-56 votes

Tax the Rich, End the Fed

Can anyone explain to me why they think a few people HOLDING MILLION/BILLIONS/TRILLIONS of dollars in their Personal bank accounts will create jobs and stimulate the economy?

People having a savings is great but when such a small amount of people are holding most of the US's wealth that is not helping the economy. They have more money then they know what to do with and having MILLION/BILLIONS/TRILLIONS sitting in a bank account is not going to create jobs and they won't use it to make risky investments which is something we need in today's world.

No amount of Tax incentives will inspire them to spend enough. Even with a 50% tax they still don't spend enough. Why do we have to have a total collapse, when the few people with the means could give more and avoid a crash completely.

Government sponsored enterprises are still owned by the Private sector.

End the Fed, Tax the Rich



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

We were all born of this

We were all born of this Earth, it is common heritage and should not be owned by anyone person or a group of people.

Who owns your land? your resources? A Bank, who gave them the right to say what property belongs to who.

Property Rights was created by the Banksters to keep you in check.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

Buddy, you are commenting on

Buddy, you are commenting on the wrong web site.

Not here for the lost causes

I'm not here for the lost causes, I'm here for the people still looking for answers. I learned a lot from this site and the people here, but the vocal ones are as narrow minded as any liberal I can come across.

You guys are not better then the liberal idiots who think more government is the answer. (sigh)

It's understandable, humans are animals and after a certain point they stop listing and learning new things. When you stop listening to ideas that might be different then your own, you no better then a dog with rabies.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

Regarding your quote by Jacque Fresco....

He's acknowledged to be essentially a Marxist, socialist, commie or fascist. He sounds like a hubristic central planner.

Like I said, you are on the wrong side of the table here, pal.

Form of Governance, Human Nature, Scientism, Calculation Problem

His hypothesis of a resource-based economy is sometimes equated with Marxism,[123] socialism, communism, or fascism.[90][119][124] Fresco responds to these comparisons by stating, "The aims of The Venus Project have no parallel in history, not with communism, socialism, fascism or any other political ideology. This is true because cybernation is of recent origin. With this system, the system of financial influence and control will no longer exist."[107]
One writer notes, "it's also true that his system of governance, in which authority is given to the expert in each field — in this case, specially programmed computers — is one that many writers, including Nobel-prize-winner Friedrich Hayek, have shown to be disastrous."[79]
Another writer reviewing one of Fresco's films writes,
the more I listened to Fresco's specifics and fuzzy non-specifics it seemed to me I was encountering a God-like hubris coupled with the standard sci-fi dreamer's naivete vis á vis human nature. But just as I was jotting this last down in my notes, Fresco cautioned viewers — and it gave me the shivers, since he seemed to be responding directly to my written reservations — to remember that human nature is not synonymous with human behavior; the latter can be changed. Although Fresco's futurist scenario is — in my humble opinion — rife with problems, it's not every day that somebody comes along ambitious enough to offer a blueprint for re-designing the world.[123]
Other criticisms have implied a scientistic approach due to Fresco's heavy emphasis on science alone to overcome humanity's obstacles,
His vision is eminently practical, and although this constitutes an innovative and welcome element with reference to previous utopian projections, his focus on science alone makes him fail as a generalist – the criticism Fresco himself passed on academics and scientists. Today's pressing problems require a holistic approach – various disciplines, arts science, philosophy working on a "convergence mode", unfortunately Fresco's vision seems to consolidate the long established view that the "two cultures" (Science and Art) are antagonistic.[106]
The calculation problem has also been raised against a resource-based economy.[125] In a resource-based economy, it is claimed, there is no ability to calculate the availability and desirability of resources because the price mechanism is not utilized. Fresco responds to this issue stating, "we can achieve a level of production so high that it would be superfluous to put a price tag on things."[126]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco

Did you even read this

Its doesnt even say that Resource based economy is socialism, communism, or fascism.

It has been compared to socialism, communism, or fascism. The same way Republicans would compare all of you here are a bunch of Liberal who support Obama because you don't support Romney.

