Re: Globalization

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:37:36 -0700, Rumpelstiltskin
<PleaseDoNotReplyByEmail@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 11:40:45 -0700, Islander <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On 9/2/2011 9:22 AM, Rumpelstiltskin wrote:
Nowadays things are not so good for the workers, because
the corporations have taken over and are now shaping
government, in both domestic and foreign policy, to do
whatever is best for the corporations. F**k the people: they
don't count anymore.

Henry Ford institutionalized this. Drawing upon advances in
manufacturing lessons learned in the Civil War where manufacturing
replaceable parts rather than hand crafting each part, Ford build his
assembly lines around the idea of replaceable workers. He bragged that
he could replace any worker with only one half hour training for a new
worker.

The "mushroom" philosophy of corporate management is
now in sway: keep 'em in the dark, feed 'em shit, and can
'em when they mature.

It's time for revolution IMV - a peaceful one unless things
get so bad that a peaceful revolution will no longer do the
job. I don't think the Democratic party is up to that The
Republican party of course is the party of The Problem, so
there's no point expecting any help from them.

#1: tariffs on imported goods

I don't support tariffs per se. That only discourages advances at home.
Rather, we should use our market to impose the same standards that we
place on domestic companies. No product should be allowed to be
imported unless it and the manner in which it was manufactured conform
to exactly the same laws that are required of US companies. It is
foolish to penalize domestic companies.



Your argument is cogent, but my primary focus is on a
healthy lifestyle for Americans. Until we all have robot-
slaves, good jobs are an indispensable factor toward that
lifestyle. Despite the fact that tariffs do of course have a
negative impact on international competition - the
argument of course looks crafted that way, though I'm
sure that many of my arguments for my own views look,
and are, similarly crafted - one thing that tariffs will do will
be to insure that there's a need for home-grown labour.
Assuming that's correct, it's a big enough concern to
compensate for, if not cover, a multitude of sins.

I don't think I was originally as much against
globalization at first as I am now. Now that I'm retired,
I'm much more concerned about the plight of the
workers than I was when I was working myself. I'm
also concerned about the homelessness. I passed a
familiar guy yesterday who panhandles. I felt guilty
but I also felt that I can't be giving out money to local
panhandlers. There might be some people who can
do that - Jean Genet or a wandering Buddha - but I'm
not one of the kind of people who would enjoy people
trying to catch my eye in the street, hoping for me to
give them money.





#2: raise personal taxes back to pre-Reagan levels

You are probably talking only about progressive income taxes.
Unfortunately, there were lots of loopholes in the tax code in 1980
which allowed those who could afford a good CPA to avoid paying taxes,
regardless of the top marginal rate. Reagan had the right idea in 1986
when he eliminated many of these loopholes and made the tax rate on all
income subject to the same taxation. Unfortunately, he set the upper
marginal rates far too low. Complex tax codes favor the wealthy as much
or more than marginal rates.


There are a couple of complexities I don't think can be
avoided. Credit for raising children is the big one. Credit
for caring for the infirm and elderly very arguably should
be included in that.

Also, I think it's a practical necessity to give people
credit for a house, and to try to keep that house protected
for people who get into bad financial positions. That's
not morally defensible like credit for raising children, IMV,
but I think it falls just short of that, and perhaps is
something to which society should give special
consideration on humanitarian grounds. I've never
owned property myself, BTW, and never will.

Other than that, I certainly applaud removing loopholes
as a general idea. For starters, all non-gift income.
including capital gains and Social Security check money,
should IMV be treated just as income.



#3: forbid businesses from contributing to political
parties, propaganda tanks, socio/political causes
(including Sierra Club), and individual politicians.
#4: place an effective upper limit on how much an
individual can contribute to political parties,
propaganda tanks, socio/political causes
(EXCLUDING outfits like Sierra Club that have
no immediate political connection) and individual
politicians.

Noble ideas, but I don't know how to do it without restricting free
speech.

A monetary contribution would be best made to a shelter or a soup
kitchen that feeds the homeless. We have many homeless, both men
and women who frequent the beach area I live in. Often they ride
a bike with a trailer attached and scavenge our dumpsters. The city
finally is providing beds and a plan for those who wish to take
advantage of it to get into some manner of permanent housing and
a job. A while ago someone panhandled me asking for money
to put gas in his car. I rode on my on my trike. Some will always
prefer to "live free." The clement weather helps them maintain
their lifestyle.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Globalization
    ... whatever is best for the corporations. ... or more than marginal rates. ... Credit for raising children is the big one. ... , and individual politicians. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Globalization
    ... whatever is best for the corporations. ... Unfortunately, there were lots of loopholes in the tax code in 1980 which allowed those who could afford a good CPA to avoid paying taxes, regardless of the top marginal rate. ... Complex tax codes favor the wealthy as much or more than marginal rates. ... , and individual politicians. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Globalization
    ... whatever is best for the corporations. ... there were lots of loopholes in the tax code in 1980 ... or more than marginal rates. ... , and individual politicians. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: You actually believe your politicians work for you 99% scum?
    ... You guys aren't taking Occupy Wall Street serious. ... overthrow our crooked government and the Wall Street people they protect. ... politicians only admit to Campaign Financing. ... Whistleblowers are hurting our corporations and government, ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Gingrich just won my vote
    ... in light of what the U.S. supreme court has and has ... about corporations being "persons" or not. ... Politicians have always been crooked, of course, but Republicans, in ... flawed view of the Constitution and corporate personhood. ...
    (soc.retirement)