jump to last post 1-14 of 14 discussions (136 posts)

Checks on the Excesses of Capitalism

  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Most people agree that regulations are needed.
    What would the regulations and safeguards be based on?
    How can they be implemented?
    What are the excesses?
    Should States get more involved?
    Should the Fed deal with whatever causes the inequity of wealth?
    What would the Framers say?
    What would the nature of the "regulations" be?
    How do we check Governmental Loopholes, Bailouts, and Back-room Bonuses on both the Federal and State level?

    The catch is, that at all costs, the people must remain sovereign.

    1. junko profile image80
      junkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Unregulated Capitalism is unsustainable and will eventually cannibalize the economy of the US and the world. Capitalism's most destructive by-products are Greed and Selfishness. Most successful Capitalist pay little or no taxes. They just pile up more and more moneyand power, denying the Great Unwashed money, power, or cake. The King nor 400 Kings shouldn't own over 90% of the wealth on earth. The people will soon become restless and history will repeat itself.

      1. Credence2 profile image86
        Credence2posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        How true, as the situation accelerates, it must by its very nature become unsustainable

        1. Paul Wingert profile image79
          Paul Wingertposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          This country, and most European countries experienced almost pure capitalism in the mid 1800's commonly referred to the industrial revolution. Hmmmm, how'd that go?

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Which US capitalists pay little or no taxes?  With links, please?

      3. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Unregulated capitalism is unsustainable: Can you please Elucidate?

        Can you also explain how it will cannibalize the economy and the world?

        How does capitalism deny "the masses" money and power?

        Where do the fat cats stash their mice?

        How is their avoiding being taxed detrimental to us? We benefit by their industriousness do we not? Shouldn't their industriousness be encouraged somehow?

        Definition of Industriousness: diligent and hard-working.

        Surely, we should not equate diligence and hard work with Greed and Selfishness!

        *And most importantly,
        How do you propose to regulate capitalism? Can it be done without scraping the freedom which promotes it?

        No one in their right (or left) mind would want to scrap the potential of liberty through individual independence, would they?
        Would They?

        1. junko profile image80
          junkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          1.    About 50 years ago when I was a child it cost 7 cents to ride public transportation buses. Bread was 15cents a loaf. Milk was about 40 cents a gallon.  A new automobile was less than 2 thousand dollars. Most things worth having were made in America. Fifty years later, bus fare, bread, milk, and a new automobile has inflated 100’s and thousand’s  of percent  because capitalism is most successful when price increases. To slow, stop, or roll back prices is anti-capitalism. Fifty years from now the majority of people in the US won’t be able to afford the fore-mentioned goods and service. 1.
          2.    Money is power and the great unwashed  has no power and can’t buy cake without food stamps. 2.
          3.    Taxes is how the capitalist got rich in America. Tax money  and government handout made it possible for railroads and interstate highways used by capitalist to improve commerce nationwide. Federal Tax dollars has been the cash cow that financially backed capitalism in America. Now the masses need Federal taxes for help during  joblessness and those that got rich with the help of tax dollars don’t want to pay taxes to help the masses. 3.
          4.    Money is stashed and invested offshore. It takes money to make money, not hard work. The more money the less work. 4.
          5.    We need not scrap capitalism but, it need to be better regulated and excesses need to be put in check. 5.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            5. HOW?

            1. janesix profile image60
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Caps on income. Income and profit regulation.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Who determines the cap?  Who has the right to limit my profit or income (ethical right, not legal - anyone that can make laws can have the legal right).

                1. janesix profile image60
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Who has the right to have so much money and recources that it affects the rest of the population?

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Anyone that can legally earn it. 

                    But, realistically speaking, no one individual has that much.  Even Gates, with his billions, cannot have a real impact on the country as a whole solely with money.  With the power behind it, yes, but not with a few billion $$.

                    But you didn't answer - which individual has an ethical right to tell put a cap on my ability to earn?

                  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    namely...

            2. junko profile image80
              junkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              C'mon Kathryn, another ? after I took the time to answer all of your questions.. I think you knew the answers to all the questions you asked me but thought I had no answers  to your questions  I don't believe you are that ignorant.  I believe you know HOW! already. You couldn't honestly address my answers openly, so I will ignore your How question because you don't really want to know the truth.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Your view of the truth is interesting to me.  Believe me, I am trying to learn from anyone who makes sense. So far, Wilderness makes the most sense… to me. Why would you not contribute?
                The truth is, I am very prone to left thinking. I hate that in me.

                1. junko profile image80
                  junkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  If its wilderness that makes sense to you, I understand that because you both ask question that you don't really want a truthful answer to, but really have nothing to add or subtract from the question answered.

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah, but do you actually have truthful answers, or just opinions based on a fantasized picture of how things should be done?

                    Do you really believe that the rich people are "stashing" their money somewhere?  Their mattress, maybe?  'Cause it's a great way to go broke...

      4. 83
        Education Answerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        That the greatest capitalists pay little to no taxes isn't really a problem with capitalism; it's a problem with the tax codes.  We need to simplify tax codes.  Why should the government be in the business of giving tax breaks to certain people?  Is it the government's business whether or not we're married, give to charity, or have children?  Should the government be giving preferential treatment to people for "acting" in a way that pleases Big Brother?  The tax codes should be simple.  The taxes should be minimal, but everybody should pay.  The government shouldn't be in the business of trying to socially engineer its people by offering tax incentives. 

        Our tax codes are not representative of capitalism; on the contrary, they represent a big, over-reaching government which tries to regulate capitalists by offering tax incentives for government-pleasing behavior.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          like

        2. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          +1  Well said - that "social engineering" is a major problem in this country.  If a thing is worth doing it doesn't need a subsidy (via a tax break) to encourage it.

    2. wba108@yahoo.com profile image86
      wba108@yahoo.composted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Some guidelines should be:

      1) Is this regulation market friendly? Another words is the regulation going to increase or decrease output. This is important because as output grows the country as a whole usually profits.

      2) Is the regulation usurping the legislative function of Congress? Right now bureaucratic agencies have more power than Congress and can arbitrarily make laws without a vote. This is a dangerous trend if left unchecked.

      3) Is the regulation top down or bottom up? Top down regulation involves the strong arming and direct involvement of the government. This should be a option of last resort. Its usually much more beneficial to allow the free markets to regulate themselves as they have done very well for a long time.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Thank you.  This need's to be home-printed and put up on everyone's fridge.

        1. wba108@yahoo.com profile image86
          wba108@yahoo.composted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Thanx so much!

  2. pramodgokhale profile image61
    pramodgokhaleposted 2 years ago

    I am an Indian, we experienced excesses of Fabian socialism and now ongoing western type capitalism or liberalized economy and Globalization.
    If economies are being driven  by capitalists across the globe . It seems, you have a dream to make  world free of
    profit and loss and fail-safe system will do holy care job for citizens.
    Isms goes extreme , it fails. Isms can be contained but greed , lust that spoils systems and people suffer. In China after  switching over to market economy, income levels rose but crimes too. This is the dilemma of system.
    I think Scandinavians proved that it can be done , capitalism can be brought under control and implementation of welfare schemes sincerely then it can reduce excesses of capitalism
    Human is a complex machine and cannot be kept in confined space, human is constructive and destructive animal .
    Sweden is democratic socialist country as they claim and ahead in generous funding to developing nations and promoter of peace. but Sweden manufactures Arms and sells.These are double standards because they cannot earn revenue to run welfare schemes for their citizens.. India is a buyer of Swedish arms and  famous Bofors gun scandal!!
    Advocates of capitalism say it allows freedom of expression and always open to accept new ideas and innovation and so charities and philanthropy but by earning profit in business and part of  donated in Corporate Social responsibility !!!

  3. janesix profile image60
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    Things will work themselves out on their own. If that's not the case and it takes human impetus, then other options need to be looked at.

    All current societal structures, especially capitalism, aren't working not from lack of trying, but from the nature of human behavior.

    We lack the higher consciousness that was available to cultures like the ancient Egyptians. Figure out what was going on there, and we might have a clue.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Higher consciousness in ancient Egyptians?  I'm certainly no expert there, or even very well informed, but I thought they kept slaves?  And that there was a most definite ruling class, far, far above the common citizen.  How many commoners built pyramids for their afterlife, pyramids that bankrupted the system?

      1. janesix profile image60
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Egypt started out as a high civilization, and then declined. But it still managed to stay together for three thousand years. A plan was mapped out for building structure, which took place over a long period of time. Pyramids were not meant as tombs. Any common citizen could have any position except for that of Pharoah and perhaps the Pharoah's wife. Society was basically ruled by the priest class, who had to be trained for years. They had to follow a series of initiations, where most of the candidates were weeded out. If they didn't understand the laws of nature, they were weeded out. One early initiation weeds out potential candidates by swimming a maze with crocodiles in the water above them. This easily takes out any possibilities of cowardice, and also ensures the candidate has critical thinking under duress. We don't know if the original Egyptians had slavery. We don't know exactly what the laws for maintaining society were. There are no records at all from the beginning. But we do know that society was maintained by the priest class, who understood the laws of nature.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          "We don't know exactly what the laws for maintaining society were."

          Then we don't know that anyone could be a Priest (ruler), do we?.  Or any of the others in high society (merchants, politicians, etc.)

          Tomb: a place to put dead bodies.  And I'm sure this time that that's what they did with pyramids.  Each one has a dead Pharoah in it.  Or did before the grave robbers came, anyway.

          Slaves - both the Hebrews and Christians seem to think so, and their written records bear that out.

          1. janesix profile image60
            janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Read Temple of Man by Shwaller de Lubicz if you want to really understand the Egyptians.

  4. wilderness profile image96
    wildernessposted 2 years ago

    Safeguards; protect and maintain competition.  No (or very few) monopolies, no price fixing, etc.  Including price fixing by labor.  When a union sets prices for an entire industry it is out of line.

    Should feds "deal" with wealth inequity?  As inequity is primarily caused by differences in people - abilities, motivations, wants, etc. - no.  Should a couple prefer lots of kids to lots of money it is their choice, for instance.  Should someone want money so badly they work 60-70 hours per week to afford their Cadillac, RV, mansion and boat, it is their choice and they owe no one any of that money.  Realistically, we have to have a graduated income tax structure, but keep it to a minimum.

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      We have laws in place regarding monopolies. I would say we need to pay attention to safeguards which are built in and which may be being overlooked by …?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Overall, I think we do a decent job there.  Where we fail quite badly is the buying of laws from lawmakers greedy for power and money.  That one is extremely common and desperately needs checked and checked hard.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Laws could be established to prevent lobbying for corrupt purposes.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Nobody lobbies for the good of the country, only for their own personal benefit or sometimes to promote their personal concept of morality.  Should we stop all lobbying?  Stop just corporate lobbying (hard to prove if they didn't want the origin to be known)?  Stop all corporate gifts, including campaign funding?

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              hmmm. Maybe we should not allow lobbying, but allow corporate gifts and the free speech of campaign funding.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                - no, lobbying is a right.
                maybe limit it to once a month...

  5. junko profile image80
    junkoposted 2 years ago

    Kathryn asked me where did they stash their money my answer didn't mention a mattress. That why its hard to have positive dialog with people who ask questions just to deflect dialog and also put words in comments and accuse of wards unspoken.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry - I missed both her question and your answer.  I just caught that you blame capitalists for all the countries evils because they "stash" their ill gotten gain. 

      Just wondered what you meant by that; if you know where they are putting that stash, and who is stupid enough to do it, or just slinging dirt on the economic system that produced the richest country and nearly the highest standard of living in the world.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I asked, "Where do the fat cats store their mice:  junko said, "Money is stashed and invested offshore. It takes money to make money, not hard work. The more money the less work."

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I see.  That's where I caught it, but still wonder where it is stashed.  Invested off shore, of course - over regulation has virtually guaranteed that business will leave the country for a profit somewhere else.  But I don't understand the "stash" thing.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Ah, to regulate or not to regulate! That is the question! Well, knowing when to regulate and when not to. That word "regulate" is still confusing to me.
            Sometimes it refers to taxation.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Regulate = control.  Our politicians are better businessmen and women that the men and women that have spent a lifetime running their business.  They thus have the right and need to run all business as they see fit, leaving only the minute details to those that actually understand how to make it happen out there.

  6. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Tonights best answer: "...protect and maintain competition." by wilderness.
    Thank you once again, wilderness.

  7. janesix profile image60
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    I unrestrained greed ethical?

    Is supporting unrestrained greed ethical?

  8. janesix profile image60
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    Unrestrained capitalistic "growth" can ONLY have one result. That would be the stripping of the Earth of all of it's useable resources.

    Do you think the Earth is a never-ending cornucopia of resources?

    Fresh water from the available aquifiers...already happening
    Rainforests...our very source of the air we breath
    Oil
    Metals
    Etc.
    These things cannot be replace, folks. What aren't you getting here?

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      ???  Why in the world do you put excessive population growth and the desire of people everywhere for luxuries at the feet of capitalism?  Just because it is the only system that can provide it all?

      These things are not being depleted because of a social or financial model - they are depleted because people WANT their goodies and luxuries.  Including kids.

      1. janesix profile image60
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Because capitalism is the epitome of unrepressed greed.

        Because it IS using up our resources at an upresidented, unsustainable level.

        I didn't say anything about overpopulation. You did. That's another story. A problem that needs to be addressed as well.

        Who uses the VAST MAJORITY of the world's resources? The United States. Much of those resources are just to keep our infrastructure functioning. Corporations are allowed to destroy forests at a rate of an area the size of panama every YEAR. They are allowed to pollute sources of water used for drinking and agriculture. Who sucks up the dwindling world's supply of oil? Do I have to mention it?

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          We use the VAST MAJORITY of the world's resources? Our corporations are allowed to destroy forests at a rate of an area the size of panama every YEAR? They are allowed to pollute sources of water used for drinking and agriculture? We suck up the dwindling world's supply of oil?

          How should this be stopped. These are indeed good examples of excessiveness.  I am at a complete loss to comprehend this situation.

          What if the president told us who is doing this (George Soros for one) and stopped supporting the production of his oil in Brazil and stopped cooperating with these gigantic capitalists for the benefit of the countries they are destroying and the destruction they are creating. How can this type of thing stop?  The giants would have to grow a conscience... Can we help them do that? SOMEHOW?

          But you can't take away the freedom of capitalism and the competition we all benefit from!

          1. janesix profile image60
            janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            "But you can't take away the freedom of capitalism " Why not?

            " and the competition we all benefit from!"

            Americans, heads of corporations and a few others benefit. NOT everyone.

  9. janesix profile image60
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    You want bandaids to place over the holes in the dam.

    Bandaids aren't going to work.

    How long do you think the bandaids are going to last before the holes get too big?

  10. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    It seems the conclusion of some is that *capitalism leads to greed.*

    No, greedy people lead to greed. Why blame an *ism,* when individual people and their selfish decisions are to blame?
    Perhaps the best check to the excesses of capitalism is respect for nature and fellow man. Can't be regulated from without…only from within.

    Q. How can people stop other people from pillaging the people or the land?
    A. Stop buying their products.

    Awareness of who is doing what is required. Well, we have the internet now. We have twitter. Shouldn't be hard to act en mass when it is called for.
    Right?

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I think I shall follow the lead of my parents.  Throw away the computer, microwave, second car, and TV.  Rent out half the house; what they had is good enough.  Dump the air conditioner.  Start a large garden and buy a rifle; quit buying vegetables and meat.  Trash the cell phones and go back to a landline only.  Maybe raise a cow in the back yard. 

      The folks didn't have any of that stuff, and we don't need it either!  So lets act en mass - who's with me?!

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        if your parents can do it, so can we!
        No?

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Well, I can.  Those living in the high rise apartments downtown LA might have a small problem with the garden/hunting thing. 

          But they can still throw out the AC and dump the second car.  It will help save the earth until they die of starvation or dehydration (my well will suffice me there - not sure what you will do).

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, I really want to find some property with a well. Somewhere where there is a lot of rainfall, yet warm. Suggestions? Georgia? or one of the southern states? Peru? Costa Rica?

        2. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I actually lived on an acre of land in Mendocino county (early 80's).  A fixer upper with no electricity, I had NOTHING! no gas , no electricity. Not even a good working vehicle… just an old 49 chevy that sometimes would start with an aligator clip and sometimes not. The well was pumped by turning on a generator every morning. Not easy living, not fun. I had to have a cord of wood for the wood stove and chopped my own kindling every morning. My son was two and cried every time I made a move. Why? Because in the city I had addicted him to my constant attention. Here I had to do stuff!
          Looking back on it... I miss those days. Vegetables in the ice chest…No ice. I got used to warm vegetables.  I started a garden... out across the stream, beyond the path of the deer and the redwoods. Sigh.
          We could go back in time… We might,  voluntarily … eventually.
          Or not.

      2. janesix profile image60
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Good idea.

        Already done here. I own less than $100 worth of STUFF. And that includes clothing. I own:

        4 sets of clothing (all second hand)
        2 pairs of shoes
        about a hundred books (all second hand)
        A stack of notebooks
        Enough personal items to fit in a shoebox
        An incomplete set of Battlestar Galactica DVD's (my one luxury item)

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
          Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I bet YOU could engage in capitalism and not be greedy!

          1. janesix profile image60
            janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            How so?

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
              Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Ummm... here is the plan:
              You bring a bunch of paints and canvases to the homeless in your area. You get them to paint anything they want. They have all sorts of time on their hands and might really enjoy painting. They might create some really interesting pieces. You could sell these paintings for them in an open air setting... like in a park or in a donated gallery space. People would come from miles around to this really great art show for a really great cause and purchase these interesting works of art. All of you could split the profits, you taking less of course, and you never know where all this industry could lead!
              No?

    2. janesix profile image60
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      No. Greed leads to capitalism.

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Odd - I would not have thought of the entitlement mentality as capitalism, but that is surely where greed has led a great many today.

        1. janesix profile image60
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Entitlement mentality is not only a condition of the poor.

          It is also a condition of the rich and the middle class, who think they are entitled to whatever they want. It's "OK" to take what you can get, regardless of how it affects the rest of society.

    3. janesix profile image60
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The thing is, you expect people to regulate themselves "from within".

      Very few people are willing to do that.

      It's unrealistic.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        ( You are right: We should have stopped buying products from China a long time ago. Maybe Nixon should not have opened up trade with China in the first place.)

        However, I have noticed people have a tendency to follow good leaders. If the president told us to stop buying products created by Monsanto, for instance, wouldn't we as a nation get on board?
        Why doesn't he?

        1. Credence2 profile image86
          Credence2posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I certainly do not expect powerful corporate interests to be concerned about anything beyond the 'bottom line' It is conservatives that always seem to believe that people will do the right thing without being compelled to do so. Without the regulators, who knows what would get into the market place without scruntiny. Look how much trouble it was to get big tobacco to admit that their products were addictive.  I accuse everyone of it who has a superior knowledge to exploit those that do not and the golden rule is no longer applicable. The excesses of capitalism began to be confronted during the turn of the last century, with greedy trusts, exploitative labor conditions and a book called "the Jungle".  You don't really believe the idea that people are going to self regulate for the good of his fellow man do you?

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            You do know that tobacco was the first currency don't you? The early Americans traded goods for tobacco itself. This is the dismal beginning of our capitalism. sad
            And New York was a very successful city because of the work ethic brought with the darn Dutch. sad
            Blame the Dutch.

  11. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    But back to the matter at hand:
    What about this statement made by junko?

    3.) Taxes is how the capitalist got rich in America. Tax money and government handout made it possible for railroads and interstate highways, used by capitalists, to improve commerce nationwide. Federal Tax dollars has been the cash cow that financially backed capitalism in America. Now the masses need Federal taxes for help during joblessness and those that got rich with the help of tax dollars don’t want to pay taxes to help the masses.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      There is some truth in 3) (as opposed to all the others) in that business (and capitalism) depend on the transportation infrastructure as much as consumers do.  And the water, sewer, and electrical grid as well.  Plus the GPS system, weather stations and satellites, radio/TV systems and our schools, such as they are.

      But it is a little more than unfair to insinuate that the happy homeowner doesn't need and use those things just as much as the evil capitalists do.  Just as it is a little unfair to say that capitalist businesses pay no taxes, while every dollar they earn is taxed twice at every level from city to federal.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Yes and they were built for the benefit of all!

        1. janesix profile image60
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          All Americans.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            and...

        2. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Exactly.  They were built for all of us and we all benefit from them.  Those projects helped capitalists, socialists, theists, atheists and all the other "ists" you can come up with.

    2. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      When would everything get back to normal if we increased the process of doling out money? 
      ...and you do know where the tax money comes from don't you?
      It comes from the people.
      So, when could the up-trodden stop paying for the down trodden? Never? Then where would the incentive to even be up-trodden come from?

      If you are ambitious and determined toward success and you earn money, but the government takes most of it away for the benefit of others who are becoming increasingly weak, then where is the incentive going to come from for you to keep trying…to stay "up?"
      It really comes down to that…
      INCENTIVE!
      Work, success and industriousness needs to be ENCOURAGED and rewarded.
      Not discouraged and punished.
      Who would not agree with this.
      This is not right or left thinking
      This is logical thinking..

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Unfortunately, a great many on the left will disagree. It kind of points out that the entitlement society we are rapidly building won't work, and that is a thought that cannot be permitted to spread.

  12. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    I hate saying this but in all honesty we have to allow for natural selection on some level.
    No?
    Humans must take care of their own in the end. Their own families, their own loved ones. They must take responsibility for the weak ones within the family and the community.
    It is amazing to think that it really comes down to love.
    Love tempered with logic.
    Thats what is required for survival of the fittest.

    1. janesix profile image60
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      That's great. If you want to continue to live at the level of animals.

      I believe as thinking, caring humans, we JUST MIGHT be capable of creating a society that is better than the one we have today. If we take a good look at where the real problems lie, and make an effort to fix them.

      Survival of the fittest. It's survival of the greediest.

      This society will not last the way it is going.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        "If we take a good look at where the real problems lie, and make an effort to fix them."
                                                     
                                                      H O W  ?

        1. janesix profile image60
          janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I don't know.

          That should be the goal of the human species.

          If we can all agree that there is a problem, then maybe we can start working together to find a solution.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
            Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Okay… Maybe with a concerned, honest president who is elected by the people to office. Sadly, even if George Washington were here today he probably wouldn't have a chance to get elected. Not a chance.
            We are obviously doomed.  But I still say,
            Long live capitalism!
            Until they destroy the planet, learn their lessons and reap their Karma.

            1. janesix profile image60
              janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I don't think we are doomed.

              I'm not saying capitalism is itself a bad thing. I just don't think it can be sustained as it is. Without some form of control. A strong form of control that people won't like. They most likely won't agree to it. It most likely won't work.

              For some reason, I have hope that people will start to see things as they are, and work out a system that will be sustainable that will also be acceptable for most people.

              What I actually think is in the works is completely different. But I'd like to give humanity a chance to figure this thing out for ourselves first.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
                Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                NWO?

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  * to fight this force see below.

                2. janesix profile image60
                  janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  lol...no

                  I don't believe in conspiracy theories, for the simple fact that humans are incapable of keeping secrets, especially of that magnitude.

                  1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
                    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    "What I actually think is in the works is completely different. But I'd like to give humanity a chance to figure this thing out for ourselves first."
                    Could you give a hint… or are you writing a book.

  13. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    But we could try to obtain a concerned, honest president… couldn't we?
    I think that suggestion isolates the ultimate difficulty. It seems like the body of *We the People* does need a benevolent guiding light, in general.

    Also, if George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or John Adams were here today… those three would probably advocate a major overhaul and revolution.
    You know what they would say?
       *Stop Paying Taxes.*
    (Yay for freedom of speech.)
    Could anyone throw the whole entire nation in Jail?
    Or what could "they" do if the whole entire nation stopped paying taxes one fine year???? via technology, Twitter, Facebook etc. (Yay for technology.) What would happen? Ah, the calamity.
    Just wondering.

  14. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    Ever hear of the Council of Foreign Relations?
    "The CFR is considered to be the nation's most influential foreign-policy think tank. Its membership has included senior politicians, more than a dozen Secretaries of State, CIA directors, bankers, lawyers, professors, and senior media figures." Wikipedia
    Well, I just heard Obama proclaiming something about Canada and Mexico cooperating with US.
    CFR wants to remove the borders of Mexico and Canada. They have very big plans for the economic unity of these three nations. This is why the bullet train is being built here in CA. The first phase plans for it to stop in Modesto, but they want it to eventually cover the entire territory of Mexico, US and Canada.
    It is starting to happen right before our very eyes.
    We need a president who will not yield to the plans of the CFR.
    Unfortunately, the current one is yielding to NWO plans... according to what I just heard him say on the radio.
    Not a conspiracy theory at all.
    Reality.
    or not?

    1. janesix profile image60
      janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I won't argue this one, although I don't necessarily agree with it. I just don't have enough info, nor the time to research it at the moment. So I will say I can accept it as a possibility.

 
working