If taking or taxing 100% of someone's income is considered slavery, what percentage when you start counting down would you consider to not be slavery?
Post what % you consider no longer slavery
0%
0%. Not a tax slave btw
>>74249615
Keeping for yourself the profits you create
And not giving the fruit of your labours to an Employer
>>74249615
Even though all forms of taxing is a form of slavery, and I agree based on a libertarian principle, you have to look at this pragmatically. Taxing is necessary to maintain a country. The best case scenario would be taxing sufficient for quality infrastructure, services, etc. Not more, not less. And if you are to tax people, tax them on their consumption rate of the benefit, rather than whether they are rich or poor.
0.0%
>>74249848
What percent of tax is not slavery to you?
>>74249904
0.0%
Did you read what I wrote?
The acceptable amount of taxing in my opinion would vary depending on the needs of the population or the country. I think everyone believes in this. It's a whole other question though, to know how to figure out this ideal percentage.
If I was certain that the money actually went to the services provided and not someone's pocket, I'd happily pay 20% for community services and infrastructure
Getting $7 an hour for making $100 profit for an employer, that's slavery
>>74249615
20%. It's not like you're going to stop going to work and start an insurrection over getting 80% of your paycheck, especially if it can be shown that your paycheck is going towards productive things.
>>74249615
I would be fine with being taxed if the money was spent on useful things. This giving deadbeats money and people that aren't even citizens can fuck right off. Why the fuck do we give other countries foreign aid?
1% for roads
>>74250460
Agreed anon. What percentage would you consider not slavery?
>>74250460
Do you know how much of your tax goes to corporate welfare?
Giving tax breaks and our money to the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Gina Rinehart?
Literally >4000 times what goes to social welfare (Medicare, Centrelink, pensions, war widows etc)
But keep believing your media spin on your television. When you took the blue pill you weren't meant to insert it anally
>>74250635
http://m.baka.com.au/business/tax-office-forced-to-pay-rupert-murdoch-880m-20140217-32weo.html
Why isn't my time/labour tax deductible?
>>74250750
http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/02/18/why-news-corp-got-almost-1-billion-of-your-money/
>>74249615
its dependent on how much was made. 50% is to much for people making minimum wage but is fin if you make more than 1 mil in 1 year
if you bitch about making only half a mil in 1 year there is something wrong with you
>>74249615
First cent you make over 2million should be taxed 100% or else people grow too powerful like Soros
>>74249615
it ain't about how much they're taking but about how they're spending it
they get plenty of money but use it irresponsibly
>>74249615
Less than 50%
But I consider any form of debt given by non-gov't organisations to be a form of slavery.
Governments are essentially elected kings.
Bankers are unelected usurpers.
Sauce of OP pic?
>>74251429
>2016
>Thinking your vote makes a difference
Panem et circenses
Red or blue is an illusion, they're the same team
>>74251980
A video from FilthyFrank. Not sure which one tho, and I'm not gonna do the research for you
>>74252058
I know.
But it's still better than banker leaders.
We need technocratic leaders. Ones that see the corruption in the systems themselves and can implement a way of stopping them.
It's one thing to tax the wealthy, it's another thing to tax the wealthy without them escaping.
First you send the enforcement, then force them to hand it out.
I'm talking the extremely wealthy here, the ones that commit usury and steal from the meek.
>>74249615
Anything below 100%.
>>74252613
That would be all of them.
It's political influence to the highest bidder here, as in most places... Banks own our government.
We don't own the RBA, we borrow our own money at interest that will never be paid off.
When they speak of this "national debt", why does nobody ever ask who it's to?
>>74252831
>When they speak of this "national debt", why does nobody ever ask who it's to?
Because that would lead to another shoah anon.
>Bring it on.
>>74252830
Notice their flags. They're all from colonial nations, they are of immigrant roots, they have no sense of nation and community.
Their societies are heavily infected by individualism which puts your own narrow self-interests and consumerism at the pedestal.
>>74252977
>Their societies are heavily infected by individualism which puts your own narrow self-interests and consumerism at the pedestal.
So much this.
