To our fellow muricans

[SixThumbs]

More like you are too dumb to understand what that would take.

Until the American people are so dissatisfied with the current government that we are ready and willing to engage in a bloody revolution that would result in the deaths of at least 100 million people and destroy our country, that isn't going to happen. So long as the majority of the middle class feels better off under this government rather than a country in ruins with half of them dead, that isn't going to happen.
Unless we suddenly turn into Russia or Greece or any number of African countries overnight, that isn't going to happen.

No, no, you're wrong Rumblood. If enough of us go out into the streets in tie-dye holding flowers and flashing the peace sign then eventually Wall Street and Silicon Valley will come to their senses and give us a fair share, stop avoiding taxes and contribute meaningfully to the community. We won't just get blasted with water cannons, tear gas and batons and surely no one from the FBI will join our ranks and mislead us towards rioting.

[zagibu]

It's funny that you muricans are sometimes so full of pride about your wonderful economics, and at other times seem to not grasp the first thing about it.

[Rumblood]

It's funny that you muricans are sometimes so full of pride about your wonderful economics, and at other times seem to not grasp the first thing about it.

Show us your spot in the Forbes top 500 listing, because an economic genius such as yourself must surely have a place there 

(BTW, I work for a Wall Street company and while I'm not a 1%er, I'm a 5%'er.)

[Xant]

When the administration of some important organisations such as various Intelligence Community agencies is held by (in this case) neocons for so long, their influence does not vanish instantly with a new government.

Really? Where's the proof, then? It isn't just a "new government", it's multiple new governments between then and now. Forty years. Completely different people. So unless you have some kind of proof for saying this, you're talking out of your ass.

[Kafein]

It's funny that you muricans are sometimes so full of pride about your wonderful economics, and at other times seem to not grasp the first thing about it.

Maybe because they want to be selfish so much, that they even forget when to cooperate for shared interests. Something that the big businesses don't forget.

Really? Where's the proof, then? It isn't just a "new government", it's multiple new governments between then and now. Forty years. Completely different people. So unless you have some kind of proof for saying this, you're talking out of your ass.

Proof would be hard to come by, although it seems to me understandable that the people present in an organisation tend to influence the progress of those that just start out, being more inclined to give important positions to the similar minded rather than the meritorious.

[Xant]

Proof would be hard to come by, although it seems to me understandable that the people present in an organisation tend to influence the progress of those that just start out, being more inclined to give important positions to the similar minded rather than the meritorious.

Yes, of course they "influence" those that come after, but the amount of the influence varies person to person, and after 40 years it's ridiculous to assume you are still practically dealing with the same people when the "influence" has been watered down by many generations, and there are individual personalities to take into account as well.

[zagibu]

Show us your spot in the Forbes top 500 listing, because an economic genius such as yourself must surely have a place there 

(BTW, I work for a Wall Street company and while I'm not a 1%er, I'm a 5%'er.)

Alright. Maybe you can help me, then. Do you see an easy solution for this problem: http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2013/05/28/how-does-apple-avoid-taxes/ ? Because I see one, and it has to do with business 101.

[Rumblood]

Alright. Maybe you can help me, then. Do you see an easy solution for this problem: http://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2013/05/28/how-does-apple-avoid-taxes/ ? Because I see one, and it has to do with business 101.

There are numerous ways to deal with the Apple problem, however the first thing that must be addressed is whether the philosophical stance on corporations is a valid and sustainable one. What you are seeing there is the evolution that I began talking about over 20 years ago. The time is approaching when governments are no longer the most important force in the world, corporations will be the actual ruling hand and governments merely the tongue that licks the corporate hand with a primary responsibility of keeping a stable workforce, stable currency, and an environment suitable for the corporations themselves. The actual form of government or citizen freedoms will not matter, so long as there is stability. You can look at the Citizens United ruling to see that this is coming to fruition in Federal Law now. You can view Apple as either a sliver in that transformation, or the lead dog in the new world order.

[sF_Guardian]

There are numerous ways to deal with the Apple problem, however the first thing that must be addressed is whether the philosophical stance on corporations is a valid and sustainable one. What you are seeing there is the evolution that I began talking about over 20 years ago. The time is approaching when governments are no longer the most important force in the world, corporations will be the actual ruling hand and governments merely the tongue that licks the corporate hand with a primary responsibility of keeping a stable workforce, stable currency, and an environment suitable for the corporations themselves. The actual form of government or citizen freedoms will not matter, so long as there is stability. You can look at the Citizens United ruling to see that this is coming to fruition in Federal Law now. You can view Apple as either a sliver in that transformation, or the lead dog in the new world order.

Sound like an awful vision of the future, even though it's actually reality in some terms already.

[Rumblood]

Sound like an awful vision of the future, even though it's actually reality in some terms already.

It isn't as bad as it sounds, as we the citizens will be somewhat in control of that stability. It can also lead to a global stability. I imagine that the world will be better in some areas, and worse in others, but overall the quality of living should be much more elevated than today. The real problem is when citizens decide to disrupt stability in order to create change, and the corporations decide to just shut down the economy in that country until they "come to their senses". That and we need to focus those nasty military industries on something more productive, or at least less destructive. But I suspect the other corporations will be fighting that "war".

[Kafein]

The only thingd we truly care about are bread and games, any system that provides that will remain.

[zagibu]

I wasn't able to extract an answer to my question, so I tell you about my idea. Maybe it is too naive and simple and only works in cloud-dreamland. But how about you stop buying products from such companies?

[Kafein]

I wasn't able to extract an answer to my question, so I tell you about my idea. Maybe it is too naive and simple and only works in cloud-dreamland. But how about you stop buying products from such companies?

In some cases (not Apple obviously), it's more complicated than that. But it does work if the company you want to punish is visible to end customers, yes.

[SixThumbs]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Rumblood]

I wasn't able to extract an answer to my question, so I tell you about my idea. Maybe it is too naive and simple and only works in cloud-dreamland. But how about you stop buying products from such companies?

Well the reason you didn't get an answer is because you phrased it as a problem. The article you posted demonstrates that only some people think the same way, and inevitably they will become a shrinking minority.

Sen. Paul demanded that the subcommittee apologize to Apple for hassling it about taxes because it is a job creator. His argument is that if big companies are indulged on tax, regulation and other matters they will provide jobs and growth. Belief in this syllogism is not uncommon among legislators of both parties.

And hey, status isn't about money in the end. It is about what you can buy. So what if most of the jobs created are shipped over to China when the majority of Americans can own the product itself? You see, in the long run, being able to possess the product and finding a different job than manual labor is far more important that making the product, but only a minority being able to own it. Why on Earth would we not purchase that product from that company when the end goal is to own the product for its use and status? Where is the problem? You are seeing one where the psyche of the consumer sees none. It isn't as though those taxes are being missed by the consumer. They only miss money when the taxes come out of their pockets.
The coming Corporate led world won't be stopped, and maybe it shouldn't be. There are many reasons to believe that corporations will do a better job than current governments. Also, the idea of the "big bad corporation" taking over the world is only a temporary state in that evolution. One resource that is growing, but will have a finite number is human population. Once the corporations are actually competing with each other over that resource, instead of humans competing to work for the corporation as it is today, you will begin to see better conditions and perks as corporations need to do more to retain the "better" selection. That will include cleaner air, fresh uncontaminated water supply, etc. Only at that point we will be back to fighting in some form or another, whether that is whatever global laws are setup between those corps, or actual guns and bombs again is a big question. However, this won't be completed in our lifetimes.