Here is to US imperlialism

Resident Commie · Post by **Resident Commie** » 2002-07-22 03:28am

Azeron, i don't know if your comment was directed at me or Wong, but since you added some of my comments i'll respond to your post in whole.

[semi-rant]

"American Capitalism" is Feudalism -- what you had no come back so you blast the same charge back. Capitalism is not fuedalism by definition. I have several millionaires in my family, all are first generation, some didn;t even have a job durnign the great depression. Most of them you would think are millionaires becasue of the regular life they live. That is not indicative a feudalist society, in feudalism, you earn money through your parents, or by killing enough people for it, or through some politiking (very rare but it did happen) With enough effort and foresight, anyone can become wealthy in the US. Not so true in any other place in the world where government connections means you can crush your competitor, and noone will say anything.

Do I care that you personally millionaires you have in your family, whats your point? That since members your family are rich, by pure default anyone who lives a "regular life" in America will become rich too. The hard truth is that the poor are getting poorer and the rich richer, (but thats a whole other issue). With wealth in America comes power, and by wealth I'm not talking about the self-made small business millionaire or the newest state lottery winner. Im talking about the big bucks, the multi-billionaires whose incomes are easily doubled that of most small countries, and whose corporations have more influence than the majority of the world's presidents.

It is these elite, few, and ultra wealth who pose as feudal lords, controling there property and slaves. Who are these slaves in this modern paradigm? The slaves are the workers, the workers without chains, and the workers whose livelihood is being stolen from by their feudal masters. There present as well as future is being stolen and violated. This is clearly evident in the growing class gap, corporate monopolies, longer working hours, skewed tax breaks to the elite, and now perhaps the gravest crime the loss of employees’ whole retirement savings due to the malpractices of greedy CEOs, ex. Worldcom, Enron, and numerous others.

You probably do, and 10's of millions of fellow americans through investments, IRA's, 401(k)'s etc.

Exactly, and look what became of these investments by the general shareholders, Lost! While the public lost money, CEOs and their elite friends gained due to insider trading.

Individual prosperity is not the issue here, it is the fact that capitalism has been so warped and concentrated that it has now taken the form of imperalism internationally and feudalism domestically.

In short, Americans meekly put up with incredible abuses on the part of Corporate America that they would never accept from their elected government. From outside America, it may appear that American Corporations are trying to conquer the world. From inside America, I suspect that it appears they are trying to conquer America too.

[/semi-rant]

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-22 10:29am

You seem to be forgetting all those people who made tons of money during stock rise ogf the 90's. When I was working at a fast food place in college, I remember a relatively poor manager who managed to double his life savings in a year, and noone gave him tips.

You seem to point out enron, and worldcom and the hallmarks of capitalism, I maintain thier are the exceptions and not the rule. And don't forget these people were caught, and they are going to lose everything and go to jail. If this was france or gernmany the government would have tried to cover up what they were doing as well (for a hefty bribe I might add)

I am not debating that people do things for selfish reason, but to think that people are less selfish becasue they are maigcally transfromed into a government official is absurd. As matter of fact people doing selfish things for thier own best interest is actually a good thiung in a capitalist system. Why becasue it gets people to work really hard.

My point was is pointing out I know millionaires, is that they are FIRST GENEERATION. that is extremely rare in a communist system or a feudal system, but it is common place here in a america.,

These Feudal lords yiou are taslking about, most of them were born into poor or average families, so they are first generation as well. You seem to think they are slve owners and herd thier employees around as such. I have firends who work are places like Microsoft who were made filthy rich from working there. How many "slaves" were made wealthy by Feudal masters?

You seem to think that when someone gets to be an eilite, that they stop caring about the world. Did you know that Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and many the of "Capitalist Feudal Lords" (a contradiction in terms) hgas pledged to give it all away to charity.. Bill Gates himself has established the largest charitable organization in the world sdtanding at about $20 billion in assets. They even had to get divesture exemptions from the IRS becasue they can't give away the money fast enough. In my own family the wealthest members themselves contribute almost a quarter of what they earn each year to help the poor, and in their wills give up significant chuncks of it to charitable organizations.

How often does that happen in Europe or Russia or anywhere else on this planet? Almost never, or not even coming close to how frequently happens in the US. as a matter ofdfact in many upper class communities, you are measured by how much you give away, how much good you can do while you are alive. As Dave Thomas put it, "No herse has a luggage rack". He gave nearly all of his hundreds of millions away as well.

BTW the top 5% of america pays about 91% of all taxes.

Now are you going to point out some facts or just spew basless accusations about the elite?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-07-22 11:07am

Alferd Packer wrote:Something no one has mentioned yet is that China can raise, train, and equip an army of over 200 million men. Short of massive nuclear or biological attacks, the U.S. cannot overcome such a massive army.

Why would the US face a 200-million man army? Are they going into the ROK along with the DPRK? Is the PLAAF equipped to defeat the USAF before they start bringing their airpower to flatten the (IIRC) mostly infantry columns advancing?

