for fleeing billionaires.

But yes, there are always unintended consequences. Also, I'm not proposing a straight up wealth tax... I think it's too hard to implement, but I would start doing a much more aggressively progressive marginal tax scheme (add more brackets and aggressively step it up).

The point is that money needs to move around more. The reason I like UBI at high levels is not only does it help eliminate poverty (although not completely, there would definitely be some inflation in rent and other things like that), but also you'd get a lot more entrepreneurs, creators, innovators. I think it would benefit capitalism.

What I don't want to see is a chaotic populist movement that has centralized control over economic decisions.

Increasing taxes isn’t the only way to move money around. UBI won’t pass in the foreseeable future. If the govt gets too aggressive on income taxation, wealthy people will shelter much quicker than govt can tax and the result will be that the middle class gets hammered as usual.

But hey. I’m open to suggestion. Need to see some meaningful numbers and not “blue sky mathematics”.

 

[TampaJoe]

This discussion isn't about the right to decide what makes someone happy, it's about whether or not people have an absolute right to do whatever they decide makes them happy. Your point is moot to this discussion.


Nope, you are purposely being evasive to the actual discussion being had. It's nothing new from you. You do it all the time.


Nope.


If you honestly believe that, then you should reread the thread more carefully.


Nope. That's what you kept trying to choke the discussion down to, but that's a very small part of what's being discussed. This is one of the ways you try to avoid what's actually being discussed.


I do and am practicing what I preach. You should either improve your reading comprehension or be more honest and direct..

We appear to be at an impasse. So instead of wasting time in meaningless back and forth with you, I will go back to ignoring you.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

...the result will be that the middle class gets hammered as usual.

The middle class has already been hammered and continues to be hammered like a dead horse under the status quo that you keep championing.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

We appear to be at an impasse. So instead of wasting time in meaningless back and forth with you, I will go back to ignoring you.

If I had a nickle for every time you've made that declaration to someone...

 

[UriUT]

Which of course means some sort of populist movement that does a forced redistribution which will be worse.

I think there is a third possibility, and we are seeing the levers pulled that way. Putin's managed democracy. Julia ioffe explains it well along with this american life from npr. There is a massive imbalance in wealth but the population just doesnt care. They are left in a constant state of disbelief from the shear amount of misinformation and conspiracy theories. The media is controlled by putin's cronies. What should be a strong economy comparable to Germany is inefficiently similar to Brazil. There are other examples. Hungary, economy the size of Alabama. Turkey. Pis poland. What's interesting with Poland is that it took an existential threat from russia for them to be jolted to vote for a liberal party. And even now, they are having a hard time correcting the damage pis did, like removing the media ownership from the few. The judges.

In this country, we are complacent and spoiled. We dont care anymore. Sadly we are moving merrily towards the Russian way. There should be immediate response to this illegal war but we re just going about our way. 1/5 doesnt even register. South Korean and Brazil have already prosecuted those who tried to usurp their government. There is no congress here and the scotus wants authoritarians. Funnily enough, mercantilist policies is their red line.

 

[Huntn]

Yeah well you can’t always get what you want. But you do get to decide for yourself what you want and what you need. You may not get it but it is your decision to make.

If you want to live somewhere where everything is shared. Go join a commune. That is a choice you can make. But the government in this country doesn’t get to make those decisions for you or others.

It’s pretty obvious in your line of reasoning, you don’t see the We picture, just the Me image. In the US we have huge income disparity, you’re also good with that cause “they earned it”, while you refuse to see or acknowledge the damage this does or that it amounts to stealing, manipulating, controlling the system for one’s advantage which maybe what people do, but can we be better, must we be better for success, stability, and a future? (Rhetorical) Maybe you will not start to question until the system manages to unravel, and you actually feel pain because of it, or maybe you like the idea of shaking things up, regardless of the damage, it’s worth achieving your end goals whatever those are. Hard to say from here.

 

[Huntn]

Maybe, but I think it'll be a bit difficult -- they could move to a couple of tax havens, but the US has some recourse for that as well... if their wealth is tied up in US assets, the US has some play there. The US can also start issuing sanctions on countries that act as tax shelters for fleeing billionaires.

But yes, there are always unintended consequences. Also, I'm not proposing a straight up wealth tax... I think it's too hard to implement, but I would start doing a much more aggressively progressive marginal tax scheme (add more brackets and aggressively step it up).

The point is that money needs to move around more. The reason I like UBI at high levels is not only does it help eliminate poverty (although not completely, there would definitely be some inflation in rent and other things like that), but also you'd get a lot more entrepreneurs, creators, innovators. I think it would benefit capitalism.

What I don't want to see is a chaotic populist movement that has centralized control over economic decisions.

Wealth caps are the answer if we ever decide we are a community, not preying on each other for advantage*, but an actual team. And it appears we can’t even decide what’s enough to live a good life without being a glutton. When living on a lifeboat, gluttony does not work so well.

* maybe this IS what humans like doing.

 

[LA 2 L.A.]

In this country, we are complacent and spoiled. We dont care anymore.

Today is the third No Kings national protest and it's expected to have a record breaking turn out. Republicans have lost almost every single election since Nov 2024, even in Republican strongholds. Polls are showing a solid majority of Americans strongly disapprove of what Trump and the Repbulicans are doing.

I think all of that shows that though we might have been complacent, spoiled and uncaring in the past, that is not the case anymore. The majority of Americans are not complacent and uncaring at this time. We are fed up and care enough to do something about it. Americans are angry and you don't get angry if you are complacent and don't care.

Sadly we are moving merrily towards the Russian way.

