Rich people buying/controlling land/property to extract rents from ... Isn't this just the natural outcome of monopoly capitalism? Why the conspiratorial framework? Ever consider capitalism is actually the road to serfdom?
To concentrate wealth where they want it which is to have it mostly or all within their control. You don’t really believe that these people have any benevolent intentions, do you? For example, take Gates. In the 80’s and 90’s he was a modern day robber baron. Treated employees poorly and abused monopolistic power. While I had some disagreement with some of the actual charges I do know that it was very difficult to develop third party software to run on Windows if Microsoft didn’t want it (usually because they had or were developing something similar). He was basically forced to start his foundation to repair his image, it has always been more about changing behavior than true charity, and future donations were always conditional. He would place his investments in areas set up to benefit from the spend of his foundation money. There is nothing benevolent about him.
Isn't that the whole point of being a billionaire? Our capitalist culture lionizes them for that. When I suggest even slightly higher taxes for these people, I'm typically met with "you're just jealous" level criticisms.
Billionaires Rally Behind Bill Gates' Call For Wealth Tax In Unprecedented Show Of Unity: 'We Ask You To Tax Us' | Nasdaq The billionaire made a compelling case for the wealthiest nations to substantially augment their contributions to address global income inequality. He also emphasized the moral duty for individuals, nations, and corporations with substantial resources to be more generous. "Those who have the most — whether it's countries, companies, or individuals — should be pushed to be more generous," he said at the event, according to Business Insider. Over 250 wealthy individuals have signed an open letter petitioning global leaders to implement a wealth tax. The letter straightforwardly declares, "Our request is simple: we ask you to tax us, the very richest in society." It also says that taxing the super-wealthy won't "deprive" their children or "fundamentally alter" their standard of living. ............... The letter emphasized the urgency of tackling economic inequality and warned of catastrophic consequences for society if elected representatives from the world's leading economies do not take decisive measures. "If elected representatives of the world's leading economies do not take steps to address the dramatic rise of economic inequality, the consequences will continue to be catastrophic for society," the letter read. The open letter was accompanied by a comprehensive report as part of the "Proud To Pay More" initiative, jointly organized by Patriotic Millionaires, Patriotic Millionaires UK, TaxMeNow, Millionaires For Humanity and the charitable organization Oxfam.
of course Klaus. Makes complete sense. Elections are so 1980s. Just circling back on the creepy WEF part. This guy is 100% creepster.
There is a limited but important function for government. it’s where I fundamentally disagree with the Obama team and his acolytes. His quote from 2001. The expressed purpose of Bill of Rights and constitution is to provide exactly that. What state and federal cannot do to you. They should not be in the retirement or health care/ entitlement business. Between those 2+interest + ‘income security’ that is 70% of federal budget. That would bring us much closer to the 3%. The spending should be majority local. Then if states or cities wanted to be Norway with entitlements they could have at it. And federal such as interstates etc would have a small amount with sunset and be re approved. His quote , “The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.”
It should be noted that there is no first world country in the world that resembles what you are looking for. Not even close. There is probably a reason for that.
COVID lockdowns of the economy, out of control government spending paid for by running the printing press...these things led to the conditions that created the need to triple interest rates. Big government is the genesis of this whole mess. Whatever idea you have in mind to do away with or diminish capitalism...that probably involves Big Government going Super Saiyan... Bad idea.
Threads like this one almost make you think that the right wingers are coming around to the idea that extreme wealth disparity is bad.
Capitalism, as I understand it is simply allowing people to be free. We have regulations to prevent monopolies and things like that. So, it is not freedom in an absolute sense. For the most part, though, freedom of commerce is a good thing. When people are free they are free to do good or to not do good. When free people who have made lots of money do bad things, it is the people who choose to bad things that are to be blamed. One does not have to defend every action of every person in a capitalistic society as good to consistently believe that capitalism is a good thing. It is kind of like freedom of religion. One does not have to defend every action of ISIS to consistently hold to freedom of religion. Some things are good despite their imperfections.
That is very much akin to “Let them eat cake”. What an elitist thing to say. You talk as if inflation is back down under 2% over and done with. Not there yet.
It is at 3%, wow! Massive difference. Get real. And it was nothing like "let them eat cake", it was explaining the difference between a one year transitional blip in inflation, and long term inflation (like was seen in the late 70s and 80s). For example, lets look at what happens when something that costs $1 now is inflated by 3% per year vs 10% per year for 10 years. At 3%, the $1 item becomes $1.34 in 10 years. 34% increase. At 10%, the $1 item becomes $2.54 in 10 years. 254% increase.
First of all you probably need a better understanding of capitalism (capitalism is perfectly compatible with slavery and coerced labor- see 19th century America). Second, which people? It is allowing the people this thread is about (the biggest winners of the market) to be very free, but it sounds like you think that is a bad thing.
I specifically said incrementalism California's Bold Move: Say Goodbye to Gas Lawn Mowers in 2024 Incandescent light bulb ban: The best light bulbs you can still buy. The production and sale of incandescent light bulbs have officially been banned in the United States because of their low energy efficiency. The rule, which was initially proposed all the way back in 2007, officially went into effect as of Aug. 1, 2023.
But you can still own light bulbs and lawnmowers right? Isnt this like complaining you cant own a horse and buggy for road use anymore? Are you confusing forced obsolescense for some sinister plot? Again this is just the nature of capitalism. They want you to buy new stuff, so they just make its slightly better or different.
as of 2024 you cannot buy a gas mower in cali. And good luck finding incandescent bulbs. I specifically referenced incrementalism if horses and buggies were banned Yes. But they were not. Now over time the free market deemed Them irrellevant and that the organic progress that I am All in favor. A More intellectually honest comparison would be if you day one of the model T you and your govt buddies said the horses and buggies were banned and then levied a tax on the country as a whole to subsidize cars and required people that wanted nothing to do with the car to participate. Then piled on and said everyone needs to buy a car even when the horse and buggy made sense for the individual or business for the next 5/10/15 years for whatever reason.
I do not have any problems with people who have more money than others. Neither do I have any problems with people who earn more money than other people. Making lots of money in and of itself is not immoral. In fact it is troubling when a society effectively criminalizes someone for engaging in too much commerce. Now how people choose to spend their money once they have earned it is another story. Just as there are moral and immoral ways to earn money, there are also moral and immoral ways to spend money. That is where my criticism lies. Capitalism shuts down immoral and exploitative ways of making money (drug dealing, monopolies, etc). In a similar way it can also shut down wealthy people conspiring against society. And FWIW, slavery is present in the world right now, and it is the anti-capitalist societies that are most heavily engaged in it right now.