I fucking hate this decline of the empire.
It's nothing but "bread and circuses" as this anon said>>74252058
We need caesars now.
>>74251980
ET 2
Literally the only way to stop this cycle is to kill the 1%, and their loved ones, family, and spawn... and burn their shit
Nobody has the balls though... apathy rules. Every pleb is too busy working 9 to 5 to make some other cunt rich, then going home and watching TV to get told what to think and what to buy.
>>74253124
>Nobody has the balls though... apathy rules. Every pleb is too busy working 9 to 5 to make some other cunt rich, then going home and watching TV to get told what to think and what to buy.
I'm making some progress mate.
But I fear I'm running out of time.
>>74253347
We all are.
>>74253124
Why kill them?
They are simply smart people who abuse the system.
Direct your rage towards those who were elected by people but don't represent interests of the people.
Direct your rage towards a system that puts profit above community and human.
>>74253495
I just hope there is a good hacker out there ready to give the corrupt hell.
I doubt it though - none of them have balls. Fucking geek community puts off men from doing programming.
Though I noticed the ethernet cabling at bunnings is nearly always sold out. I'm guessing we're starting to realise the need.
>>74253608
>They are simply smart people who abuse the system.
You answered the question.
People that abuse the system generally should not enjoy the fruits of it.
It's basically warfare against the virtuous workers.
You seek to subvert and destroy the system to rule it. The fact you subvert makes you unworthy.
Truth conquers.
>>74253608
The only way to stop the rot is to burn it down and start over.
You honestly think the sociopaths would change their ways? They don't give a fuck about you. Not one.
You're not a member of the club...
.
Close the club.
>>74253844
I went to a lecture the other day, the jewish professor literally said usurp when describing a case for banks to use as case law in order to get property.
When the founders of the club started it, they did it... look at France, Russia
They literally murdered everyone in the Tsars family
About time they reap what they fucking sow
>>74253665
Unfortunately hacking won't do much
>>74252977
> people from 3-rd world rage about market economy and individualism
>>74253810
If you simply remove those at the top, new ones will appear. It's human nature.
That's why systems and state exist, to balance human nature.
System needs to be destroyed, people who exploit it are simply a byproduct. Everyone is guilty, in varying degrees. But most guilty are those who are supposed to represent people, but instead represent narrow interests of elites.
>>74253844
>change their ways
You don't understand my point. They'll change their ways because once system is destroyed they won't be able to do same shit they did.
''They'' are simply a product of what liberal capitalism stands for. What you're seeing is evolution of liberal capitalism.
People make a huge mistake of not reading Marx simply because his part about solutions was shit. Marx was often right in his analysis.
Capitalism without restraints is an utterly dehumanized system.
>>74254361
I'm afraid I don't understand your point.
What makes me incompetent to observe and draw conclusions?
In fact, in Eastern Europe you see it best.
>market economy
Nope.
>individualism
Nope.
I ''rage'' against neoliberalism.
>>74254528
>If you simply remove those at the top, new ones will appear. It's human nature.
Yep, so make sure the most virtuous leads.
If one can do so through virtue - prosperity beckons.
Others cause the downfall of society.
You cannot lead a society that is destroyed.
>Marx was often right in his analysis.
>Capitalism without restraints is an utterly dehumanized system.
Marx was very wrong in a lot of ways, mainly because he's the reason why there are corrupt pigs in the world. Some want to enforce it in one way.
We need education - not socialism.
Educate people on the corruption, teach the method, destroys that method (because people legislate against it).
Furthermore, things like speculation becomes useless.
>>74254672
Neoliberalism is meme.
Only system that can be exploited is regulated economy. If you want system that cannot be corrupted, you must choose free market.
By uprising/creating laws that will "deal" will "1%" you will make more space for cronies.
>>74254528
This goy gets it. It doesn't matter to the machine that is modern society which ideology pretends to control it, nor does it actually matter to the people who are enslaved by it, robbed of their freedom regardless of any false capitalism/communism dichotomy. Thus the only choice is to destroy the machine.
