An experiment in socialism

Originally posted by crimvelvet
Lets pretend I didn't disclose that. Lets pertent the money would have gone to government bureaucrats who do what???

An old ATSer answered that:

...I'm glad to see People posting about their own experiences with waking up. I know at times it can be difficult; especially wading through all the crud out there.

I remember for years my brother chose not to see the light of day, and it was his very employer who should him. He worked for the EPA in oil field site inspections. Consistently he was tasked with fining, and shutting down mom, and pop outfits, but consistently was ordered to leave the big boys like Exxon Mobil alone.

This made a profound impact on the way he looked at the World,..... sanchoearlyjones

This is a symptom of the massive control corporations have over the regulators.

We need to fix that flaw so that "the government" can defend us from corporations.

This is exactly why taxing "the rich" is a fundamental part of capitalism.

Capitalism allows individual people to become so incredibly powerful that it creates huge externalities that effect the environment, the entire population of the world, and the future of society as a whole.

Taxing the profits from these actions is vital to keeping capitalism and competition alive.

It creates balance to prevent
1. people from becoming slaves
2. our natural environment from being destroyed.

reply to post by Jezus

This is a symptom of the massive control corporations have over the regulators.

We need to fix that flaw so that "the government" can defend us from corporations.

This is exactly why taxing "the rich" is a fundamental part of capitalism....

I might agree in theory but it is not going to happen. We have to attack the root of the problem.

We absolutely HAVE to get rid of the wealth siphon called the Federal Reserve and OUTLAW fractional (zero) reserve banking - it is nothing but THEFT by the rich.


A weapon, one every single one of us should be pushing for, is a state law allowing voters to recall Federal Senators and Representatives as well as state officials.
Recall Congress Now Org

However this will be a bitterly fought battle. The last thing TPTB wants is their pet legislators worried about what the voters want instead of what they have been bribed to do.

While 18 of the 50 United States offer their citizens an opportunity to recall their elected officials, it is a fact that in our nation’s history, no federal legislator has yet been recalled.

It has not been for lack of interest. Rather, the process has languished in part due to debates on whether or not legal authority exists for recall of U.S. Senators and Congressmen; and, in the case of Idaho, interference by a state court prevented recall of a federal legislator....

After reviewing the body of law and opinion concerning recall, it is apparent that if recall of federal legislators is to succeed, it will likely only be after an intense battle in the federal court system as to the degree to which the courts will go to allow the literal meaning of the Tenth Amendment to be in force and effect.

As this author reads this language, it appears clear that " the States ‘ and " the people " living with in them, should be recognized to have the right of recall.

But in order to implement a strategy that will enable recall petitions to result in actual removal of errant Senators and Congressmen, considerable legal and political obstacles will present themselves and can only be overcome by understanding the lengths to which those opposed to recall can be expected to go...

Eighteen states have recall provisions. Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin all have recall of some kind available to their voters. Only seven of these states require any grounds.
www.uscitizensassociation.com...

The other RIGHT we have to fight for:
We have a RIGHT to a trial by jury in criminal matters or in civil matters over $20. Jurors have the RIGHT to NULLIFY laws. That is what "case law" is all about.

Informed jury amendments have been filed as an initiative in seven states and legislation has been introduced in the Alaska state legislature....

Today, the constitutions of only two states -- Maryland and Indiana -- clearly declare the nullification right, although two others -- Georgia and Oregon -- refer to it obliquely. The informed jury movement would like all states to require that judges instruct juries on their power to serve, in effect, as the final legislature of the land concerning the law in a particular case....

Those who have endorsed the right of a jury to judge both the law and the facts include Chief Justice John Jay, Samuel Chase, Dean Roscoe Pound, Learned Hand and Oliver Wendell Holmes. According to the Yale Law Journal in 1964, during the first third of the 19th century judges did inform juries of the right, forcing lawyers to argue "the law -- its interpretation and validity -- to the jury." By the latter part of the century, however, judges and state law were increasingly moving against nullification. In 1895 the US Supreme Court upheld the principle but ruled that juries were not to be informed of it by defense attorneys, nor were judges required to tell them about it... prorev.com...

I would also dearly love a CITIZEN review of errant bureaucrats. I have had enough little Hitlers show up in my life time to want a way to legally bury them.

This is an example of what I am talking of:

Family Facing $4 Million in Fines for Selling Bunnies (Update)
...The inspection ended with the inspector telling Judy that the Dollarhites rabbits looked healthy and well-cared for.

After the inspection, the Dollarhites didn’t hear from the USDA again until January 2010, John said, when he received a phone call from a Kansas City-based investigator from the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service......

