Exceptional tax cuts for rich 'good for economy': practice fails - theory is broken

a reply to: enlightenedservant

The ideology of war is based widely on lies and deception, the incentive for war is usually to acquire wealth and riches, with war for the most part being a means for the global financial elite to maintain or modify their status quo.

It was in the later half of the 1800s that “European financiers were in favor of an American Civil War that would return the United States to its colonial status, they admitted privately that they were not necessarily interested in preserving slavery,” as it had become unprofitable. The Civil War was not based upon the liberation of slaves, it was, as Howard Zinn described it, a clash “of elites,” with the northern elite wanting “economic expansion – free land, free labor, a free market, a high protective tariff for manufacturers, and a bank of the United States. Whereas the slave interests opposed all that.” The Civil War, which lasted from 1861 until 1865, resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, during which, “Congress also set up a national bank, putting the government into partnership with the banking interests, guaranteeing their profits.”

source: www.globalresearch.ca...

The institution of slavery takes on disparate forms, during the American Civil War individuals were held in bondage as sourthern plantation slaves, as-well-as conscripts within the northern and southern armies in which desertion constituted a capital offense and was punishable by death.

source: en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: MOMof3

I have about the same attitude. Tried my best to get the course we were on changed but well it wasn't until people saw the destruction coming in the distance that they took notice. Till then they were happy, comfortable, and well had plenty of credit if their incomes didn't provide the level of comfort that they desired. Or they were poor without jobs that paid a living wage but didn't really care because well they knew they had it better then those that were earning a little more than they were and didn't want to rock their boat by going for a job that paid a little more.

I actually noticed that the words that I had written in the letters to my representatives were twisted around by the republicans and used to tie us onto the course we were on. So well I am now just waiting for the destruction to hit knowing danged well that those who are suddenly getting it are in fact getting it only because the destruction has hit in their field of vision and they know now that they are next if they haven't been hit by now.

Very few will remain standing in glory when we finally hit rock bottom and it's a very steep clift we have fallen from with slick edges that have not one tree limb to cling to. Sorry!!!

At least you have a little coming from the gov't. I have nothing!

Have we ever really stopped to consider that if this is how it is now; how likely is it that the 1% who are the de facto deciders of the future will use their influence and wealth to change things? Do we think they will say... "Oh my! Perhaps we only need 50% of the world's wealth and they rest can achieve a life devoid of survival struggles?" Do you think as they amassed their gargantuan wealth they were ever inclined to settle with less. Most of them - probably all of them I would wager, have never - ever- wanted for anything or feared anything... That leaves the 1% to pursue those things which matter most... but they don't... instead they devote most of their enterprise to hoarding more wealth.

This isn't about metaphors and memes. It is about the reality that this road ends in a place where slavery returns to the world.. in the form of debt-bondage.

The key here is that the attitude you have (had you been born and accepted to the 1% you wouldn't have this attitude... so does that mean the attitude isn't really "yours" but one born of the situation common to most 99%ers... you will never have enough... your wages will lag, your savings will be subject to incomprehensible strains, and any possible avenue society offers to not live in this state revolve around incurring ever increasing debt loads that haunt us for decades - or resigning oneself to living as a socioeconomic undesirable.

The politicians are a system of control... they serve only to offer the illusion of benevolence. I can say this because they don't actually change anything (which kind of makes sense since nearly every political party is now subject to cloistered and secret cabals of deciders who actually establish policy and sell it through their political party reps.

None of this can change as long as we tolerate the idea that 'this is all our own fault' - it isn't we didn't "bring the nation to this as citizens" - we were led here by con-men and charlatanry bolstered by traditional media which is not in any way interested in anything other than revenue streams and their exploitation.

Much thanks for this. Have seen both sides of the argument time and again but one things for sure the way this said Corporatocracy is going it is in only a benefit towards greed.

If someone is worn out on the issue but still votes they should take into consideration who they rally for. Whether a president, senator, etc, elected or selected, even one voice can make a difference somewhere.

originally posted by: anton74
a reply to: Maxmars
So, higher taxes and bigger government are going to help build the economy?