See how easy it is to make an accusation about some thing that is completely False.

How about you take the time to Research Fresco and Recourse based economy with an open mind and form your own opinion, not the opinion of others.

There is even a video resource based economy vs Libertarianism youtube if you like to watch that.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

I didn't notice his quote by

I didn't notice his quote by Jacque Fresco, yet. But now I know what the philosophy of him is...

This whole resource-based economy garbage together with the zeitgeist movement is pure NWO propaganda.
The people who support this resource-based economy thing don't get the point that a free market system is resource-based. One must even ask what means "resource-based" to them, because this is a weasel word which the socialists like so much to use.

Computers have to be programmed by humans. They are not able to do something that a human can't do. Computers can only do it much faster.
This being the case, you still have the calculation problem unsolved, as displayed by Hayek.

Besides, it is a total contradiction to liberty, because they are not talking about voluntarily participation in that system. If they want to do it voluntarily, nobody is hindering them to do it even now, since everything is so easy as pointed out by them.

And the quote by Fresco "we can achieve a level of production so high that it would be superfluous to put a price tag on things" shows that he has no understanding of the economy. There are always prices on things. Having a high production output doesn't remove the price, because always somebody has to work and invest capital for the production which isn't done for nothing.
And what if the product which the people want is not a material one, but for example free time? This means they value their free time higher than the product they get for working. In a free market economy causes this the people to work less and so the production output to shrink, which is fine because the people don't want the products.

So in conclusion, what the zeitgeist movement offers, is just a modern version of communism. Those who program the computers are somehow superior to the others and know exactly how to manage the economy, in this society.
Not calling it communism still lets it be communism.

Life is not so sinister

The fact that you believe that there is a group of people who all agree on exactly the same thing and are working together to create and NWO says more about you then anything else.

Are there a few people making a lot of decisions, yes, do they all agree, no. And because they don't all agree there is no NWO.

The Market is not resource based. We can produce more for more people, but we only produce enough for the people who can afford it. Its Recourse Monetary based which does not accurately represent our true producing potential.

You don't understand computer programming my friend. You can program a computer to do ANYTHING. When Hayek was an economist he and no one else in his time would think computers could do what they do now.

Its easy, but RBE faces the same problems that Libertarians face, the people in control, don't want to give up their control. The difference is, libertarian model would eventually lead us right back to where we are. Its a monetary based system and as long as some one has more then another, they will continue to violate "Property rights". If no one owns anything, you can't violate property. But as long as there is property to violate, there will always be issues.

We are entering in an age that most of what we need can be automated, again the only reason more things aren't is because it cuts into the power structure. If "Capital" was easily available to anyone, you wouldn't have to raise it, it would be built cause the community wants it built. You can't look at things in a monetary based way.

People are always able to do what they want and whether its in a free Market or RBE people will make good an bad decisions. No society can predict how everyone will behave.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

So, you don't think more

So, you don't think more government is the answer?
Why are you suggesting to tax even more then?

The only person I see here who refuses to listen and learn new things are you.

Government gives money to the Free Market

Taxing the highest percent more is because that's where the inflation is. And I'm not sure why its so hard to understand that the government gives out loans to businesses in the "FREE MARKET". These businesses are some times even publicly traded.

A government loan to me is no different then a loan from the bank. Both will make good and bad decisions.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

And where does the government

And where does the government get the money from compared to the bank?

The government now get its

The government now get its from both the people and the Fed. The Free Market banks ONLY gets it from the Federal Reserve. All money invested by a bank is fiat. ALL.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

Oh so you have the answers!!

Oh so you have the answers!! Thank god someone has the answers! It's SerTruthgio! Yay!

Sorry but the wealthiest pay the most in taxes. Each one is taxed 100 to 1000 times what each of us as individuals pay. Take all their money and you know how many high end jobs will be wiped out? You think companies that sell to the rich will last? You think they don't profit and the money does not move through the system? Well you'd be wrong.

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

You know who also believes in

You know who also believes in Property Rights, the people who own the Federal Reserve.