...Eight weeks passed, and John decided to call Colorado Springs. Immediately, he was given the number to a USDA office in the nation’s capitol. He called the new number, and the lady he reached there was blunt, John said.

“She said, ‘Well, Mr. Dollarhite, I’ve got the report on my desk, and I’m just gonna tell you that, once I review it, it’s our intent to prosecute you to the maximum that we can’ and that ‘we will make an example out of you.”

When John once again tried to determine which law he and his wife had violated, he said the USDA lady replied, “We’ll forward you everything.”

“Ma’am, what law have we broken,” John said.

“Well, you sold more than $500 worth of rabbits in one calendar year,” she replied, according to John.....
bobmccarty.com...

On top of that we have kids being "BUSTED" for selling LEMONADE!

Kids lemonade stand fined $500

a little girl ticketed for running a lemonade stand in California...

Georgia Police Raid Girls' Lemonade Stand....

reply to post by Janky Red


I don't come to ATS because everyone agrees with me. It's important to me that people know that not everyone agrees with their ideals.

Originally posted by feloniusunions (now) are fronts for communists and the mob.

Not all unions are the Teamsters...

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Beautiful example JR. You blame others for your lack of stars and downplay anyone elses "success" on vieled insults.
You, by your post, have provided an OUTSTANDING example for my little experiment.

That is your supposition... I thing my lack of stars has to do with many things all of which are my fault.

I have bad grammer

Poor structure

I can be a vicious prick

I am very agressive at times, I don't back down

My positions are not easy, or black and white

If you would like to make a wager I will triple my stars as Janky Red in a month with another made up
personna, double or nothing???

But I can also say, that the measure of "success" on ATS you have set forth, stars and flags do not always indicate exemplary intelligence, in some cases quality... That feeling also inhabits my being too... I march
to my own drum beat, I admire what I admire as a matter of nature. I looked at your posting history and with
compared quantity to all my incarnations here... I have posted 20 times more than you post wise. But clearly
more people favor something about your contributions, I think that is good for you, there can be many reasons
which contribute to your success, just as there are many reasons which contribute to my failure. I few of my
real world friends are in the top 20 here and I think there are various reasons for their success too, separate
from your catalyst.

I will wager you if you want, can Janky Red become popular by striving to be popular?

Or does Janky's stats suck because he is sub par or average?

Or is it more complex than just one causation?

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Janky Red

I bet I can create a faux identity and triple my "value" in a month by echoing what people want to hear.

Anyone want to take me up on that bet?

Lets not talk about what you could do but what you actually do.

edit on 18-7-2011 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)

What I can do?

I argue positions that are very unpopular and fight uphill battles with each and every post because I
believe in my own beliefs. It is not fun to be disliked, I think it could be much easier to "succeed" placating everyone and saying things that garners a star quota per mention, but I am not here for the currency,
I am here for the fight, the exercise and the rigor. I am satisfied in my position on ATS, I only wish I
could explain my ideas better and meet more intellectually honest people at times. The truth

Tell me what I don't do?


How would you alter my subjective reality to achieve the kind of DO you can appreciate?

reply to post by crimvelvet


Just so you know, Salvation Army is an outpost for the Rothschilds..but it still has benefit.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by crimvelvet

 

Just so you know, Salvation Army is an outpost for the Rothschilds..but it still has benefit.

Really? The Salvation Army? what do you mean an outpost of the Rothschilds, what does that mean? I will never be able to look at those nice old folk collecting money for charity again.

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by crimvelvet
It is an excuse for enforcing "Collectivism" where "the group" that is THE GOVERNMENT, is more important than the individual. Once you allow this concept to hold sway it can lead to all sorts of atrocities all in the name of "Protecting the Group."

I say this sums up the corporatist conservative position just as well...

We protect the group, it is just a different group, that thrives on private collectism.

Was that to imply that all corporatists are necessarily conservative? I think that is where your extreme leftist ideology gets you into trouble. You fail to realize that many corporatists are indeed very liberal. Take Google and AOL for example, Ted Turner, Time-Warner. These are all very liberal outposts. Look at Bill Gates. He is liberal as it gets. Gates not only built one of THEE most profitable businesses in the world, he set a certain standard for the computer industry, and he is also a member of the very elite Club Of Rome, along with Al Gore, who owns a giant mansion right on the ocean front despite his belief that the oceans will rise significantly due to global warming.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by crimvelvet

 

Just so you know, Salvation Army is an outpost for the Rothschilds..but it still has benefit.

Really? The Salvation Army? what do you mean an outpost of the Rothschilds, what does that mean? I will never be able to look at those nice old folk collecting money for charity again.