I don't think the PLA is willing to sacrifice that many troops. Everyone points to Korea, but that was not an experience they wanted to repeat. (according to Friedman in The Fifty Years War).

Iraq's current standing army is 4th-largest in the world and is well-equipped and trained.

But by what standard? Their C4ISR networks are no-where near as developed, their air-defense almost meaningless and their equipment does not compare to modern Western gear.

Also, the U.S. can only maintain a full-scale, high-technology conflict for about one year before the government goes bankrupt.

Just curious, your source for that ?

Given this, would it even be wise to attempt to take on the world? The lifestyle we revere so would definitely suffer, if not be obliterated by such a conflict.

Nope. It wouldn't be worth it.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-07-22 11:09am

Azeron wrote:In case yu are not familiar with isreal, its the ony country in the world that consistantly manges to kick our ass in war games despite having inferior technology. Isreal has the most advanced military doctrine in the world, and the most effective ground forces to date. It could easily kick the shit out of the entire middle east before breakfast and still make it back before lunch.

Sure, they'll well-trained, but do they have the materials store and logistical support to back them up if they want to go head-to-head with the rest of the Middle East?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-07-22 11:54am

Azeron wrote:"Iroquois system"
You got that from a bad movie didn't you? I hasve heard that garbage made it into a motion picture, absolu te trash. Perhaps we forgot to incorporate the part about killing the higher up to take his position.

Don't be ridiculous, you ignorant twat. You are the one who's getting his ideas about the Iroquois from movies. The Iroquois had a system of democratic representation and recall in 1400. The various tribes elected representatives to sit on the major council, and the Great Binding Law of the Iroquois Confederacy bears a strong resemblance to the US Constitution.

SO if Tom Daschle wanted to be president he would challenge him to a battle to the death. Thats the "Iroquois system" not exactly democracy. Though there are many appologists for indian tribes, the truth of the matter is, that there really wasn't much democracy outsdie of primitive tribal councils.'

The founders copied noone, it was a completely new draft, with nothing like it in the history of mankind, though they did borrow form the romans and greeks heavily, but made many innovative structures.

Interesting. Benjamin Franklin seems to disagree with you. From his famous speech at the Albany congress: "It would be a strange thing ... if six nations of 'ignorant savages' should be capable of forming such a union and be able to execute it in such a manner that it has subsisted for ages and appears indissoluble, and yet that a like union should be impractical for ten or a dozen English colonies."

Strange, isn't it? Benjamin Franklin describes the United States as a "like union" to the Iroquois system, yet you claim that he and the other founding fathers invented the idea out of thin air, and that there was "nothing like it in the history of mankind"! Not to be a snob or anything, but I'll take Benjamin Franklin's word over yours, particularly regarding the inspirations used by him and the other founding fathers.

"open minded" You notice how people who are constantly spewing out about how "you need to be more open minded" that roughly translates into, "Your only open minded if you aggree with me, and ascent to my baseless rantings without haveingh any clue what I am talking abouit"

Speak for yourself.

The reasoin I don't take you seriously is because You speak in contradictory terms "American Capitalism" is Feudalism (snip)

The reason I don't take you seriously is that not only do you speak authoritatively on matters you obviously have performed no research into, but you can't even keep your quoting straight; you're attributing someone else's words to me now.

I have several millionaires in my family, all are first generation, some didn;t even have a job durnign the great depression. Most of them you would think are millionaires becasue of the regular life they live. That is not indicative a feudalist society, in feudalism, you earn money through your parents, or by killing enough people for it, or through some politiking (very rare but it did happen) With enough effort and foresight, anyone can become wealthy in the US.

True. However, the big corporations are slowly taking away our freedoms, and your arguments have nothing whatsoever to do with that fact. Even the millionaires of this country face imprisonment if they dare analyze copy protection technology even in the exercise of their fair use rights, and even a millionaire can face financial ruin if he says something to piss off the wrong big company and gets their lawyers on his ass. You are drawing a false dilemma between communism and completely unregulated capitalism, which is just plain silly.

BTW the top 5% of america pays about 91% of all taxes.

That's because they have all the money! Relative to their wealth, they are actually under-paying. I am no communist; I think Marxism is bullshit. But that doesn't mean I believe in the omnipotent wisdom of The Market either. Too many people draw your false dilemma between completely unregulated capitalism and communism in order to defend the former. When the big corporations control the government (see Fritz Hollings), you have lost your democracy. John McCain understands this; why don't you?

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2002-07-22 11:54am

Azeron, I'm aware that Isreal contains much more than rabbis, and delis

, but I doubt they would be effective in stopping a combined arab attack. The Isreali army already has a difficult time intercepting suicide bombers and stamping out the various militant and terrorist factions. I agree with you that Isreal has excellent ground troops but that being said, would they be able to stop missle attacks from various targets (i.e. Iraq, Syria, Lebennon, etc.).