>>74249615
This logic is dumb. If slavery is defined as zero economic agency, having no tax doesn't give you unlimited economic agency, because you're still limited by your earnings relative to everyone else. A percentage tax might limit you freedom by degrees, but there isn't a line that separates freedom from slavery because at zero you could still have not enough agency to be free, while someone with 80% tax could still have more than enough agency.
Presumably this is why poverty lines existed at one point, but it's totally innacurate today.
>>74249615
15% the current rate
Just enough to have money in the federal reserve and new programs,not enough to become a welfare state
>>74254528
What's wrong with killing them?
They wouldn't so much as blink doing it to us.
And systematically, publicly eradicating their genetic line is one fucking hell of a deterrent to those who aspire to follow in their footsteps
Add to that 63% of global wealth stashed by the top 82 families, redistribution of which would fund pretty much everything and end global poverty
It's a win win, and payback is a bitch
>>74249615
Should never in any circumstances go over 49%.
>>74254946
>You cannot lead a society that is destroyed.
Never argued for that.
>not socialism
What is socialism?
Socialism as in Marxist socialism, nope.
Socialism as in orientation towards interests of society as whole, yes.
>>74254979
>Neoliberalism is meme.
How little you know.
>you must choose free market
Yeah, I suspected you're a libertarian or something.
>Only system that can be exploited is regulated economy.
I never heard a dumber statement in my life. That's how you people operate, you make some baseless assumptions (welfare elimination will eliminate immigration) and you hold them to be axioms and pillars of your ideas, despite the fact they aren't based in reality.
Libertarianism is another dehumanized system. It's a disease of mind, it's not an actual political ideology.
>>74255228
>Income Tax
>Over 20%
You guys are KEKs for paying for NEETs.
We give 0 dollars to NEETs every decade
>>74255219
>What's wrong with killing them?
Because it's pointless.
>They wouldn't so much as blink doing it to us.
And I'm better than them.
>is one fucking hell of a deterrent
It's never a deterrent. If you observe history, punishments were highly brutal, yet it didn't discourage people.
>redistribution
Bad idea, if you're thinking of that type of redistribution.
>end global poverty
You'll never do that m8. Throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it. In fact, it makes people dependent. Look at Africa.
>>74255086
>Thus the only choice is to destroy the machine.
Can't rejuvenate a withering tree by hacking it down.
This tree's too big to cut down. Gotta trim the branches one at a time.
That is, destroy the branches blocking the light. Allow the lower ones to grow.
At the same time, don't cut too many branches or it withers. Don't just keep the lowest branches or it never grows.
Let the light get to the bottom.
>>74255219
>I'm going to redistribute this skyscraper to 1000 starving African children to eat
"wealth" is largely fabricated.
>>74255442
You're better than them?
Why aren't you in charge?
>>74255442
And there is a big, big point to exterminating them
If you don't get that, you don't get it
See the forest, not the tree
>>74255582
Morally.
5% for protection and keeping our country white.
>>74255662
Morals don't count if they aren't mutual...
Never waste respect on an ingrate
>>74255562
Also this.
>>74255473
You'll never reform the system, only revolution is an option. Revolution is actually easier too. Reforms don't light a fire in the hearts of the people, whereas revolutionaries are ready to face almost unlimited hardship once the ball gets rolling. Granted there'll only be a minority of active revolutionaries, but that's usually all it takes. Only a few percent of people in a society are actually needed to topple the whole house of cards like a jenga tower, and then it's checkmate against the elite.
Reforms also don't usually solve societal problems in a meaningful way, and you'll just continue being a pawn in someone else's game of ping pong in the end anyway.
>>74255562
Ask yourself this...
Where did the gold in your federal reserve go?
Because it's not there anymore
>>74255442
>Because it's pointless.
No it's not, it's the quickest most effective method mate.
>And I'm better than them.
The 1% do nothing for humanity as a whole. I treat humanity as a family, the 1% treats them as nothing but slaves.
Are you part of this 1%? Prepare to die.
>It's never a deterrent. If you observe history, punishments were highly brutal, yet it didn't discourage people.
