Letter From One Percent
- Thread starter Chessie
- Start date
The problem with this 99% / 1% horseshit is that it places way too much emphasis on wealth discrepancy ("it's not fair!") instead of the real issue: exploitation and abuse of what is generally presented as a meritocratic system.
Bah... Ram... Ewe...
Bah... Ram... Ewe...
To your breed, your fleece, your stock be true.
Sheep be true.
I find this highly ironic considering the Occupy Wallstreet crowd in NYC is getting 5 star cuisine from world class chefs offering their services to the protestors.
The protests are attention-grabbing but pointless considering their goals.
I'd like to respond to the first part of this - Straight out of objectivism. When you analyse something, often its absurdity comes into view.
What is worth more to a person who buys a cup of coffee? Their $1.50, or the cup of coffee? The cup of coffee is more important to them - otherwise they wouldn't buy it. It's an exchange of value where BOTH sides are benefitting. The purchaser is GAINING value by purchasing that cup of coffee because they value it more than the money they're spending on it. The seller values the money more than the cup of coffee. If they DIDN'T value it more (say a $50 cup of normal coffee), then they wouldn't buy the coffee.
Right now, many (most?) people consider starbucks coffee more valuable than independant coffee places. This could be for their consistency, taste, value, or brand. We do like to show off to others in different ways.
My retort to your statment of "They're rich because of society" would be to ask how this is any different than saying "The middle and lower class get their luxuries from the rich creators, investors, and industrialists. Without them, there would be no plasma TVs, TV Dinners, Coors Light or affordable IKEA furniture. The middle and lower class need to stop trying to steal - to "have their cake and eat it too" - by getting their money's worth when they buy a product and then demanding their money BACK from the people who make these luxuries available. It's an obscene gesture of greed and childishness and they need to get their shit together and cut it out. Just as much as "The rich are rich because of society", so it is that "The poor are living better and better because of the rich". The only difference is that you don't see the poor getting their products stolen from them at a rate of 30% or more, while the rich are getting their profits taken from them at that very rate."
Please, do explain.
First of all, I would agree that many things are taken too far by the protesters. The rich weren't the only ones whose greed fueled the economic crises. The thing is that most people are getting poorer while the "1%" are getting richer. That shows that people are getting less value from the things they buy. Not all of them are being greedy. However, being the ones who already have the wealth to invest doesn't justify disproportionately more wealth. My point was that people should support people who are not being so greedy, not that the rich shouldn't have money for what they do. Part of it is also that people are upset about having to bailout banks while the people who invested poorly get even more money.
Coffee?
Lol....if people weren't made to work so many hours by the 1% then they wouldn't need to pump themselves full of stimulants all the time! Whats the world rushing to.....it's own funeral?
Here's a film made in 1996 which predicted the crash we are in at the moment. It describes how the entire history of the United States of America has been a tug and pull battle between the people (who actually do the work) and the bankers (who don't create any wealth but just extract interest from the real economy of production and consumption like a big parasite)
It's quite long but obviously can be watched in parts!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936#
Lol....if people weren't made to work so many hours by the 1% then they wouldn't need to pump themselves full of stimulants all the time! Whats the world rushing to.....it's own funeral?
Here's a film made in 1996 which predicted the crash we are in at the moment. It describes how the entire history of the United States of America has been a tug and pull battle between the people (who actually do the work) and the bankers (who don't create any wealth but just extract interest from the real economy of production and consumption like a big parasite)
It's quite long but obviously can be watched in parts!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936#
Le gasp! How Atlas shrugged, now you're getting it.
I can explain it. People who can't add value to the economy are complaining that insufficient wealth is redistributed to keep them in their accustomed lifestyles.
Some problems include: How and why? Do we force people who have money to just give it to the less well off or do we find something they can offer the rich that they are willing to pay sufficiently for? Naturally it would be even more sensible for those who need money to self-generate said useful activity
Last edited:
We should never have to engage in physical altercations with others, we should never murder each other, and we should never act irresponsibly... in a perfect world where we're all robots... but they happen all the time, and they always will. Greed will always be with us.