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-22 12:37pm

Azeron wrote:You seem to be forgetting all those people who made tons of money during stock rise ogf the 90's. When I was working at a fast food place in college, I remember a relatively poor manager who managed to double his life savings in a year, and noone gave him tips.

You seem to point out enron, and worldcom and the hallmarks of capitalism, I maintain thier are the exceptions and not the rule. And don't forget these people were caught, and they are going to lose everything and go to jail. If this was france or gernmany the government would have tried to cover up what they were doing as well (for a hefty bribe I might add)

I am not debating that people do things for selfish reason, but to think that people are less selfish becasue they are maigcally transfromed into a government official is absurd. As matter of fact people doing selfish things for thier own best interest is actually a good thiung in a capitalist system. Why becasue it gets people to work really hard.

My point was is pointing out I know millionaires, is that they are FIRST GENEERATION. that is extremely rare in a communist system or a feudal system, but it is common place here in a america.,

These Feudal lords yiou are taslking about, most of them were born into poor or average families, so they are first generation as well. You seem to think they are slve owners and herd thier employees around as such. I have firends who work are places like Microsoft who were made filthy rich from working there. How many "slaves" were made wealthy by Feudal masters?

You seem to think that when someone gets to be an eilite, that they stop caring about the world. Did you know that Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and many the of "Capitalist Feudal Lords" (a contradiction in terms) hgas pledged to give it all away to charity.. Bill Gates himself has established the largest charitable organization in the world sdtanding at about $20 billion in assets. They even had to get divesture exemptions from the IRS becasue they can't give away the money fast enough. In my own family the wealthest members themselves contribute almost a quarter of what they earn each year to help the poor, and in their wills give up significant chuncks of it to charitable organizations.

How often does that happen in Europe or Russia or anywhere else on this planet? Almost never, or not even coming close to how frequently happens in the US. as a matter ofdfact in many upper class communities, you are measured by how much you give away, how much good you can do while you are alive. As Dave Thomas put it, "No herse has a luggage rack". He gave nearly all of his hundreds of millions away as well.

BTW the top 5% of america pays about 91% of all taxes.

Now are you going to point out some facts or just spew basless accusations about the elite?

Azeron, there is no point in talking to RC about this, I've tried to tell him the exact same thing in the past and he just ignores what you bring up.

Mr. B · Post by **Mr. B** » 2002-07-22 01:33pm

The Isrealis have to put up with so much shit from the rest of the Middle East. If they went and clobered the region, I wouldn't mind.

Oh, and by the way, the rumor is that Isreal has nukes. So by by Baghdad.

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2002-07-22 02:09pm

Mr. B. isn't it fair to assume that if Israel decides to nuke baghdad that another middle-eastern nation with nuclear missles, say Pakistan, wouldn't return in kind? Even with a reported nuclear arsenal, would Israel still be able to handle the counter offensive? With U.S., and U.K. backing them, maybe. Without any superpower allies then the answer would be no.

Mr. B · Post by **Mr. B** » 2002-07-22 02:13pm

They wouldnt have to take land territory, just pound their cities, make them not a threat.

Pakistan has to long range missles. Just short-medium range. And Pakistan had India to worry about.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2002-07-22 02:26pm

That's because they have all the money! Relative to their wealth, they are actually under-paying. I am no communist; I think Marxism is bullshit. But that doesn't mean I believe in the omnipotent wisdom of The Market either. Too many people draw your false dilemma between completely unregulated capitalism and communism in order to defend the former. When the big corporations control the government (see Fritz Hollings), you have lost your democracy. John McCain understands this; why don't you?

John McCain doesn't understand anything but that he wants to be in front of a camera and he wants it NOW. Regardless of our views on McCain, you are very correct that the rich pay less of their wealth than the poor (despite being in a insanely high tax bracket). The rich can manipulate their way around the tax laws and shield their wealth. Off shore investments, trusts, etc.. Thats why the income tax and the IRS are failures and need to be abolished in exchange for a fairer system. I believe a consumption tax would be fairest since saving money, or investing it, wouldn't be punished.

Next of Kin · Post by **Next of Kin** » 2002-07-22 02:46pm

Azeron said:
...As matter of fact people doing selfish things for thier own best interest is actually a good thiung in a capitalist system. Why becasue it gets people to work really hard.

Really? Why don't you ask the investors of WorldCom, Halliburton Co, or Enron if "selfish things" did them any good? Those companies cooked their books for their own self interests or to simply look good on paper. I'll agree on one thing, the auditors from Andersen consulting did work really hard in their creative accounting techniques.

Azeron said:
You seem to point out enron, and worldcom and the hallmarks of capitalism, I maintain thier are the exceptions and not the rule. And don't forget these people were caught, and they are going to lose everything and go to jail. If this was france or gernmany the government would have tried to cover up what they were doing as well (for a hefty bribe I might add)

Halliburton Co.'s fromer CEO was none other than Dick Cheney! Even George Dubbya's Harken Oil Corp was investigated by the SEC. I think the U.S. has done its fair share of cover ups.

