Russell Brand Revolution

[Mighty AC]

One note about profit and the Schiff video. Is profit a good thing if current economic trends steal middle class wealth and hand it to the 1%? Current policy is decimating secondary industry while making a profit for the ownership class. This process creates numerous social economic problems as we have already seen in the US.

[TimG]

Is profit a good thing if current economic trends steal middle class wealth and hand it to the 1%? Current policy is decimating secondary industry while making a profit for the ownership class. This process creates numerous social economic problems as we have already seen in the US.

This makes no sense. The middle class is having problems because technology has eliminated many of the jobs they used to do and the jobs that are left face competition from countries with much lower cost structures. It has absolutely nothing to do with profit and companies are certainly not "stealing" anything. Edited October 31, 2013 by TimG

[dre]

This makes no sense. The middle class is having problems because technology has eliminated many of the jobs they used to do and the jobs that are left face competition from countries with much lower cost structures.

Actually it goes way beyond that. Its about how the system allocates wealth and where we tax it and intentional policies designed to skew the rewards of the system away from labor and towards investment, and away from productive behavior towards people that do nothing but shuffle paper and move electronic money around.

Its not the concept of profit per say, but the result in practice of decades of crony capitalism and the cozying up of the political class and big business and all the mutal masturbation that occurs.

Edited October 31, 2013 by dre

[Argus]

This makes no sense. The middle class is having problems because technology has eliminated many of the jobs they used to do and the jobs that are left face competition from countries with much lower cost structures. It has absolutely nothing to do with profit and companies are certainly not "stealing" anything.

Do you honestly think that's the only reason? You don't think, for example, the shift of taxation from the wealthy and from corporations onto the shoulders of the middle class had something to do with it?

[bush_cheney2004]

One note about profit and the Schiff video. Is profit a good thing if current economic trends steal middle class wealth and hand it to the 1%? Current policy is decimating secondary industry while making a profit for the ownership class. This process creates numerous social economic problems as we have already seen in the US.

"Social economic" problems have long existed in the US...good times and bad. Since no such problems exist in Canada, it is no big deal that US corporations shut down or move operations back to the "states" where they came from to make even more profit, or stop significant losses (e.g. Stelco, EMD London, GM Oshawa, etc.)

[Shady]

This makes no sense. The middle class is having problems because technology has eliminated many of the jobs they used to do and the jobs that are left face competition from countries with much lower cost structures. It has absolutely nothing to do with profit and companies are certainly not "stealing" anything.

Exactly. It's as if somebody is breaking into their homes, or hacking their bank accounts and taking their money and property, which of course is completely false and absurd. It's probably something copied out of a Marx book.

[dre]

Do you honestly think that's the only reason? You don't think, for example, the shift of taxation from the wealthy and from corporations onto the shoulders of the middle class had something to do with it?

Not only that but the introduction of pure unbacked fiat currency played a huge part as well. Without massive monetary expansion the "dollars" needed for all this concentration of wealth would simply not exist. Basically what has happened is that the government conjured up trillions of dollars, and gave it to the wealthy. And the general public is now on the hook to pay back each and everyone of those dollars.

I believe these things are all direct consequences of the collapse of Bretton Woods.

This first graph shows wealth concentration....

This one shows public debt....

This third graph shows monetary expansion... after Bretton Woods ended in 1971

This graph shows top bracket tax rates...

All of these things are interconnected... A concious decision was made that the US could fund both the government and economic expansion by simply making new money and turning it over to the wealthy. The most obvious consequence of this decision is monetary expansion. The next is debt because that monetary expansion was the result of fractional lending and selling bills and bonds. The next is concentration of wealth because the wealthy were in the best position to benefit from all that monetary expansion, and because this new found revenue stream allowed the government to slash top marginal tax rates.

This last graph shows confidence in government...

Edited November 1, 2013 by dre

[dre]

It's as if somebody is breaking into their homes, or hacking their bank accounts and taking their money and property, which of course is completely false and absurd.

No... its as if the economic and political system transitioned from one that rewards hard work and productive behavior to one that rewards the act of "having wealth", and shuffling paper, and fraud.

[bush_cheney2004]

Economic and political system have ALWAYS rewarded WEALTH.

[eyeball]

And economic and political systems that do eventually all go down, usually violently...rinse and repeat as they say.

[bush_cheney2004]

And economic and political systems that do eventually all go down, usually violently...rinse and repeat as they say.

Those who don't like it can move to Somalia and really get their hate on for wealthy people.

[eyeball]

Or they can stay and work towards better times.

[bush_cheney2004]

Or they can stay and work towards better times.

Oh no...that would be counted as "wealth"....can't have that. Only the very poor shall truly inherit the Earth.

[eyeball]

Sure you can, it's just a thing. Its what you do with it that counts.

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure you can, it's just a thing. Its what you do with it that counts.

No...merely having "wealth" is the newest sin. The "poor" middle class can no longer look down on the great unwashed masses.....a pity.

[Mighty AC]

This makes no sense. The middle class is having problems because technology has eliminated many of the jobs they used to do and the jobs that are left face competition from countries with much lower cost structures. It has absolutely nothing to do with profit and companies are certainly not "stealing" anything.

Free trade agreements between unequal nations are responsible for the relocation of secondary industry, responsible for a large portion of middle class wealth, to less developed nations. Wages are certainly lower in other nations but huge savings are also achieved through lax environmental, health and safety standards. The disgustingly low standards are often a requirement of the companies operating in third world nations.