Bullshit. That's a lie taught at schools so we stop criminals from being afraid to commit such crimes.
This whole thing went out of control the moment we got rid of it.
>You'll never do that m8. Throwing money at the problem doesn't solve it. In fact, it makes people dependent. Look at Africa.
Money does solve the problem. Africa's problem is exactly like the west's, only much worse. The corruption of the tax system leads to people turning to crime, which makes EVERYONE lose.
The rich are greedy fucks. They are so blind to what they are doing. They are killing themselves by their deceit, weak to not admitting their crimes.
>>74255808
First thing you do in a revolution is take over the TV broadcasts
98% saturation of true believers, instantly
>>74255272
Lol, you accuse me of making baseless assumptions while actually making baseless assumptions about me and logic fallacies.
I am not libertarian, but it is actually laugable that you use that assumption as argument.
I will care to explain further if you don't get it.
The more regulations and taxes system has, it has more space for corruption and exploitation of weaker. It is "1%" that use the most from regulations - they have power, money etc. to manipulate, lobby and corrupt.
In economically free country people can become rich by serving customers.
But you will still shill on rich people as they are criminals just by making money, while most crimes are actually made by poor losers that waste their lives on vodka, rap and chimping out on streets.
>>74255808
>You'll never reform the system, only revolution is an option.
Wrong.
No one's bothered to try yet.
That's why the system hasn't reformed.
Revolution is a tool used by usurpers.
I just want to fix the sick king. The government.
>>74255913
>memes mate
Fuck I got the solution.
>>74255913
It'd be enough to just cut people off TV and/or Internet for a few days and there'd be mass riots.
>>74256050
>>74256047
Get them onto the streets and the apathy fog melts
Beware people trying to take over the narrative... that's what created BLM
>>74249615
99%
>>74255824
How about you address the point instead of departing in a trollerific tangent?
>>74256197
Think.
No troll intended. The vaults are actually empty
>>74255987
Sometimes you can reason with the king
Sometimes his head rolls into a basket
>>74255987
>no one's bothered to try yet
Yes they have, all the time you hear people proposing various reforms, but it almost never gets past the drawing board. And what would even be the point? It would be like applying a band-aid to an infected wound. It won't heal the infection, just hides it from plain sight until it spreads further like african negro from greek islands.
>>74256410
Sometimes when the infection is spreading badly enough, amputation is the only sane option
>>74255653
Exterminating them in future, yes.
Physically exterminating them, nope.
>>74255871
>it's the quickest most effective method mate
It also gives way to abuse.
>The 1% do nothing for humanity as a whole.
1% is a meme.
Look, either give specific names, or crimes that warrant such punishment, or don't prescribe punishment.
Learn from failures of totalitarian systems.
>Africa's problem is exactly like the west's
Africa's problem is disrupting them by colonization, then withdrawing, and now exploiting them along with throwing scraps which end up in pockets of corrupt politicians while also allowing unsustainable growth of population.
If you cut aid to Africa, plenty of them would starve.
Throwing money at the problem blindly just creates dependency. If you want to help them, help them in a real way.
>The rich are greedy fucks.
They always were.
Problem now is neoliberalism and the system of free trade.
In past, you could be rich as fuck, but you still couldn't do what they do today because their wealth was still tied to their land.
If their land suffers, their wealth suffers too.
Free trade created a class of rootless cosmopolitans who have no identity, no attachments, and who are almighty because governments can't really destroy them, they can simply force them to relocate at the best case.
Of course, there are systems that solve this issue at it's root, but they create too many other issues. See USSR.
>>74255982
I already explain it to this Australian.
Free trade and free market are ultimate banes of society.
Free market is a fiction, because as soon as power is amassed in a certain entity, that entity will de facto end free market.
>poor losers
Contempt for poor people is a sure sign of a moral nihilist and rootless cosmopolitan.
Another thing Marx was right about, partly. Very rich people are indeed not divided by nationality.
>>74256410
You can't fix a wound, you can only treat it.
Revolution is like amputating a leg.
Last desperate resort.
The leg's scratched badly, but we still need it to walk.