Nope. We are angrily insisting on moving toward a less corrupt government that is much more "for the people, by the people." That's not an opinion, it's an observable fact.

There should be immediate response to this illegal war but we re just going about our way.

The largest No Kings national protest today is heavily fueled by anger over the war. You are factually wrong.

South Korean and Brazil have already prosecuted those who tried to usurp their government. There is no congress here and the scotus wants authoritarians.

In both of those countries, they had to wait until the corrupt regime was not in control. Everyone needs to have more patience. It's unrealistic to think that accountability will happen over night. Being condition of instant gratification has a lot of people a lot more disappointed and pessimistic than the actual reality of things warrants. It took us over 50 years to get to this point. It's going to take a minute to clean up and correct things.

 

[TampaJoe]

It’s pretty obvious in your line of reasoning, you don’t see the We picture, just the Me image. In the US we have huge income disparity, you’re also good with that cause “they earned it”, while you refuse to see or acknowledge the damage this does or that it amounts to stealing, manipulating, controlling the system for one’s advantage which maybe what people do, but can we be better, must we be better for success, stability, and a future? (Rhetorical) Maybe you will not start to question until the system manages to unravel, and you actually feel pain because of it, or maybe you like the idea of shaking things up, regardless of the damage, it’s worth achieving your end goals whatever those are. Hard to say from here.

Oh I see the “we” picture. But it all depends on what is being proposed and who the “we” is? Rarely is everyone in complete agreement. Our constitution is written to protect individual rights and is designed to prevent the majority from infringing upon the rights of the minority.

So your view of what is good or necessary for “we” isn’t shared by everyone. You don’t speak for “we”. Neither do I. Lastly, the federal governments ability to dictate to its citizens, individually, how they should live is limited to rights bestowed upon the federal government as specifically enumerated in the constitution.

 

[TampaJoe]

Wealth caps are the answer if we ever decide we are a community, not preying on each other for advantage*, but an actual team. And it appears we can’t even decide what’s enough to live a good life without being a glutton. When living on a lifeboat, gluttony does not work so well.

* maybe this IS what humans like doing.

We aren’t living on a lifeboat.

 

[Dragon]

We aren’t living on a lifeboat.

But you are - it is called "Earth"

 

[TampaJoe]

But you are - it is called "Earth"

Earth isn’t a lifeboat. It is a planet. An ecosystem that will outlive us all. There’s a difference between a lifeboat and the ocean.

 

[Dragon]

Earth isn’t a lifeboat. It is a planet. An ecosystem that will outlive us all. There’s a difference between a lifeboat and the ocean.

If you fall overboard, the ocean will indeed outlive you too—that doesn’t make it a good place to live.

The point of the “lifeboat” analogy isn’t that Earth will disappear if we mess up. It’s that our ability to live here comfortably might. A lifeboat doesn’t sink just because the ocean exists—it becomes a problem when the people on it ignore limits.

Earth is absolutely a planet. But for humanity, it functions very much like a lifeboat: finite resources, closed systems, and no rescue ship coming. So sure, the planet will be fine in the long run. The question is whether we plan to be fine with it—or just become a brief geological footnote with impressive shopping habits.

 

[TampaJoe]

If you fall overboard, the ocean will indeed outlive you too—that doesn’t make it a good place to live.

The point of the “lifeboat” analogy isn’t that Earth will disappear if we mess up. It’s that our ability to live here comfortably might. A lifeboat doesn’t sink just because the ocean exists—it becomes a problem when the people on it ignore limits.

Earth is absolutely a planet. But for humanity, it functions very much like a lifeboat: finite resources, closed systems, and no rescue ship coming. So sure, the planet will be fine in the long run. The question is whether we plan to be fine with it—or just become a brief geological footnote with impressive shopping habits.

To think that somehow we will all agree on things as a species is unrealistic. We can’t. We won’t. You can’t legislate that. As long as people are free to choose for themselves there will be disagreement. It happens in every organization. You can’t legislate agreement. You can’t legislate harmony, peace love and understanding. Some people will not be controlled. That’s what it means to be free.

We are individuals. We are capable of thinking and deciding for ourselves what makes us happy and what we want. We won’t always agree. That doesn’t lend itself to the hive mindset where everyone surrenders to the will of the collective. That isn’t freedom.

 

[Dragon]

To think that somehow we will all agree on things as a species is unrealistic. We can’t. We won’t. You can’t legislate that. As long as people are free to choose for themselves there will be disagreement. It happens in every organization. You can’t legislate agreement. You can’t legislate harmony, peace love and understanding. Some people will not be controlled. That’s what it means to be free.

We are individuals. We are capable of thinking and deciding for ourselves what makes us happy and what we want. We won’t always agree. That doesn’t lend itself to the hive mindset where everyone surrenders to the will of the collective. That isn’t freedom.

And yet we do have rules and laws. You can't kill your neighbor and if you run a red light you get a fine

But killing or harming millions because of greed is ok with you?

 

[MT15]

To think that somehow we will all agree on things as a species is unrealistic. We can’t. We won’t. You can’t legislate that. As long as people are free to choose for themselves there will be disagreement. It happens in every organization. You can’t legislate agreement. You can’t legislate harmony, peace love and understanding. Some people will not be controlled. That’s what it means to be free.

We are individuals. We are capable of thinking and deciding for ourselves what makes us happy and what we want. We won’t always agree. That doesn’t lend itself to the hive mindset where everyone surrenders to the will of the collective. That isn’t freedom.

You cannot be this dense, can you? You have to be trolling.

We can and do legislate all kinds of things for the common good. Do you not have a firm grasp on reality?