Excuse me? I may misunderstand your post. I would have never purposefully tried to give that impression.

Higher taxes could help the country if they were used to a certain effect. But they are not. They won't be.

How our taxes are apportioned is what is used by politicians to create larger income for themselves by being aware of which private companies will get them in contracts. They then invest, and viola; is it any wonder that any elected official serving in the House or Senate sees their personal wealth grow exponentially?

Our federal taxes are the ransom we pay to the global banking cartel for the apparent privilege of borrowing their currency to use in our countries. It is a large-scale fraud. We have the right to make our own currency but instead - we pay trillions each decade to use "federal reserve notes" or the like. As if the bank provided a service tot he nation... yet when the banks threatened with insolvency - we pony up more taxes to bail them out... and are treated with politicians, and news media telling us that "we wanted this" and "they are too big to fail."

We accept this crap from our representatives because the media tells us we do.

Big government. Any government is too big if it steals from it's citizens to ensure that it never changes.

a reply to: Maxmars

This road ends in debt slavery?
Pretty sure we are already there.

I'm not so concerned about the 1%, honestly.


It's the .001% that really scare the # out of me.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Maxmars

There is much more to our current predicament than just the Reagan tax cuts.

For example, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and the passage of Gramm-Leach-Bliley...

We have become a nation of debtors and gamblers, not savers and investors, with the cream rising to the top -- as intended -- by both parties.

Everything is connected. The removal of a gold standard was just as large a part of problem, as was abolishing a national currency, the establishment of a monopoly to control interest rates and monetary policy. We allowed a few to set a course for this nation based upon national indebtedness to a private banking firm. We were told it is what we want - to avoid depressions and hyper-inflation... yet the banks caused many of these and continues to do so on macroeconomic scales (take a look at Detroit). This is a problem too.

But the biggest problem today is the lie that money is a "real" thing; and that if the rich get richer we will all be better off. Why.... because all of our leaders are rich... hence the problem evolving and entrenching itself in power monopolies and the idea that money is "political" speech.

a reply to: FaceMyBook

I have to agree that the implicit message is sound, eventually people will come to the realization on a larger scale that economic theory is as much faith based as is much theology. The fact that they throw around words like "confidence" and "risk" should clearly show this to be true... but we insist on believing that the talking head experts makes them legitimate. Sort of how the word "Federal" in Federal Reserve makes them a worthy authority.

originally posted by: dreamingawake
Much thanks for this. Have seen both sides of the argument time and again but one things for sure the way this said Corporatocracy is going it is in only a benefit towards greed.

If someone is worn out on the issue but still votes they should take into consideration who they rally for. Whether a president, senator, etc, elected or selected, even one voice can make a difference somewhere.

I had once toyed with the scenario where a majority of American went to the polls and submitted blank ballots to the vote. Imagine if millions spoke with their vote and denied their parties the support to continue the charade. (Not voting doesn't help because they simply take that for "you don't care".) But then I remembered that it is the media who tells us who "we decided" we wanted... just like the media reported that "Americans overwhelmingly supported" the politicians who heaped trillions in "borrowed" wealth upon a failed banking system - because we feared their demise too much....

originally posted by: FaceMyBook
a reply to: Maxmars

This road ends in debt slavery?
Pretty sure we are already there.

I'm not so concerned about the 1%, honestly.


It's the .001% that really scare the # out of me.

I too fear the idea that there are people out there holding on to trillions in wealth (and no - not the bull# 'top rich people lists' which are mostly meant as pablum for the masses.) There are people (hiding behind institutions) who could wipe out the national debt of most nations, end world hunger... and more; but they won't... after all it's "their" wealth. They have that right... but would deny yours to be free of oppressive monopolies ... oppressive regulation ... and more.

They 1% however could collectively change all that - if it were not for the fact that hoarding wealth is exalted above all else in western civilization... interesting that we live in a world where such a vice is praised, and virtues like love and peace are mocked. Sad thing that.

a reply to: Maxmars




Wait, why would they call something the Federal Reserve if it wasn't government run & sanctioned?