What would some reasonable "Things that need to be done" be then?
If you tax investments more, there will be less investments to small businesses, individuals, etc.
If you stop bailing out the banks then the banks will collapse and there will be far, far less loans to people.
If you tax the rich, they will raise prices on their items to make up for the amount they were taxed.
If you limit the amount that people can work or earn in a year, then many, many rich people won't work as much.
Of course, I'm in favor of one or more of those things above... but I'm fairly sure it won't happen. Is that defeatism, or is it being honest with myself? People fear change. Many would rather just complain and keep trying to get what they can (greed from the bottom) from those who have worked to get their money - whether honestly or unscrupulously (greed from the top).
The only fair things that I could see as a conclusion would be:
Educate people on how to manage their money. (This won't work because many poor people have a strict policy against learning.)
Let them learn themselves through failure and hope that they seek to be more responsible (But many won't, and you have to be ok with that.)
I'm not trying to justify the rich, but to say that we're all, for the most part, greedy bastards who want things we haven't worked for and want to devise a way to get it. That goes for the rich who defraud people, and the poor who want the government to defraud the rich. To those people who say "We need to do something about the hungry in the streets" I would say "What have you done to help them?" If their response is "I am petitioning for a new law so that the rich have to pay for it" then I lose all respect for them. If their response is "I am raising money for charity" I feel a slight bit better. If their response is "I am making sandwiches and distributing them myself, out of my own pocket" I have a great deal of respect for them - they're learning themselves and we'll see where it takes them. Their views will most definitely change though.
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will say he can't, he doesn't have time to learn, that it's too hard, and he'll come to you tomorrow asking for another fish because you know how to get food and he doesn't. Let him starve for a week and he may die, or he may ask you to teach him and actually learn. The goal isn't to find a someone to be a slave of the poor, but for them to learn to be their own masters - but that requires consent on the poor person's behalf... and they're not so willing to consent to an effort of that sort.
I can't find a way to make an actual, coherent response to this without saying something that will get me infracted. I'll try a short one though:
Mictim Ventality.
I first posted this film on this forum in 2009
I don't believe in a monopolised form of capitalism where the 1% can manipulate the markets if that's what you are referring to, but i'm not for free markets either. I believe in community not competition. We currently have community but one where there is a strict hierarchy intent on imposing itself on everyone else. I'm not for unrestrained competition either as that will lead to conflict as sure as night follows day.
However until the system i would like to see can come about there is a need for people to try to reform the current system which requires people to stop falsely seeing it as some sort of level playing field because it isn't. They also need to realise that the concentrated wealth is for the most part 'old money'
This idea of telling people to pull their socks up and grit their teeth shows a failure to realise what is happening in the bigger picture. Also all this talk of consumer goods is pretty pointless because that boom was built on easy credit which the banks gave out and have now stopped. The boom times are over, it was an illusion of prosperity built on debt and the younger generation will now inherit the problem and have a right to be pissed off about it.
Ultimately I do not agree with the solution suggested in the film because i would like to see money gone altogether, but seeing as that is unlikely to happen tomorrow (unless the bankers replace money with something electronically stored which i think they'd like to so that they can put microchips in us! I'm not kidding either....those people would do it) then i'm open to ideas to challenge the monopoly as a step on the road to where i'd like things to eventually go.
I've had numerous debates with 'anarcho-capitalists' but as far as i'm concerned their solution is thinly disguised fascism and usually when you scratch beneath the surface of their arguments you find a whole bunch of hate; for example justifications of violence.
If we keep clinging to capitalism then we must realise that preventing monopolies is going to be virtually impossible (over large enough timespans) which means that we (the people who do the work) will constantly have to face these boom and bust cycles where we are facing economic crises and will have to protest our way out of them (ie pressure the one percent in to making life bearable again for the workers).