I'd rather take my money to the casino and bet it all rather than investing. I'd at least have a fair chance of getting it back!

Resident Commie · Post by **Resident Commie** » 2002-07-22 02:55pm

"We have about 50% of the world's wealth, but only 6.3% of its population...In this situation we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment...We should cease to talk about vague and unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democritization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better"
-George Keenan (Head of the U.S. State Department, Policy Planning Study 23, 1948)

Is it that hard to see that the elite, the top 1% are in control.

My point was is pointing out I know millionaires, is that they are FIRST GENEERATION. that is extremely rare in a communist system or a feudal system, but it is common place here in a america.,

Really, common place. According to the 2000 census. It reports that

"A related measure of the severity of poverty in a population is the "poverty gap." The poverty gap is the amount by which the incomes of all poor people fall below the poverty line. The poverty gap reflects both the number of people who are poor and the depth of their poverty. In 2000, the poverty gap, using the broader measure of poverty described above, was $66.5 billion."

"According to the Census data issued today, in 2000 the share of the national household income that the poorest fifth of households receive was tied for the lowest level on record, with these data going back to 1967. The share received by the middle three-fifth of households — the broad middle class — set a new low in 2000. But the shares that the top fifth of households and the top five percent receive set new highs."

"Although poverty declined and incomes increased in 2000, poverty rates are likely to rise in 2001. (Note: analysis recently conducted by Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution also reaches this conclusion.) Many economic indicators point to a slowing economy this year. The monthly unemployment rate, which averaged 4.0 percent for 2000, climbed to 4.9 percent by August 2001 and will likely be significantly higher by the end of the year, given the current round of lay-offs. Growth in the gross domestic product (adjusted for inflation) fell from an annual rate of 1.9 percent in the last quarter of calendar 2000 to 1.3 percent in the first quarter of 2001 and 0.2 percent in the second quarter of 2001. Many economists expect that GDP growth will be negative in the last two quarters of the year, which would mean the economy has entered a recession. During all recent recessions, poverty has increased."

http://www.stw.org/images/Inequality.or ... rth_98.gif
http://www.stw.org/images/Inequality.or ... _Worth.gif
http://www.stw.org/images/Inequality.or ... Retire.gif

The facts don't lie. While you maybe lucky enough to be one of the few wealth people in America the poverty as well as income gap is growing.

You seem to point out enron, and worldcom and the hallmarks of capitalism, I maintain thier are the exceptions and not the rule. And don't forget these people were caught, and they are going to lose everything and go to jail. If this was france or gernmany the government would have tried to cover up what they were doing as well (for a hefty bribe I might add)

I am not debating that people do things for selfish reason, but to think that people are less selfish becasue they are maigcally transfromed into a government official is absurd. As matter of fact people doing selfish things for thier own best interest is actually a good thiung in a capitalist system. Why becasue it gets people to work really hard.

Although companies such as enron were found out, think of the many others who have yet to be prosecuted. These scandals involve many more corporate giants. And to think that the government is not turning to "blind eye" at most of these cases is ludicrous. The army sececretay, vice-president and even Bush himself, have been exposed for there illegal activity. The sad truth is that when people do "selfish things" it more often then not includes "illegal things".

"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both"
- Louis Brandeis, Supreme Court justice 1916-1939

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-22 07:13pm

That original quote was, what, 1948? Since then we have never been vague about anything. Many countries complain that we interfer to much.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-22 10:03pm

first about isreal.
Yes it can kick some serious ass. it has whipped the crap out of the arab nations before, and it will continue to do so in the future. Yes they can't stop suicide bombers, but they are too human just to kill off the palestinians. Even though I would for what they are doing.

ohh Mike, I was reffereing history to you, economics to red commie.

ohh the great binding law
http://www.constitution.org/cons/iroquois.htm
hmm I read through it, and to tell you the truth, I couldn't stop laugihing.

Yes I aggree its an oligarichic confederacy, but really, its little more than tribal council. Hell they even decide who has to swat the flies and little animals who interrupt thier "fire".

that is an entirely differnt baby than this
http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

As for franklin, he was present at the convention but he didn't particiapte, he just took notes. Like Washington, he was there to give legitimacy, nothing else.

The US is a federated republic, not a confederacy -- big whopping difference.
the father of the constitution is James Madison (http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/bios/04pmadi.html) who devised the Virginia Plan, basically the outliune of the republic. He was a genius by any standard, an avid reader of history. he took from many nations poast, like Rome,Holy Roman Empire, Athens, England (parliment, proto federation) and others, and I assure you he was no fan of "indians" or anything they wrote. Madison was no pot smoking hippie, but franklin was known to make outragous comments in his day.