And you know what the Federal reserve thinks is its property. EVERYTHING.

You have no right to complain about anything because in the end, the wealthy own you. or at least everything you think you own.

LOL

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

Tax the "ILL GOTTEN GAINS" the so-called rich stole!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLOQitODAFI

Even Ron Paul knows there must be something done to correct the unbalanced wealth distribution that exists BECAUSE of the FRAUDULENT FED SYSTEM, and those individuals who WILLINGLY abused it for their own personal gain.

(A completely different animal from an individual whose wealth results from a true "capitalists" venture...)

A pendulum swings both ways.

Concepts of "wealth

Concepts of "wealth distribution" are B.S. from the socialist play book. Try to sell that garbage to the "Occupy" twits.

Ill Gotten Gains

Anyone who took out a loan 30 years ago can be considered to have Ill Gotten Gains.

When Mitt Romney came to town is a prefect example. 20-30 years ago he'd go into an area, loan a Mom and Pop shop money, send there manufacturing over seas and drive out any competing business that did not have the funding that Bain Capital brought.

Why people can't understand this is beyond me...

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

That Kind of Nearsighted Thinking...

That's the thinking that brought us the IRS in the first place. Sure, it starts out that way...

Ron Paul is correct: there's nothing wrong with someone like Steve Jobs becoming wealthy by pleasing consumers. He can do what he wants with his wealth (except take it with him).

The wealthy who are withholding investment (and the not-so-wealthy who control the assets of others), are just being smart: they don't trust what the government will do, and they don't trust the Fed, and they can't make a move in this environment.

Only Ron Paul's plan to bring the troops home, stop the bleeding (literal and financial), and promoting peace and fiscal restraint would cause any investor to loosen the purse-strings and take a risk.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

I see fine, but think you need to open your eyes

I don't think anyone is arguing that some one getting wealthy off a good idea is bad.

The problem is how did he get that money to create those products. Most businesses would have not got to the level they are today with out the Fiat money system (Apple included).

30 years ago the people who had money to invest were not going to spend it, so what did the government and the Wealthy families do? increase to money supply.

Now that they have made a fortune off of this Fiat system they don't want to invest AGAIN and they don't want to be taxed. Open your eyes...

False, no amount of Tax incentives would create enough incentive for people to invest. We've been falling for 5 years and Obama has kept the Bush tax cuts and people still did not invest enough.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

You're just claiming things

You're just claiming things without any proof and you don't have a clue about economics.

Please show me evidence about "30 years ago the people who had money to invest were not going to spend it".

If you understood economics, you would immediately recognize that your argument makes no sense.
If many people sit on their money and don't invest, the prices of the investment goods go down which causes interest rates to go up.
At some point, they will again invest their money, except when there's a Federal Reserve which keeps interest rates low.

Even if some silly people decided to just throw all their money away, that wouldn't affect anybody else. Prices would then go down and everything would be fine. There is no loss of wealth if you destroy money, because it is just paper. And even if money were gold, the loss of wealth would only affect other uses of gold, besides the monetary ones, as for example jewelry.

Its a Thoery

I know its hard for you to grasp because its more like an algebraic equation then plain evidence. But once you put all the variables in the sequence its easier to understand.

I'm not going into interest rates or who knows economics better. I'm talking about simple algebra. My conclusion comes from answering the question (why would they create an influx of money 30 years ago to today). Why do you think they did it? You already know what I think. You must have some theory of why the did this.

Here's Ron Paul basically saying what I was saying about a few people and families being in control, not even Congress.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDEgBWO54dA

They decide how much money is in circulation because they are the big banks tied to the Federal Reserve. This only leaves my theory as true, they know how much money was out there and they did not want to use what they had in their accounts so they made more money.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

They print the money because

They print the money because they want to get richer this way. So what? Do you think we don't know that?

But where is the connection to your "tax the rich" or your claim that there wasn't enough money 30 years ago.

I explained to you why there can't be "not enough money" in an economy. So either you explain to me exactly why this is wrong or you agree with me. Repeating your stuff or saying "I'm not going into this" only shows that you have no clue about it.

You can't base your argument on logic, so you decided to just ignore logic at all.

Please read Carefully

I never said there (wasn't) enough money. Please read more carefully so I dont have to repeat myself.

There was enough, they just weren't spending it. And that's why they created more, so they Didn't have to spend what they accumulated.

Please read correctly what I wrote and then respond.

Again I NEVER said there was not enough money so your argument about interest rates and anything else is nul.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

When there are people who

When there are people who hoard money for years, it is for the rest of the people exactly the same as this money wasn't existent at all.

I know what you meant and my argument about interest rates has nothing to do with the amount of money. You didn't understand it at all and instead of going into the details and examining it, you're again just claiming things without logic.

I wrote:
"If many people sit on their money and don't invest, the prices of the investment goods go down which causes interest rates to go up."

So please tell me, where am I talking about "not enough money" in this argument???
In fact, I was exactly talking about what you were saying, namely people not investing their money.

Zero dollars in the market place

"When there are people who hoard money for years, it is for the rest of the people exactly the same as this money wasn't existent at all."
That's not logical, just saying something doesn't exist just cause you can't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Why would you bring up interest rates if the original discussion was about Taxing the rich and how they chose not to spend the money they accumulated 30 years ago?

You wrote
"But where is the connection to your "tax the rich" or your claim that there wasn't enough money 30 years ago."

Whether the price of investment goods goes up or down is irrelevant if the money in circulation is held in a few bank accounts.

Why is this concept so hard to understand? If there is $0 in the Market place and $300 that no one wants to spend. It wont matter if the price of goods is $1 because the majority of people have $0.

Not sure how much easier I can explain this.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

Did you forget about me?

"When there are people who hoard money for years, it is for the rest of the people exactly the same as this money wasn't existent at all."

This is 100% correct. The amount of true money-hoarding is so minuscule anyway that it almost isn't even worth discussing in the context of a $16 trillion economy.

I'm having trouble following any of your arguments. What exactly is your goal here?

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

I made it pretty easy for you

I made it pretty easy for you to understand and you still dont get it. Its like talking to a 2 year old about nap time.

There is $0 in the Market place. Unless you put money in the market place, there is not Market place.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

So money predates the market?

You should call up "the economist" magazine right away, because apparently you just turned Carl Menger's theory on its head.

"unless you put money in the market place"

Where does this money come from, that you are putting in the market place?

And don't say "they just print it", because then you'll have to call up the economist again, because you just falsified Ludwig Von Mises regression theorem.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Silly question. I'm not going

Silly question.

I'm not going to give you a history lesson on how the Marketplace lost its asset based exchange for monetary based.

Today's Marketplace relies on a flow of money. You cut off that flow and even if people are working, they are not making enough to invest further.

I for one don't want to make any of my own stuff, I don't want to hunt my food, grow my own food, make my own medicine etc...

I like being part of a community and I like the idea of everyone chipping in to have things that a single person with the means may not want to create cause it doesn't benefit him Solely.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco

How old are you?

I commend you for having an interest in economics, but judging by your (lack of) reading comprehension and inability to coherently respond to simple questions, I can only assume you are a young person.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

(27) and have lived in 3

(27) and have lived in 3 different states 4 different cities and make close to 100k with a household income of almost 200k.

I have clients who work in every business imaginable, from car dealers to doctors, lawyers, Realtors, you name it I have worked for them.

I've probably done more then most people twice my age. My comprehension is fine and judging by the fact that you call me young, you must be old.

The older you get the more stuck in your ways you get. You don't want to learn new things and you think that things are the same as when you were young.

Even if your 40 which is not that old, when you entered the job market computers didn't take the amount of jobs they have now.

Today's youth are competing with the efficiency of computerization and an inflation rate that have never been seen in history.

So please don't try to belittle today's youth when in reality, you have no idea what your talking about or the thing your generation has left for us to deal with.

"If you think we can't change the world, it just means you're not one of those that will"

Jacque Fresco