Robert Maxwell, whose real name was Jan Hoch, was incredibly well informed . He explained over one of his lavish dinners, that the Rothschild syndicate who funded Britain’s war effort, could easily have bought from Hitler, the freedom of all the Jews of Europe, but chose not to. The name “Rothschild” means red shield, and when the Salvation Army was set up with loans from Rothschild’s, it amused Rothschild to insist they had as their emblem the “red shield” of Satanism.
This secret weapons school had as its motif, a shield divided into red and black, black is the colour of night, darkness and of evil, red is the colour of life force and of bloodshed.
badge also had a large owl[1] at its centre, the owl is the bird of the night, it comes alive at night and it kills at night, all Bilderberg ceremonies incorporate owls. Bilderberg operatives function with Rockefella and Rothschild rules, and all this was topped of with a star, the star of Lucifer, the devils star, over the red and black.

www.illuminati-news.com...

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by beezzer

 

What you are suggesting is indentured servatude. In other words, slavery.

What exactly is slavery about his proposition? As I understand it, you always have an option to leave the government agricultural program if you dont want to work there, and you wont receive associated benefits - unemployment assistance.

edit on 17/7/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

Maybe I took it wrong, but it still seems to me as if this type of program would be ripe for abuse. Slavery being the least of it.

What's really missing here is the govt telling the people that they must give away as many of their stars and flags as possible so that others may have more stars and flags in order to be more equitable and have social and economic justice, or they will be fined thousands of stars and flags (see because the govt says they must purchase their stars and flags from the govt program of stars and flags)

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by beezzer

 

Excuse me? Your post makes no sense. What I'm saying is that many wealthy people haven't "earned" the money they have, they've taken it...big difference.

Taking from those people isn't theft, since they didn't earn what they took. Bernie Madoff is a good example. Prior to him getting busted, you'd have defended him to the death, claiming everyone who wanted to tax his income at a higher rate would be stealing from the poor, hard-working man. Turns out he was simiply a high-class thief. He wasn't alone in his scam: lots of his friends benefited, not everyone lost money. How do you feel about their wealth? Did they "earn" it?

Too many of the wealthiest in this country accumulated their wealth in similar ways, using the government to redistribute the wealth upwards, but that seems ok with you, as long as it goes up, not down.

All your objections to "redistribution" ring very shallow, merely a cover for theft and shirking of responsibility by wealthy people who wouldn't know hard work if it surrounded them (which it does). I've known a lot of wealthy people, and the only thing they work hard at is bugging other people to work harder for them. Most of their "hard work" was verbal, usually cutting a deal over drinks or golf.

So, you imagine that taxing his income would fix the problem of him stealing the wealth of people who invested with his firm? On what planet do you live? You are simply justifying redistribution of wealth by saying that neither he nor his investors actually made that money so it should be transferred to the govt to decide. Do you really believe that the govt is so beneficent and really cares for all those little people? It looks to me like you are recommending the govt steal the investors money by taxing the guy who stole from them. Wow, what a solution! I hope you do not manage anyone's fund.

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by beezzer

 

What's wrong with capping wealth?

Didn't you learn in kindergarden to leave something for someone else?

Excessive wealth concentration has always destroyed the civilization that allowed it.

Trust me, a wealth cap won't effect you negatively, unless you are already a billionaire, and even then how the hell would you notice? Is there something a billionaire can't buy because they can't afford it? After the first half-billion it is all purely ego.

Give me a valid, genuine reason why a wealth cap is bad.

I'm pretty sure a few people would go into a funk and refuse to work anymore, but I'm also pretty sure there's a few thousand willing to take their place. The wealthy aren't irreplaceable: they are just people with a lot of money, not genetic superiors.

The real problem with your solution of capping wealth is that it imposes govt restrictions and limits on people who really worked for their wealth, while those who made their billions illicitly just have all their money safely hidden in tax shelters. Do you really not know this about these wealthy Elite? Taxing those who make 250,000 is just taxing the middle man really. In today's economy that's really just well off.

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Wow...a wee bit touchy about acknowledging history, are we?

For the record, I'm not claiming victimhood, whatever you mean by it, I'm simply outlining known facts pertaining to the establishment of capitalism.

Sorry if the facts jar your belief system, but there they are.

Your argument still does not and never will justify socialism and redistribution of the wealth, even if the pioneers did all "Steal" the land of the Apaches.

I was pointing out the obvious chip on your shoulder

Oh, and by the way......