One interesting thing the film does show is how with each crisis the wealth has become even more centralised. The bankers orchestrate the crises because they know how to make money from them and to use them to pressure governments into legislating in their favour.
The economy has become more globally integrated as have the levels of government and banking. In respone to that the protest has to be global as well....which it is. The point i'm making is that the scale of this is unprecedented, which throws a bit of uncertainty into the mix
If we give in to the bankers now we will find that they own everything and can basically charge us what they like to use their goods and services. Charges might be in the form of some sort of money or in labour.....either way though it's pretty scary, because if they control everything then they will not allow workers rights. We will be their corporate playthings......how do you think they would treat us....like humans or like robots?
For me, Occupy Wall Street is not about wealth discrepancy. I doubt it is for the majority of people who are in favor of the demonstrations.
We are angry at our government for bailing out the few - while at the same time letting the majority fall and die by the way side.
My Ex and I are a good example of what is happening to quite a few of the working class.
Yes. We work. We have worked. We have paid taxes. I have been paying taxes on income since I was 18 years old for a majority of my 55 years of life.
Now - I cannot find employment here. I cannot sell my home and my land. So I'm stuck. My ex is making about 10 to 20% of his former hours and I am fortunate to be receiving unemployment. But this will run out at the first of the year. We both live in separate abodes situated on our land. So far between the two of us and with some help from my family - we are making ends meet.
But now comes the property taxes. My property is paid for. I own it - all of it - no liens. Yet I am scared I will be unable to pay the tax. They'll let me slide the first year. Oh sure they'll sock it to me with past due interest and penalties - but they'll hold it. The next year I am unable to pay - they'll initiate a law suit. The year after that - they'll seize it. If I was over 65 - they couldn't put me off of my land. They'd just put liens on it and when I died they'd take what they wanted. But that will not happen for me.
This is land I purchased and paid for with my blood sweat and tears of hard work. The homes we've built here, the trees we've planted, the grasses we've encouraged to grow - will all go to a wealthy individual who'll buy it at a discounted rate from the county. It's not that we made bad choices in using our money. We had no control over the rise in cost of oil = fuel = food. We had no control over the rising taxation initiated due to a downturn in the economy. We had no control over the fact people lost a lot of money in ponzi schemes and derivatives. Capital has vanished into thin air...
I'm angry at my government because they bailed out a few at the expense of the many. I am angry at my government because they are bought lock stock and barrel with the financial industry's slimy cash. They allowed deregulation. And now the very ones who did are part of the White House's Financial Advisers.
What right do the CEO's of those failed corporations have to receive their huge bonuses and not have to pay for any of their mistakes - when I am going to lose all I have because of their greed for money and power?
Hmmm?
What right!
Here is the latest numbers from the US. You can see the rise in unemployment, the costs of oil, and a few other numbers that may be of relevance.
The taxpayers paid for a bail out. What we didn't realize was WHO was being bailed out. It sure as hell wasn't us...
We are angry at our government for bailing out the few - while at the same time letting the majority fall and die by the way side.
My Ex and I are a good example of what is happening to quite a few of the working class.
Yes. We work. We have worked. We have paid taxes. I have been paying taxes on income since I was 18 years old for a majority of my 55 years of life.
Now - I cannot find employment here. I cannot sell my home and my land. So I'm stuck. My ex is making about 10 to 20% of his former hours and I am fortunate to be receiving unemployment. But this will run out at the first of the year. We both live in separate abodes situated on our land. So far between the two of us and with some help from my family - we are making ends meet.
But now comes the property taxes. My property is paid for. I own it - all of it - no liens. Yet I am scared I will be unable to pay the tax. They'll let me slide the first year. Oh sure they'll sock it to me with past due interest and penalties - but they'll hold it. The next year I am unable to pay - they'll initiate a law suit. The year after that - they'll seize it. If I was over 65 - they couldn't put me off of my land. They'd just put liens on it and when I died they'd take what they wanted. But that will not happen for me.
