« First « Previous Comments 179 - 190 of 190 Search these comments
But you are much more sensible in person, that is the good news :).
Yeah, this is one of the nice things about the Patrick.net coffee hour.
That we are cute?
In is that your theories make you cute.
But then again, the same cute theories make you horrifying if you get the power to inact them.
That we are cute?
In is that your theories make you cute.
But then again, the same cute theories make you horrifying if you get the power to inact them.
Only if you reject Utopia. ;-)
It is not a tax, it is a fee. There is also competitions.
First, Fees are taxes just under a different name.
Second, there is no real competition as banking is largely a cartel.
Third, pure capitalism will never yield 0% transaction costs because
Only centralized control can reduce wasteful siphoning to 0%.
It is not a tax, it is a fee. There is also competitions.
Oh, please. VISA/MC and Discover is a duopoly with no real competition, plus all the banks like their cut of the fees, too. Who's to stop them?
Stop complaining, your free to start your own credit card company! It's a free market right?
Fool, go divide your own party.
Peter P and I are joining mental telepathy powers to divide 121212's party. "wooooooo wooooooo woooooo"
(Opening one eye, to see if it's working)
Who was behind the French Revolution?
The Poor and Middle Classes, who were being taxed to death to give Nobles and the Bourgeoisie salaried positions for doing nothing. The rich also voted (yes, France had Estates, but only for the Rich and High Clergy) themselves immunity from lawsuits (oh, we're being sued too much - sound familiar?), the right to imprison anybody indefinitely without charge or trial (Cachets d'Iforget), and no taxes. Almost all taxes were paid by the peasants (who paid 4/5th of their crop in rent and taxes, often to the same person) and the middle class.
There were also a few relatively poor noblemen who seethed over not getting any positions in the Army or Bureaucracy, because they weren't rich enough to buy themselves a salaried office.
Also, which group ended up benefiting from the French Revolution permanently?
Bankers loved that.
We need a small but flat or regressive income tax plus a flat land value tax.
Also, which group ended up benefiting from the French Revolution permanently?
Bankers loved that.
I had to stop reading after "centralized, totalitarian, managerial, pseudo-democratic despotisms that now reign over the West."
I wish I was allowed to live in a different reality when I chose to.
But it is a mistake to apply value judgement to any kind of economic activity.
Only if you're a psychopath.
I could become very wealthy by murdering people and taking their money. I could become very wealthy by deceiving people into signing unfair contracts. I could become very wealthy by planting rumors of a major corporate acquisition and buying stock appropriately.
The idea that economics exists independent of ethics is a ridiculous fantasy ideal of libertarian fundamentalists who never have been nor ever will be in a position to actually have to make major financial decisions for anybody.
« First « Previous Comments 179 - 190 of 190 Search these comments
Because they think they are the greatest, yet they are rarely rich. Therefore, they try to invent reasons to explain why wealth beyond a certain point (i.e. a level attainable by their professions) should be re-distributed away.
The consequence of accepting that some people "deserve" their "excess" wealth is too severe for their egos to bear.