You basically took a snippet of a pro-federalist remark Franklin made and turned into Indian-advocacey when a simple perusal of their "binding law" shows they look nothing like the US Constitution. Perhaps you should read the federalist papers (http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/fed/fedpapers.html) if you need further convincing. There was never a federated republic (to my knowledge at least) of any kind (maybe the Delalign Alliance) in the history of mankind.

When I saw there had been nothing like what they were proposing, I am wuite right. There have been confederacys before, but federations are a very rare thing, even today.

As for John Macain and corporations stealing people's rights.
How many companies can you name that have been around 50 years? 100 years? 120 years? Maybe 1 or 2. Corps come and go, because people stop doing business with them. They die. Do they have power? Yes they do. is that fair? I would say yes. They represent the intrests of hundreds millions of american stockholders. so by every right they should have a good deal of input into what kind of laws are passed that affect their business. Do you think that a group of 2 people should have as much influence as a group of a million? Well if you said yes, you don't beleive in democracy.

How many representatives would purposely allow injustice to take place? I think the DCMA has more to do with ignorance than it does with corporate influence and is one of the reasons why having less government -- capitsalism is better than having more government -- communism. Yah people abuise the system, but its not just corporations, its allot of people. How many times do you see people abusing the court system to get millions of dollars for scolding themselves with coffee? Not watching where they are going and trip, break an arm and then sue the government? Does that mean the system is controlled exclusively by lawyers and idiots on the bench? Maybe, but if you looked at it from this perspecitve it is obvious that you are oversimplifing the situation. You have tons of rights, the most in the entire world, you can choose not to buy M$ or not, or Sun or not. It may not be practical, but if you are playing their game, they must be giving you more than they are taking away, or logically you would stop using thier stuff. And yes there are alternatives.

I have yet to see a cure thats not worse than the illness you cry about.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2002-07-22 10:22pm

Azeron wrote:first about isreal.
Yes it can kick some serious ass. it has whipped the crap out of the arab nations before, and it will continue to do so in the future.

Yes, if all of the Middle East comes to them. Logistics isn't such a large issue then, but if they have to take on everyone else 'the old fashioned way,' it becomes much harder simply because of the supplies it'd take.

I have no doubt that the IDF is superior to any of their neighboring militiaries.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-22 10:39pm

Alright commie lets talk about some figures. You decry US capitalism as growing the difference between the rich and the poor. there could be many reasons for the poverty level increasing, IMMIGRATION is a big one for us, since we are so rich, people are just hounsing at the doors to get in. The richer we get the faster they immigrate and in bigger numbers. the 1990s so a huge influx of immigrants into the US seeking a better way of life.

Now lets take a typical Euro country which is pretty dam close to socialism, did you know that France the unemployment rate for people under 30 is 25%?

Did you know rich and poor alike in the EU supports huge corporations with cash subsidies, interest free lows, tax breaks, like Airbus, the company that could never buld a plane without a subsidy. The EU taxpayer subsidizes Airbus plane sales to even FOREIGN corporations. Something that the US doesn;t do for boeing.

Speaking on my expertize as an accountant, Euro accounting standards are 50 years behind the USA. They make it real easy to hide losses. You think whats going on with enron was bad, if we audited Euro companies you would probably find a third of the major compainies running on fumes and government susidies.

But talking about government effiecency in general, here in the states Medicare/the military/EPA/you name it loses a solid 5th to a third of its budget to waste fraud and abuse. making worldcom and enron's failure pale in comparison costing the poor schmow on the street a good 5% of paycheck to pay for this crap.

I personally think the US should have a standard deduction of 50k on the income tax return, and plow all of fica under 50k into IRA's. then have a flat tax of just 10%. There is no reason why the poort should have to pay taxes.

As for a share of the wealth, that sorta depends on allot of factors, such as a marriage or kids, 1 or 2 income households, but you know the poor really don't pay much in taxes as a portion of wealth as the rich. take someone making 38k/year, poor by most standards, there tax rate is maybe 10 - 15% on half of it, but most likely you additional deductions like mortgage deductions and kids. the person probably pays just 10% of his income in taxes. Someone making 300k, easily pays out 55% in direct and indirect federal taxes. and thats before state taxes, in cali, they want to raise the income tax to 12%, making it a whopping 67% total, and then there are local taxes and property taxes. probasbly brings it up to about 70% - 73%, and most of your possible deductions are disquallified. You can call whats left wealth if you want, but they had to work pretty dam hard, and most of it was taken away and spent on something frivolus like $2000 hammers.

Commie you seem to like to talk about how much money they have, and you seem to think it comes by falling on thier lap. The relality of it is, is that the majority of people who are rich, spent mosdt of thier youths workign non stop, investing in themselves and producing more than what an average person produces. Maybe I am rich just becasue of what I make just about $60k (by the top 5% level) at my junior level, but I never went to parties in college, and studied my butt off and worked over 100 hours a week every week and paid my own way through college all by myself. And if I make a good penny in my life I owe it to no one but myself (and God). I don't think I anyone who hasn't ever had to work their ass off while others just coast an explanation or an apology for thier predictiment.