By Debbie Schlussel ***To all the liberal idiots who’ve left dumb, insulting comments on this entry (and if you insult me, your comments will be deleted), as directed by similarly intellectually-challenged lefty websites, I’m well aware Indians came here over the Bering Strait, which you’d realize if you actually bothered to read what I wrote below in this entry. I simply quoted the NYTimes that this was yet more proof. Yet, there is no proof they were the first here. And even if they were, this is yet more proof that they originated in ASIA. Hello? . . . This is yet more evidence that we did NOT steal THEIR land. It means it was not THEIRS to begin with.*** Today’s New York Times details a Japanese scientific on earwax and body odor in Asians vs. Europeans and Africans. There is actually an “earwax gene” in DNA that determines this .But the paper glosses over the most important finding. The study found that Europeans and Africans tend to have wet ear wax, sweat more, and have more under arm body odor than Asians, who have dry ear wax and don’t sweat much. But the study also found that “Native” Americans have dry ear wax and body odor similar to Asians, proving they migrated here from Asia. So whom did THEY steal the land from? Somebody else, obviously. Yet, no “Dances With Wolves” and “Into the West” from Hollywood about that.
Here’s more from the NYTimes: The dry form, the researchers say, presumably arose later somewhere in northern Asia, because they detected it almost universally in their tests of northern Han Chinese and Koreans. The dry form becomes less common in southern Asia, probably because the northerners with the dry earwax gene intermarried with southern Asians carrying the default wet earwax gene. The dry form is quite common in Native Americans, confirming other genetic evidence that their ancestors migrated across the Bering straits from Siberia 15,000 years ago.
***
They write that earwax type and armpit odor are correlated, since populations with dry earwax, such as those of East Asia, tend to sweat less and have little or no body odor, whereas the wet earwax populations of Africa and Europe sweat more and so may have greater body odor. Several Asian features, such as small nostrils and the fold of fat above the eyelid, are conjectured to be adaptations to the cold. Less sweating, the Japanese authors suggest, may be another adaptation to the cold climate in which the ancestors of East Asian peoples are thought to have lived.

.

www.debbieschlussel.com...

reply to post by Janky Red


too funny janky grammar and word structure and being not well liked has nothing to do with stars and flags.


conservatives have the hardest time getting stars and flags because they are. not well liked

and luckily to a degree obama got elected and the winds shifted on this website,

please tell me that thats not why you post

post for content and if people star you then great if not who cares say your peace to show that not everyone preaches to the choir.,

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Yeah i'm gonna need a better source than a Conspiracy theory website. I'm sure you would require more from me if I had just made an extraordinary accusation.

reply to post by TechVampyre

Why not distribute some truth?.. Funny thing about truth, it requires no meaningless stars, and flags to impress the masses..

As in mimicking real life, not always are the most worthy the most receiving. We ofen replaced truth with propaganda and talent with popularity.

IMHO.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Yeah i'm gonna need a better source than a Conspiracy theory website. I'm sure you would require more from me if I had just made an extraordinary accusation.

Then clearly you on this major conspiracy website to debunk conspiracy theories here and on other conspiracy theory sites and their theories.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Yeah i'm gonna need a better source than a Conspiracy theory website. I'm sure you would require more from me if I had just made an extraordinary accusation.

Perhaps it's just as well we know where you stand, as you probably also do not believe it when researchers such as the scholarly Antony Sutton (Hoover research) exposes the Bush, Harriman, Kuhn Loeb financing of Hitler.

more on stealing Indian flags and stars:

November 24th, 2010 by John T. Reed Copyright 2010 by John T. Reed All rights reserved It has become fashionable and politically correct for whites to beat themselves up for having stolen the land of Native Americans when we arrived in the Western hemisphere. In ultra liberal places like Berkeley, CA—about 20 miles from my house, they call Columbus Day Indigenous Peoples Day and we are supposed to feel bad on Thanksgiving because the Indians were so nice to the Pilgrims, then we stole their land. The Native Americans did not have deeds to any land in North America. Readers will say well, that was not “their way.” In fact, “their way” was violent conquest. In other words, they operated almost exactly like modern-day street gangs. They had their territory. They sought to expand it and did so by murdering neighboring (streetless at the time) street gangs—bashing heads with tomahawks, stabbing, shooting arrows into vital organs. They were also into kidnapping. Just a lovely group of innocent primitives before the evil white man arrived and corrupted them. That was also the way of our European ancestors. It was “their way” for everybody on earth thousands of years ago when there were no countries, only tribes. Then there became two ways: violent conquest of nations by other nations coinciding with deeds supported by the rule of law within each country. And that was the situation in the 1400s, 1500s, 1600s, 1700s and 1800s in the whole world.In other words, the Native American way, violent conquest by tribes, was everybody’s “way” thousands of years ago. And it was their way AND partially our way between when Columbus discovered America in 1492 and around 1900.

When we arrived in the western hemisphere, the only way of acquiring land was violent conquest. That was the Native American way everywhere in the hemisphere. There was no rule of law.

johntreed.com...