At the macro level more stuff is produced and sold, GDP rises. The company achieves higher profits and shareholders benefit. However, this gain in wealth comes at the expense of middle class workers and the planet. The gap between the rich and poor widens, which leads to increased crime and social problems. Depressed wages and loss of incomes are, for awhile, offset by borrowing eventually leading to default. A declining middle class also means declining tax revenue, which leads to a decline in social services.

In short, we are concentrating the wealth of many into the hands of a few and it is unsustainable.

[Michael Hardner]

However, this gain in wealth comes at the expense of middle class workers and the planet.

There's a huge middle class being created on the other side of the world.

I'm not sure how we're going to get to a better planet, but I don't think putting the brakes on capitalism will do that. Of course, building twice as much stuff isn't going to do that either. I like the idea of the world being on the same grid, and engaging and trade facilitates that.

To say we're worse off across the board is incorrect.

The gap between the rich and poor widens, which leads to increased crime and social problems.

This is the old playbook. Crime is going down all the time.

In short, we are concentrating the wealth of many into the hands of a few and it is unsustainable.

So, what's the answer ? I'd say the answer is to find a way to move the wealth around without penalizing investment. Stopping trade won't do it, and raising taxes forever has limited use too. We're richer than ever, but we also complain a lot more which makes our problems seem far worse than they are.

[carepov]

Free trade agreements between unequal nations are responsible for ...

I would like to see even a single example of a country that implemented a free trade agreement that resulted in their standard of living going down. Pick any country, developed or undeveloped, and any reasonable measure(s) of "standard of living".

[eyeball]

So, what's the answer ? I'd say the answer is to find a way to move the wealth around without penalizing investment. Stopping trade won't do it, and raising taxes forever has limited use too. We're richer than ever, but we also complain a lot more which makes our problems seem far worse than they are.

I still think the answer is to monitor and souveil the power that moves wealth around in the same manner that power is presently monitoring us.

But who knows, maybe enculturating a society of uncomplaining sycophants really is the best way.

[Michael Hardner]

I still think the answer is to monitor and souveil the power that moves wealth around in the same manner that power is presently monitoring us.

But who knows, maybe enculturating a society of uncomplaining sycophants really is the best way.

And you know that your idea won't be happening anytime soon. If we ever got to that point, we'd be going through some kind of neo-Communist revolution, so why not just seize their assets and nationalize them ?

[eyeball]

People have been there done that and it didn't work, because it's not about the money.

[Michael Hardner]

People have been there done that and it didn't work, because it's not about the money.

If it's not about the money, why not just let them steal ? Why mount cameras on their heads to monitor them, or whatever you're proposing ?

[dre]

So, what's the answer ? I'd say the answer is to find a way to move the wealth around without penalizing investment. Stopping trade won't do it, and raising taxes forever has limited use too. We're richer than ever, but we also complain a lot more which makes our problems seem far worse than they are.

Whats needed is a few tweaks. On the economic side, higher marginal tax rates especially on investment income which is amazingly taxed lower than labor in most places and a large inhertance tax. On the political side publically funded elections with no loopholes or exceptions and comprehensive lobby reform.

If we start soon we wouldnt have to do anything too radical. Just adjust those dials incrementallyi until wealth and political power stop concentrating. Capitalism is a great system as long as the rules are defined by a devoted and zealous advocate for the public interest.

I'd say the answer is to find a way to move the wealth around without penalizing investment.

Why would you try to think up something new based on a fuzzy half-understanding of the problem. Youre making an easy problem that has been solved before without bloodshed or much turmoil into a complicated one. Its not. If you want the political and economic system to be less regressive and allocate wealth in a more even way you just have to tune it... Nothing radical or new is required, and even if it was we dont have the capacity to bring it about. What IS doable is to tweak and tune the system, so that labor and productive work are not rewarded less than shuffling paper and moving electronic currency around. That doesnt mean you have to stop rewarding investment, you just need to swing the pendulum back a litle.

Theres other more radical changes that could made. Our monetary system in itself is extremely regressive... But monetary systems are reborn by accident in a result of events. Its not like the Government of Canada is gonna sit down and figure out a way to replace the debt money system.

The very best we can hope for from the political system is tweaks to the current system.

Edited November 2, 2013 by dre

[eyeball]

If it's not about the money, why not just let them steal ? Why mount cameras on their heads to monitor them, or whatever you're proposing ?

...whatever you're proposing...

As I've told you many many times before...for the same reason they mounted a camera on me.

As I've also said at least as many times, it's not necessary that we see these recording just like you don't need to see the recordings they make of me. Independent auditors review 10% of the video and GPS data they collect on me, match that to my written logs to validate my claims and rate my performance in reports that are made to authorities. If too many discrepancies show up in the record they dig deeper into the data. If even more show up I could be subject to charges, a penalty and have a human observer assigned to me in the future (at my cost). I suppose you could see the data on me at my trial.

It's definitely in my interest to avoid the extra costs of deeper oversight not mention the legal costs of defending myself. The camera keeps me honest and protects your interest and stake in what I do.

As usual all I can do is assume the thought of monitoring our betters is just so audacious to you that you're blind to the reasons why you should.

Edited November 2, 2013 by eyeball

[eyeball]

Whats needed is a few tweaks.

Capitalism is a great system as long as the rules are defined by a devoted and zealous advocate for the public interest.

One little tweak might suffice, an advocate with a POV camera and an audit of the record it keeps.

I think people would be astounded at how much such a simple thing would change.