Resident Commie · Post by **Resident Commie** » 2002-07-22 11:13pm

Since when did this debate turn into capitalism vs. communism. Aside from being my user name, I have made no refrences or comments about communism at all. So stop the false alternatives of communism and the diversionary attacks in which debate the "ideal" conditions of capitalism.

How many companies can you name that have been around 50 years? 100 years? 120 years? Maybe 1 or 2. Corps come and go, because people stop doing business with them. They die. Do they have power? Yes they do. is that fair? I would say yes. They represent the intrests of hundreds millions of american stockholders. so by every right they should have a good deal of input into what kind of laws are passed that affect their business. Do you think that a group of 2 people should have as much influence as a group of a million? Well if you said yes, you don't beleive in democracy.

First off, whats the relevency of how long a company has been around. The companies themsleves, do not wield the power. It is the CEOs and Board of Directors that hold the true power. And it is clear that the people in these positions not only retain their power and wealth, but they continue to make money once their company is out of business. As shown mist evidently by the CEOs of ImClone, Enron, Tyco and WorldCom.

Second CEOs do not represent the intrests of their investors. CEOs only care for profit and how they can swindle more money out of these shareholders. This is why they are adamantly against laws which would crackdown on their illegal activities. The truth is that a small group of business leaders have as much if not much more influence than the general public.

How many representatives would purposely allow injustice to take place?

Apparently everyone who isn't for stronger regulations. All those who are suppoed to be watchdoging are being bought. Boards of Directors, accounting firms and even law firms, are being compensated for their inaction. Not only is the leadership structure corrupt but the governments laws against these type of crime is almost nonexistent. That is because the injustices aren't being reported by the media corporations that stand to loose just as other non-media corporations.

The answer is simple, stop allowing the elite to manipulate the economy, enact reforms and enforce them. As for examples of possible reforms here are a few being debated in congress:

S. 1940, “Ending the Double Standard for Stock Options Act”, introduced by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ). Would eliminate a loophole that allows companies to receive a tax deduction for stock options without reporting them as expenditures on financial statements.

S. 1838, “Pensions Protection and Diversification Act of 2001,” introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Jon Corzine (D-NJ). Would have capped percentage of company stock in an employee’s 401(k) plan at 20 percent

H.R. 4084, “Corporate Asset Protection Act of 2002,” introduced by Rep. Lynn Rivers (D-MI). Would prohibit companies from providing loans to “insiders” and prohibit company executives from accepting loans unless the employer is a financial institution.

H.R. 3634, “Enron Employee Pension Recovery Act of 2002,” introduced by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). Would create a “disgorgement” fund composed of Enron and Andersen proceeds to compensate Enron employees.

H.R. 3644, “Securities Fraud Prevention Act of 2002,” introduced by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI). Would eliminate the securities fraud exemption from the civil remedy for racketeering violations.

H.R. 3769, “Insider Trading Disclosure Act of 2002” introduced by Rep. Ken Bensten (D-TX). Would require day-of insider trading disclosure to the SEC and next-day disclosure to the public and company employees.

Note: The following three bills deal with the increasing number of corporations that are reincorporating in offshore tax havens and cheating the U.S. government out of billions of dollars in tax revenue. Though they are gaining momentum and co-sponsors, none have gotten out of committee yet.

H.R. 3884 “Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act of 2002”, Introduced by Richard Neal (D-MA). Taxes corporations that reincorporate offshore as domestic companies if the ownership and the activities of the “inverted” corporation still remain primarily onshore in the United States. 106 co-sponsors

H.R. 4993, “No Tax Breaks for Corporations Renouncing America Act” Introduced by Lloyd Doggett (D-TX). Prevents corporations who reincorporate abroad for tax avoidance purposes from benefiting from U.S. international tax treaties. 99 co-sponsors

H.R. 4831, “Patriotic Purchasing Act of 2002” Introduced by Jim Turner (D-TX). Prohibits companies that reincorporate offshore for tax avoidance purposes from receiving government contracts. 46 co-sponsors

These are the laws that need to be passed, the sad truth is that they probably won't due to the exorbitant pressure that is being applied on congress by lobbyists who are there to make sure that large companies won't ever have to be truly accountable.

Azeron · Post by **Azeron** » 2002-07-22 11:43pm

the list of laws ony show your own ignorance on the subject.

As for people being bought, I refused a job with anderson a few years back when I was coming out of college becasue I though they were too aggressive in the pursuit of profits and needed an ethics realignment. But you know what, half of my class went to them because they offered the biggest checks, now they are out of job, and desperatly trying to find work with that black stain even though they never did anything wrong.

Now about this stock options thing. The accounting industry wanted this rule impossed 3 years ago, but when FASB (The accounting regulatory body) went to impose them, the very same people who are backing the stock option reporting law were in fact the same ones who threatened to pass a law to overule the accounting industry. If the democrats didn't threaten FASB stock options would have been reported as expenses.

Atrifically capping empolyees investment opportunities? What about people who work for a company thats doing really good business? taking an industry by storm? What about employee ownership in the company they work for? Same dam people who in the 90's wanted employees to become more lihe owners encouraged this in congress. thats why the laws are so leient. Complete hypocrisy

No loans to employees? what about relocation incentives like low interst to buy a home where employees are needed? what about stock options? most employees can't even afford to cash them in, and if the business doesn;t give them the temp loan they will get sharked by outside firms looking to make a quick buck. Thats gona hurt the little guy pretty big

disgourgement fund? I am not even sure what that is, but it sounds nice, but the only way to help out employees is by takeing away someoneelse's investment

Securities Fraud Prevention? thisi s jsut another charge to lob on it. why not just threaten thme with death and get it over with. You can't keep people intent from commiting a crime from commiting a crime ifd they want to bad enough. this is fluff

Insider trading disclosure? Allot of people who work in the finance industry get accused of this and are completely innocent. Are we going to smear the innocent people's names instead of solid evidence before we put a companies stock through teh tumble and ruin someone's life?

Patriot corporation? IF you travel abroad and work in say china, do you think you chould have to pay US taxes for something that has nothing to do with the USA? no other country in the world thinks so besides the USA. The only reason why they are movingthier headquarters overseas is to prevent taxation of profit which has absolutely nothing to do with the USA.

Then they want to remove their lawful tax breaks for thier US subsidaires? this is like Nazi Germany for crying out loud.

and Finally the US subsidaries can't even compete for governemnt contracts even though they are paying US taxes on US profit??????? isn't insane. So If i start a company in england and don;t pay the USA taxes on all my profits around the world, my US subsidairy would be able to do compete with other comopaines for Gov contracts, get lucrative tax breaks all the while liek a company like sears or campbells can't becasue they were orignially american can't regardless how cheap or good thier products are? dos that make ANY sense?

you are just whacky.
and Yes you called US capitalism feudalism, and crealy its not, and I will phrase the debate into whatever dichotomy fits my point of view best. You are the only one here yapping idiotically, making insane judgements and reasoning by induction.

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-23 12:03am

I generally agree with what Azeron has said but I would like to respond to one thing

The companies themsleves, do not wield the power. It is the CEOs and Board of Directors that hold the true power

Incorrect, in nearly all corporations the stockholders vote for a CEO, and if those stockholders choose not to vote or be informed about their company's decisions, that is their own fault.

Resident Commie · Post by **Resident Commie** » 2002-07-23 12:04am

So, you want figures. Here's some figures for thought.

Between 1947-1979 average family in all classes raised equally on an average of 100%.

While in the years between 1979-1999 the average family income between classes differed 69% from the bottom 20% to the top 5% of the top 30%.

To even more dismay is the income gap difference after taxes. From 1979 to 1999 the gap between the bottom 20% and aforementioned 5%, raised to an exorbitant 124%.

Now isn't this the most obvious explantions of the poverty gap. That the existing rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. That CEOs on average earn 475x that of average workers pay and that the top 10% of America own 79.7% of american stocks, mutual funds and retirement accounts.

As for a share of the wealth, that sorta depends on allot of factors, such as a marriage or kids, 1 or 2 income households, but you know the poor really don't pay much in taxes as a portion of wealth as the rich. take someone making 38k/year, poor by most standards, there tax rate is maybe 10 - 15% on half of it, but most likely you additional deductions like mortgage deductions and kids. the person probably pays just 10% of his income in taxes. Someone making 300k, easily pays out 55% in direct and indirect federal taxes. and thats before state taxes, in cali, they want to raise the income tax to 12%, making it a whopping 67% total, and then there are local taxes and property taxes. probasbly brings it up to about 70% - 73%, and most of your possible deductions are disquallified. You can call whats left wealth if you want, but they had to work pretty dam hard, and most of it was taken away and spent on something frivolus like $2000 hammers.

Thats if the rich payed their taxes because tax evasion remains one of Americas top white collar crimes. Not to mention what they get outside taxes.

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » 2002-07-23 12:08am

Resident Commie wrote: First off, whats the relevency of how long a company has been around. The companies themsleves, do not wield the power. It is the CEOs and Board of Directors that hold the true power. And it is clear that the people in these positions not only retain their power and wealth, but they continue to make money once their company is out of business. As shown mist evidently by the CEOs of ImClone, Enron, Tyco and WorldCom.

The CEOs of ImCLone, Enron, etc... are not typical of the system. They made their money illegally, through lies and deciet, not through legitimate market practices. There is no correlation between the activities of these few companies and the rest of the companies currently in business. Attempts to lump all CEOs into the same pile isn't justified by the facts.

Second CEOs do not represent the intrests of their investors. CEOs only care for profit and how they can swindle more money out of these shareholders.

Company profit is how shareholders make their money. Do you know anything about the free market?

This is why they are adamantly against laws which would crackdown on their illegal activities.

We already have laws against the practices of CEOs that use fraud to swindle investors. Why do you want new laws against things that are already illegal? As shown, these people get caught, and they will probably get punished. The only thing that can prevent things like this in the future is honesty in our places of business.

The truth is that a small group of business leaders have as much if not much more influence than the general public.

They have a bigger stake than many people in the general public combined, hence they have more influence.

Apparently everyone who isn't for stronger regulations.

The problem is that I havn't seen any 'stronger regulations' that would solve any problems. Most of the things suggested would just create more red tape and waste more money. What needs to happen is the enforcement of the laws we have.

All those who are suppoed to be watchdoging are being bought. Boards of Directors, accounting firms and even law firms, are being compensated for their inaction. Not only is the leadership structure corrupt but the governments laws against these type of crime is almost nonexistent. That is because the injustices aren't being reported by the media corporations that stand to loose just as other non-media corporations.

There are plenty of laws against fraud. If this were not so, the people involved in these current scandles wouldn't be in trouble, now would they? The same goes for the media. For media corporations not reporting the stories about big business fraud, I've seen a lot of lead stories on the nightly news. Strange how reality contradicts your statements..

The answer is simple, stop allowing the elite to manipulate the economy, enact reforms and enforce them. As for examples of possible reforms here are a few being debated in congress:

Thats like saying to stop murder quit letting people kill other people. Its not so simple. Laws can only make actions illegal, they cannot stop the actions except through the fear of what will happen if they go through with those actions.

S. 1940, “Ending the Double Standard for Stock Options Act”, introduced by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ). Would eliminate a loophole that allows companies to receive a tax deduction for stock options without reporting them as expenditures on financial statements.

How is a stock option a loss? Yes I know that they get to buy stocks cheaper than the current market price, but this is not really a loss. If I had a car, which I bought for lets say 500 dollars. Its market value was 1500 dollars. I sold it to a friend though for a mear 1000. Would I count my car sale as a 500 dollar loss (from 1500) or a 500 dollar gain (from 500) Gee, I wonder how the capital gains dept over at the IRS would view it...

S. 1838, “Pensions Protection and Diversification Act of 2001,” introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Jon Corzine (D-NJ). Would have capped percentage of company stock in an employee’s 401(k) plan at 20 percent

That whole thing is retarded anyways. For one thing, there should be no restraints on how people invest their money at all. If you want to have all, some or none of your money in your employers business is up to you. It certianly isn't up to the government to decide.

H.R. 3634, “Enron Employee Pension Recovery Act of 2002,” introduced by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). Would create a “disgorgement” fund composed of Enron and Andersen proceeds to compensate Enron employees.

Thats nonsense. The people who should be compensated are the stockholders of Enron and Anderson. Compensated of any and all assests that were stolen via fraud. Many of the employees would benifit from that by the way...

H.R. 3644, “Securities Fraud Prevention Act of 2002,” introduced by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI). Would eliminate the securities fraud exemption from the civil remedy for racketeering violations.

And in english that does what?

H.R. 3769, “Insider Trading Disclosure Act of 2002” introduced by Rep. Ken Bensten (D-TX). Would require day-of insider trading disclosure to the SEC and next-day disclosure to the public and company employees.

There are already adequate disclosure requirements on the books. I fail to see how this would stop fraud and fabrication of records. They will simply lie about sales the same way they lie about everything else.

Note: The following three bills deal with the increasing number of corporations that are reincorporating in offshore tax havens and cheating the U.S. government out of billions of dollars in tax revenue. Though they are gaining momentum and co-sponsors, none have gotten out of committee yet.

Those companies will simply leave the US. They cannot operate under the current tax situation in the country.

I might post more later if I get time...

David · Post by **David** » 2002-07-23 12:10am

The poor are not getting poorer, the rich are getting richer. Which is not bad, because they have earned it. You act as if some evil bastards plotted their way into being CEOs. Most CEOs spends years going to college and then proving they can do their job by working their way up.

Mr. B · Post by **Mr. B** » 2002-07-23 12:16am

David wrote: The poor are not getting poorer, the rich are getting richer. Which is not bad, because they have earned it. You act as if some evil bastards plotted their way into being CEOs. Most CEOs spends years going to college and then proving they can do their job by working their way up.

But some are just being greedy now. ie Martha Stewart she has billions and wanted more.

And communism will never work because their is no reward. In the US becoming a billionare CEO is a plausible reward for hard work and effort.
And it will die out in the next few years IMHO.

Alferd Packer · Post by **Alferd Packer** » 2002-07-23 12:18am

phongn wrote:Just curious, your source for that ?

Read it in the paper at work last week, it was talking about our impending action against Iraq and our capabilities. I'll try to find an online source to substantiate it, because, hey, it does seem a tad iffy.[/i]