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
>>74256943
Prosthetic technology has come a long way
>>74249615
I think the IRS tax tables have it about right. Not much tax for those with little income, higher rates for those who earn more. It's a principled and reasonable amount of slavery.
>>74256817
>1% is a meme.
No it isn't.
Derivatives(Speculation/Arbitrage).
Trusts.
And shell corporations.
Very few people know this witchcraft. The 1% are fairly large considering the size of the human population.
In the US, say with 400mil people, that leaves 4 million in the 1%.
That's a fifth of my country's population.
Some are ok, they do good deeds, pay their taxes.
Most are greedy hoarding pigs. Especially bankers (guess the ethnicity kek)
>>74256943
Amputation is necessary when the illness threatens to spread to the rest of the body.
>>74257194
Stop deluding yourself. If you're rich enough you pay zero tax.
>>74257097
Not enough.
It needs more time. A little more time.
Plus if the system is, let's say, a head - it'll never be replaced.
Money is such a thing. It's the means for production.
But it's also dangerous in the wrong hands like any tool or weapon.
>>74250530
MUH
ROADS
kek
>>74257375
Who says we need one head?
>>74249636
>>74249665
>>74249764
>>74249867
The government is the only thing from keeping your property out of the hands of bankers you fucking retards.
If you stop tax - they rule.
They implement their own ways.
These are people that literally think "greed is good"
>>74256817
Kek.
If you could read you wouldn't write about me attacking poor people in general. But it is fact that poor people have more degenerates overall.
I don't get part about nationality. "Poor" (or rather "less wealthy" in capitalist countries) should not be nationalistic. No one should.
But speaking of monopoly - can't you see how SciFi is it?
Monopoly would be possible if someone would invent totally new product, but:
1. This isn't crime.
2. No one could prevent others to try make same product.
And if you think that goverment could be taken by individual or group of individuals - how that could happen?
How even extremly rich man could enslave others? Buy weapons and gather army? State army lead by elected leaders would eliminate him.
By corruption? Who will be corrupted if there would be no entities with power to change laws to enslave people.
Monarchy/oligarchy is typical to societies with oversized, tyrranical goverment (North Korea etc.) or to societies without laws and forces protecting individual rights (Saudi Arabia etc.)
>>74257457
>Who says we need one head?
Nature does.
Exactly why we need this system now.
Because it'll be replaced by a replica.
Just look at "communist" states - they still use money.
>>74257573
Communism isn't the sole alternative.
Look into Althing
>>74257569
>Monarchy/oligarchy is typical to societies with oversized, tyrranical goverment (North Korea etc.) or to societies without laws and forces protecting individual rights (Saudi Arabia etc.)
Exactly.
And we know how bad Kings can be.
These bankers are an example of using vice as a tool.
They won't be virtuous kings.'
Otherwise they'd go to parliament and speak openly with the people.
>which one is doing right now.
>>74257663
Thingvellir, not the current farce
>>74249615
>If taking or taxing 100% of someone's income is considered slavery,
It isn't
>>74257663
>Althing
Looks too slow.
We need simply a technocratic government. We also need technological legal innovation.
I'm already drawing up ways. I think the google method of tracking what you type has some use in elections.
Parliament itself needs to lose some inefficient luggage while plugging leaks in the ship.
>>74257954
Not slow at all.
Every pirate party decision is put to an electronic (email, secure encrypted one time pass) referendum of members.
No leader, it's collective by democracy
Speed is irrelevant however... they aren't there to make legislation for the sake of it to look like they have a purpose and worth what they steal from us
Completely opposite to us at the moment
>>74255145
>>74250930
I feel as though this question doesn't really engage the relationship between the employer and the employee. Job insecurity is fed policy, greenspan cited it as a key reason for economic stability in 1997. The bigger issue is we are largely trapped by debt from education and housing to an extent that we have no means to use our skillsets to barter for better jobs or wages. Laborers and skilled workers are largely unable to move freely from job to job as they would do in a traditional theoretical market system that we learn about in elementary economics, but rather fear of unemployment and the risk of individual financial ruin impede our ability make a meaningful wage or to secure enough wealth to move freely from one workplace to another in our imperfect market. Alternatively, those at the very top are able to move their money very freely, pay virtually no taxes for their corporations and for themselves, and I think a lot of people don't totally understand how things got this way.
This argument for less taxes, doesn't protect workers, it actually benefits employers to a wildly unproportionate degree. I think the general consensus is that the people who manage and own large corporations buy elections and legislation to further these ends, and while this is not untrue, it is an incomplete observation. If we look to the industrial revolution you saw at the turn of the century the formation of unions and a violent push for workers rights eventually culminating in the labor movement and the new deal legislation which enacted some "welfare state" measures such as social security, and gave protections to individuals to freely associate or form unions.
>>74258444
Beginning with the Carter administration we saw the end of new deal legislation and a movement toward financializing the economy where every major corporation suddenly has a major investment and today a venture capital wing. A multinational corporation can make more money manipulating money than actually producing anything of value for the economy. This goes hand in hand with what we are seeing now with the offshoring production. The goal of business in the global market is large salaries for the executives, bonuses, and profits in the next quarter even if those profits are the result of financial manipulations. This incentive is what has led to the offshoring of jobs and without artificial restraint we find ourselves pretty much stuck and we find our masters free to accumulate wealth and to use that wealth to influence elections especially as the cost of those elections skyrocket, and in turn create legislation that furthers this cycle of what noam chomsky calls concentrating wealth and power.
Meanwhile we will continue to argue with each other and scapegoat marginalized groups and bicker about jobs going to illegal immigrants, or abortion or whatever stupid thing, and both parties and the people who employ them are laughing at us from their yachts and their islands and their mansions.
tl;dr we are all already slaves and it has more to do with policies and who staffs the exective and senatorial and house seats than it has to do with to what extent they garnish our wages.
>>74250203
>>Getting $7 an hour for making $100 profit for an employer, that's slavery
this
>>74250635
>I would be fine with being taxed if the money was spent on useful things. This giving deadbeats money and people that aren't even citizens can fuck right off. Why the fuck do we give other countries foreign aid?
this
>>74258092
>Every pirate party decision is put to an electronic (email, secure encrypted one time pass) referendum of members.
>No leader, it's collective by democracy
No that is very slow if it's elected by a party, then elected by government.
>Speed is irrelevant however... they aren't there to make legislation for the sake of it to look like they have a purpose and worth what they steal from us
>Completely opposite to us at the moment
It's very relevant. I reckon that method of voting is good for the whole of parliament maybe, just pointless if they do it within the party.
In parties you need a leader to go "we need to go this way" then the others to give you a method to doing it.
That's how they work today. Like a king and his advisor's. Difference is, there are several parties in democracy so the King can be changed regularly.
We need a king whose popular, efficient, smart and virtuous.
Turnball is none of those.
Shorten lakes the popular part, and he needs to ignore the greens - no one likes them anymore. They lose your votes.
He also lacks technocratic knowhow.
I might join the party and change that. But I have no credentials yet. Plenty of directions to go. I will explain what I do in simpler terms people understand.
Turnball doesn't even know the terms he uses. He's that stupid. Hockey exploits him while lurking in the shadows. He's interested in the richest people only.
>>74250766
it is if you form a US corporation
>>74258475
>tl;dr we are all already slaves and it has more to do with policies and who staffs the exective and senatorial and house seats than it has to do with to what extent they garnish our wages.
Actually if these corporate leaders actually were moral they'd cause much less problems.
But no, certain 'merchants' don't like morals. Infact that teach vice through the media and teach the parents "it's not damaging"
0% m8
>>74249615
12%
>no potholes
>firebrigade and police not privatized
>sensible subventions for farmers (green spots for local species, etc)
>great public transport
>national parks financed
>>74250460
What if those deadbeats could be not deadbeats, what if they could be educated and contribute to the economy. How do you get deadbeats to do this? provide a road through education and competitive wages, strip away the money that deadbeats can make with schemes, (legalize sell tax and regulate things like drugs and prostitution). If the new scheme is going to school and getting an engineering job and there is a safe environment for people to do this and it is more profitable than say selling weeds or pimping out your ugly relatives then guess what? What if instead of discouraging illegals we jailed their employers and gave them documentation so we could tax their income. Would you be okay with helping them go to school or subsidizing their apartment then?
>>74252058
This
>>74252613
We need to remove the influence of business from electing our officials, there is no nationalism, our nationalism has been replaced by consumerism... think about it.
>>74258731
Turnbull is merely the new talking head for the Institute of Public Affairs which is the policy division of Australian Freemasonry, who created the Liberal Party.
Same policies as Abbot, just worded differently.
Electronic ballots aren't slow if your members know that Wednesday 8pm is ballot time, vote if you have an interest.
Many issues at one time, and everyone who votes is pretty tech savvy
The grassroots still makes the decisions, the party follows the will of the members
And it's volunteers who enact them
>>74254528
>>74253844
>>Capitalism without restraints is an utterly dehumanized system.
Incomplete.
Capitalism wouldn't allow many of these institutions or their underlying restraints (govt) to exist. the US bailed out almost all of our financial institutions within a decade of largely deregulating them. without those bailouts those corporations would have failed and the government would have come under violent criticism. Whether or not that might have resulted in a new political party or a restructuring of our political construct is unclear. But honestly, unless we change the system itself we will continue to see an erosion of our rights. Whether or not we are able to exact any change relies entirely on whether we give into division or subscribe to a principle of solidarity... the only way to buck back against the masters is to reject their system in a coordinated manner.
think about it, even if those corporations had failed the elite would have just created new corporations to fill the vacuum.
On the political end, we could elect people who we believe would fight for our interests but honestly, that is incredibly unlikely to have a lasting effect within the current system. The DNC and GOP have too much power over the electoral process. We are seeing the result of this unfold right now in the DNC and we nearly saw it at a contested GOP convention.
tl;dr the hydra comprises more both the economic entities, and the regulatory system
Whole lotta slide goin on
Bump
>>74259898
Good point. See what happened at the Nevada Dems convention?
Even the illusion of democracy is dying
Kakistocracy, everywhere.
US, UK, us...
>>74258878
Well you have a system where the most power people have the most money, and where the cost of elections increase so do their influence, over time the regulated own the regulators, and this leads to legislation that favors business rather than the economy or the national interest and influences things like bailouts. meanwhile we all sit back and do nothing while the government uses our money to fix the situation in a way that favors the people who created it.
Look at the financial crisis in the us in 2007. Instead of appointing people who were critical of the process like stiglitz or krugman (nobel laureates in economics) we appointed executives from the goldman sachs and the robert rubin crowd, exactly the people who created the problem in the first place, and who were they appointed by? The people they paid to elect.
>>74249615
Honsetly 0.0%
Technically 20-25% total sum for taxes is bearable.
>>74260108
Yeah both sides are fighting for the same end, to further interest of corporations and we are bickering over things that the government shouldn't even be involved in (abortion seriously? separation of church and state, no?). I think bernie should run as an independent even if kingmakes trump. I think if we cannot create a party with our interests in mind, even if it sets back certain policies or human rights 10 or 20 or 30 years, we have to move away from this practice of closed governmental elections and toward transparency.
What happened in nevada was such perversion of elementary morality it makes me fucking sick.
>>74260522
If we can't do this now, if we don't do this now, we are setting ourselves up to fail. politics are a pendulum and this election will either start to move it in the direction of the popular interest or the correction needed to bring it back to center will be devastating.
>>74249615
>If taking or taxing 100% of someone's income is considered slavery,
It is not.
Don't like it? Don't live there. Just because YOU want to squat on CanadaCorp Defense Ltd.'s land, doesn't mean they don't have the right to collect rent from you and send you to debtors' prison if you refuse to comply. YOU are breaking the NAP by squatting on THEIR private property. You fucking gypsy.
>>74257569
>No one should.
As I said, rootless cosmopolitan.
>>74250530
Oh dear, britbong fell for the road meme.