This is land I purchased and paid for with my blood sweat and tears of hard work. The homes we've built here, the trees we've planted, the grasses we've encouraged to grow - will all go to a wealthy individual who'll buy it at a discounted rate from the county. It's not that we made bad choices in using our money. We had no control over the rise in cost of oil = fuel = food. We had no control over the rising taxation initiated due to a downturn in the economy. We had no control over the fact people lost a lot of money in ponzi schemes and derivatives. Capital has vanished into thin air...
I'm angry at my government because they bailed out a few at the expense of the many. I am angry at my government because they are bought lock stock and barrel with the financial industry's slimy cash. They allowed deregulation. And now the very ones who did are part of the White House's Financial Advisers.
What right do the CEO's of those failed corporations have to receive their huge bonuses and not have to pay for any of their mistakes - when I am going to lose all I have because of their greed for money and power?
Hmmm?
What right!
Here is the latest numbers from the US. You can see the rise in unemployment, the costs of oil, and a few other numbers that may be of relevance.
The taxpayers paid for a bail out. What we didn't realize was WHO was being bailed out. It sure as hell wasn't us...
Attachments
The economy is a 'global economy'...yes? Everything is interlinked and interconnected...yes?
So if we are trying to decide where we as individuals stand compared to the rest of humanity then you also have to look outside the borders of your own country.
You can't look at the 'poor' of your country as the bottom rung on the ladder of humanity because they aren't. There are also many people living in poverty elsewhere in the world who are all affected by the flows of money around the globe. They have no say in that process and are largely victims for example of imperialism or of monied interests who take their own country to war to steal the resources of weaker countries and to make money from weapons manufacturing.
How about those people as they catch a US made bomb on their head as they rest at home....do they have a 'victim mentality'? People are coerced and have situations forced on them all the time. Whether its someone who is being attacked or someone who is having to conform to a system which they can see with crystal clarity is not sustainable.
Even people living in poverty in the west do not have the same opportunites as their wealthier countrymen.
Really what we have to decide is how do you best create a stable, healthy, happy society?
Do you do it by turning life into a big competition.....hum....i dunno....i don't think everyone wants to live a life where they are always looking over their shoulder, waiting for a knife in the back. Sure we could do that....but it lacks vision and i think we can do better.
Do you do it by allowing monopolies of the more aggressive factions in the society? Will that lead to a stable, healthy, happy society? I think we can see around the world right now that that doesn't work.
So it seems we need to work together and encourage cooperation, whilst finding a way to stop the more aggressive factions from exploiting the others and disturbing the stabilty, health and happiness
The 99 are fighting the wrong battle, The balance of the world will always need upper, middle, and lower class populations. to up set this would be like crossing the streams......and every body knows you don't cross the streams......the real problems is not wall street or the bankers, but the national budget.
[video=youtube;QFg0DzT9tNI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFg0DzT9tNI[/video]
[video=youtube;QFg0DzT9tNI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFg0DzT9tNI[/video]
Last edited:
The one biggest thing that should have changed they didn't change. The absurd credit default swaps are still around where 8 parties down the line they're still betting each swap on whether or not someone will pay the loans back -- unregulated in any way, they increase reckless lending. They are loans that shouldn't be there in the first place. I don't know what else should be done besides the boycotting.
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised if the figure reflects the financial distribution, as centralization seems to be the preferred method of control, in most structures, apparently it leads to efficiency in decision making, thus productivity.
I've noticed some people are obsessed, or paranoid about the concept of control, which leads them to interpret irrelevant data, and almost randomly connect dots to support their ideas(i.e that they're been controlled). The English language's subjective, and can lead to confusion in communication, it's not like a programming language or maths, where an idea could be communicated to express strictly one definition, so the likelihood is that you'd find evidence which reinforce your assumptions, if you hold the thought, and believe it to be true, even if it doesn't exist.