*sticks fingers in ears*
LaLaLaLaLa

Our economic system is not perfect.

Ideally, on paper, communism would perhaps be the ideal system, except for people. People tend to ruin communism. So trash that idea.

Back to our economic system. It isn't perfect. Yet, with hard work, people can and do succeed in it every day.

Everyone has some idea to improve it.

More taxes.
Less taxes.
Flat taxes.
Tax the rich, taxes.

In every instance, each person's idea enhances or enables their own station on the economic scale.

It's how human nature works.

And while it isn't a perfect system, it does work for those who work for it.

Some succeed, some don't. Life is like that. Unless you want equal outcomes, then we're back to communism, and it won't work because of, well, humans. Human nature.

Winston Churchill said it best when he said;

“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

so allow me to paraphrase Mr. Churchill by saying, "Free Market, trickle-down economics is the worst form of economics, except for all the others."

originally posted by: Maxmars

originally posted by: anton74
a reply to: Maxmars
So, higher taxes and bigger government are going to help build the economy?

Excuse me? I may misunderstand your post. I would have never purposefully tried to give that impression.

Higher taxes could help the country if they were used to a certain effect. But they are not. They won't be.

.

They same could be said for lower taxes. In the end, Americans are doing this to Americans.

Reagonomics wasn't going to fix the problem that started in the 1970's. The bashing is nothing more than politics. We are part of a Global economy and people need to get used to it. We can stand around pointing fingers or we can turn the U.S. into the sole economic superpower again.

a reply to: anton74

The problem started in 1913.

FYI.

a reply to: Maxmars

It is about the reality that this road ends in a place where slavery returns to the world.. in the form of debt-bondage.

It's the same danged road that we were on back in the late 80's and 90's only most thought you were crazy for trying to explain it to them, even on forums such as ATS!!!

The key here is that the attitude you have (had you been born and accepted to the 1% you wouldn't have this attitude... so does that mean the attitude isn't really "yours" but one born of the situation common to most 99%ers... you will never have enough... your wages will lag, your savings will be subject to incomprehensible strains, and any possible avenue society offers to not live in this state revolve around incurring ever increasing debt loads that haunt us for decades - or resigning oneself to living as a socioeconomic undesirable.

I am a 55+ recently widowed women who has been unemployed for over two years (mainly because I have physical problems that pretty much hinder my doing any job that society says I am qualified for) with very little resources. little hope of obtaining a job that will provide my needs, and well like always very little in gov't assistance available to me..
oh ya some food stamps, a little help with the heating or airconditioning bill, and oh ya they'd let me attend school for a couple years in hopes that I would be employable afterwards- as long as I can keep a roof over my head by some miraculous act!! And let's not get into how I would be probably much more employable if the dear gov't had helped when I first asked before my feet becames as screwed up as they are now!!
but no, oh ya get a job!! if you want to live!! keep on screwing them up!! we've got all these danged illegals that we want to let into the country that will need our financial help till they get on their own feet!!
My attitude is not shared by the 99% believe me. That might take a few more years or so!

None of this can change as long as we tolerate the idea that 'this is all our own fault' - it isn't we didn't "bring the nation to this as citizens" - we were led here by con-men and charlatanry bolstered by traditional media which is not in any way interested in anything other than revenue streams and their exploitation.

But it is!! Those who are sitting pretty are still on these boards trying to place the blame on those have lost the battle- they didn't work as hard, they didn't plan, they screwed up, they married the wrong man, blah, blah, blah!! Are they all part of that 1%? I highly doubt it, they just think that they are somehow protected from facing the defeat that those they are constantly putting down have faced! Are all those businesses out there that are taking advantage of those tax credits being run by the 1%? I highly doubt it! Are all those companies that are paying near minimum wage being run by that 1%? nope! They'll gripe about how much money the gov't is giving away to the poor but they will never acknowledge just how advantageous it is to them that the gov't is doing it. I could go on an on about how the 99% screwed up!

But well, it's easier just to refer you back to some of the older posts from me because well, like I said, I probably won't even be able to keep a roof over my head for more than a month or so more so I don't plan on being around that much longer anyways.

Till people see the true value in their fellow members of society- all of them- ain't nothing gonna change.

a reply to: Maxmars

Thanks for bringing this to the boards...it really isn't a surprise, in fact in the last year I have become fed up of the people who scream "I am fed up paying for all the non-working!" This is increasingly being replaced with "I am fed up with paying for the low income families who don't work as much as I do!"

Well, quite simply my answer is this, yes I agree the long term work-shy unemployed should work (although there is a great portion you really wouldn't want serving you in various establishments), but starting on the people who work but not full time...this is riddiculous.

If the unemployed/low income people/families have no mony to spend, it is not just them who are dying to stay alive...the economy is too.

In turn, the very person screaming about losing a portion of their income to the lesser financially endowd in society, fails to realise that if they loose their job due to layoffs, their very attitude could have contributed to their redundancy.

If we all aren't spending the machine stops.

I'm not trying to sound like a know-it-all, but a lot of us already knew this about the trickle down theory. the wealthy has kept this idea alive for decades....the only thing that is going to help the majority in this country is to radically change political donations, and the funding of our political system....this is the political "area" where we as Americans have to insist on strict and harsh regulations and laws, backed by long prison times. liken the lobbyists, and political donors to junkyard dogs, in that they are necessary, but kept on a short steel chain leash.

originally posted by: beezzer
Our economic system is not perfect.

Ideally, on paper, communism would perhaps be the ideal system, except for people. People tend to ruin communism. So trash that idea.

Back to our economic system. It isn't perfect. Yet, with hard work, people can and do succeed in it every day.

....

In every instance, each person's idea enhances or enables their own station on the economic scale.

It's how human nature works.

And while it isn't a perfect system, it does work for those who work for it.

Some succeed, some don't. Life is like that. Unless you want equal outcomes, then we're back to communism, and it won't work because of, well, humans. Human nature.

I respect your position. But I cannot simply accept any circumstance where there is an excuse for the wealth to be hoarded in perpetuity by those who toil not. The idea of an economy is supposed to allow all equal access to wealth that is available. This so call 'system' is not designed to do so. It is, in fact a tool to ensure that the entire efforts of the human population are geared and measured by buy in to a precept that someone else should own the currency. It is not a 'system in which you can work' if it means that at best you can only access some infinitesimal portion of 1% of the currency while the 99 %remainder is held in some virtual place where it cannot be touched.

Human nature is not to give everything you work for to some invisible immortal institution that keeps you from upsetting the real wealth holders.

The plastic logic that enables us to reconcile this as s 'system' that 'works as it should' causes me great grief.

Of course people want "more". It is what they are trained to want. Human nature isn't to sit on a mountain of wealth while everyone around you strains and fails to thrive. I am unconcerned in this argument with the microeconomics of greed and conspiracy... these things are ever present in the world of humans. But that nature rarely see's a parent foreclosing on the future of their children because "it would deplete my savings."

"Human nature" is the prevailing excuse for actually trusting a private bank to nurture the economy of a nation. The banking cartel spent centuries establishing it's iron-clad - no holds barred - stranglehold on the welfare of societies everywhere. Our politicians accepted their proclamation that "we" (the people's representatives) can't be trusted with monetary policy... they accepted it because they were all "bought" and "prospering" in the system the banks offered.

As for some making it in this system... sure - that's what makes in the news anyway right? - the success stories... not the uncountable, wide-spread failures of entire communities ... those don't count - because we can always generalize about their collective failures as responsible citizens. Again - the prevalent meme comes forth - if you remain poor it's your own fault.

The point isn't meant to flow into the vagaries of the faith based hopes and notions of economic mouthpieces; it's about how in a world where 100% of the wealth is distributed as it is, we will see massive starvation, technological stagnation, and and endless push to kill our fellow humans for the scraps the real wealth holders have left for us to fight over.

In the real world there is what we have decided to call wealth, and there is the fact that it does not 'trickle' anywhere... money is meant to move... and not just among 2 or 3000 families... we are billions on this planet, not thousands.

I am not saying that we should tax higher or lower... I'm saying that we need to examine what the hell it is that is actually happening in the world, and reacting accordingly... not just based upon some foisted (and very lame) idea that if we make the rich richer - we all win.

originally posted by: anton74

They same could be said for lower taxes. In the end, Americans are doing this to Americans.

Reagonomics wasn't going to fix the problem that started in the 1970's. The bashing is nothing more than politics. We are part of a Global economy and people need to get used to it. We can stand around pointing fingers or we can turn the U.S. into the sole economic superpower again.

The entire "global economy" meme represents the success that banks have had in convincing the planet that if their investments (their risk taking) go bad OUR economies should suffer the loss. But when they go right, they get richer - not us. Weak.

I know now - and knew then - that trickle down was a scam. But I watched the traditional media inform us that 'we' wanted this... 'we' called for it - but the truth is we didn't even get an explanation of how this magical thing was supposed to work despite the illogic of it. The well produced talking head segments explained instead that 'we' overwhelmingly support the protection of an undeclared financial monopoly in this country (all because the sleazeballs in power in the early 20th century agreed they couldn't be trusted.) Duh.

Power is not economy. Power is not wealth. Power is power... and it belongs and will always eventually return from when it came... namely, people. If we are done allowing the punditry to define our "fault' we might see (I can only hope) hope were, and are subject to a bull# propaganda machine that convinces us of things by telling us 'everyone' is convinced.

When you travel the world you quickly realize that ignorance is a staple produced by most governments to keep the people from threatening the leadership with removal. As in all things, time is their enemy - unless they can keep their citizenry in ignorance. Frankly I was surprised to see them institutionalizing the effort to keep in power... and it is all on the backs of the make believe wealth that we are told is 'out there' for us to go get if we work hard enough (usually for someone else.)

I'm surprised that more long time small business people haven't called the politicians to the floor on this damnable carrot on a stick which we are supposed to chase to show our "good value as citizens" - but only 1% of the wealth, of course, the rest is already "owned."

originally posted by: FaceMyBook
a reply to: anton74

The problem started in 1913.

FYI.

Actually the problem started in Europe. Kings and Queens and Barons of Industry all fell to the scam early, and were in no position to argue since they bought into the scam of fractional reserve lending... that magic where someone who has nothing can "say" they loaned you money - give you nothing but paper script - and suddenly the loaner is that much richer... those morons did get special privilege for starting the dynasty of the banking cartel... in the end the serfs pay for it all... even with their lives.. to maintain and protect a system that ensures all their successes are metered by a third party.

a reply to: dawnstar

I'm sorry for your loss, and uncomfortable situation.

I know that there is little comfort in the knowledge that this is - and isn't - a 'fault' in our approach to economic theory. It is a fault in the restriction of information. The information is key, and those who can address it can no longer pretend with any sense of reason to not know that the wealth is being hoarded, because in truth the wealth does not actually exist anywhere. It's practically all virtual. But we honor the illusion under threat of decimation; after all - the banks who own all the currency, and decide how much to issue and at what interest rate are the masters - as we are the serfs. Is it any wonder that we are never told who "owns" the Fed, or the Bank of London, or the Vatican bank? It's a secret because if everyone were told at the same time how this deal really works, the owners could never handle the backlash.

It's why they are threatened by the internet. Bitcoin was a wake up call to many of them. To their praise - they have already acted to ensure it will never usurp their monopoly on currency and wealth distribution.

Of course, when you add tot hat depressing state the nasty tendencies of institutional controls, we see bloated self-serving bureaucracies, and civil servant legions - all dedicated to keeping themselves perpetually employed 'evaluating' the needs of supplicants - who by definition are lesser beings.

And all of this over the 1% of so-called wealth that is kept by one entity in stagnation... after all - real wealth serves no purpose unless it is introduced into the economy... something the 1% apparently never do.