They want to be asked questions about themselves, and appreciated for who they are, which of course is a basic, understandable request, but I'd rather learn about people by spending time with them, and picking up on their traits, preferences, and uniqueness, I'm generally interested in understanding people when I feel they're been themselves, not too self conscious, calculative, or wearing their transparent fa
I've noticed some people are obsessed, or paranoid about the concept of control, which leads them to interpret irrelevant data, and almost randomly connect dots to support their ideas(i.e that they're been controlled). The English language's subjective, and can lead to confusion in communication, it's not like a programming language or maths, where an idea could be communicated to express strictly one definition, so the likelihood is that you'd find evidence which reinforce your assumptions, if you hold the thought, and believe it to be true, even if it doesn't exist.
They want to be asked questions about themselves, and appreciated for who they are, which of course is a basic, understandable request, but I'd rather learn about people by spending time with them, and picking up on their traits, preferences, and uniqueness, I'm generally interested in understanding people when I feel they're been themselves, not too self conscious, calculative, or wearing their transparent fa
Last edited:
What it leads to is corruption and exploitation. 'Progress' seems to mean people working longer hours to later ages, whilst burdened with greater debt. It also seems to mean the acceleration in the destruction of the environment. Competition has lead to the drive for 'progress' so maybe what we need is better diplomatic relations around the world so that everyone can take their foot off the gas a little bit and we can start running an honest audit of the worlds resources and try to establish how we can manage them without a massive conflict.
That depends on how you define 'control'. I think people have very legitimate concerns about changes to legislation that might impact their civil liberties and also about what future changes there might be. In fact as participants in a democracy they have every right to be concerned and to express their concern
How exactly does one violently hoard wealth?
Am I violently hoarding wealth because I keep a few grand in readies at any time in the bank and increase this in line with inflation?
Am I violently hoarding wealth because I use my excess earnings to pay down my mortgage?
I think you don't understanding how macro-economics relates the fiscal positions of individuals. At once you would call for massive inflationary measures whilst at the same time decrying individuals who react against it as anyone in the same situation would. Thus the more you inflate the more those who are rich by definition of ingoings > outgoings will continually restrict supply until they feel secure.
I wasn't aware that you were one of the 1% jim!
'One' could violently hoard wealth by sticking some people up with a gun or violence might be a by-product resulting from the effects of the actions of one man (eg short selling by Soros on 'Black wednesday' leading to recession and the inevitable social ills that come with it)
What we're more interested in here is the violent behaviour of a small group of people, which i've referred to elsewhere as the 'power elite' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_elite ). This group have ammased vast wealth through various violent means. They have used war, they have used assassination they have used state apparatus against their own people
You've got me confused with someone else...i'm the guy who wants to see money abolished and replaced with a gift economy
They discuss this matter at about 17minutes in on episode 203 of the Keiser report: http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/episode-203-keiser-max/
For us...the 99% (but that doesn't include you does it jimbo?) the effects appear like inflation because the cost of retail items such as food, fuel and clothes are going up. But the overall wider economy is suffering from deflation which is what the central banks want to avoid, so they are pumping more money into the economy ('quantitative easing')
I think....and i've seen this happen first hand in the company i work in....when fear increases some people can start thinking with an 'i'm alright jack' mentality where they start clinging to whatever they have managed to gather together in their life and say to themselves...'i'm ok, i have this'
The danger of that attitude for that individual is that all it takes is for a more powerful group for example the bankers or the government to lean over and take something from your pile...eg through taxes or through a downturn in the business cycle.
So the 'i'm alright jack' mentality which the power elite try to encourage in people will actually keep those people vulnerable, even if they are doing ok at the moment in this giant game of monopoly
If however that individual linked arms with all the other workers, when a robber band such as the government or corporations tried to take from that person, the collective workers could kick back and say 'keep your hands off my stack....and don't forget who it is that actually creates the wealth'
So its important for people to stop thinking in me,me,me terms and to start thinking in we, we, we terms otherwise they will pick us off one by one, whether you are a successful business man or investor...they'll get you eventually, cos that's the game
Collective strength is the key
Last edited: