Bill Maher Explains the Problem with Trumpism 5 Years Ago

[JurisDictum]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90RzlUjE_Lo

It's only 4.5 minutes.

Trump hasn't offered any real plans to address wealth inequality. Some gibberish about bringing back jobs...as if there's any rolling the clock back on that. Unless he is about to contradict his entire history as a person, he's just saying that to get you working / middle class rubes to elect him.

So what did those private investigators find out about Obama's birth certificate again?

How is that conservative justice going to help us get big money out of politics?

hmmm

I'd much sooner believe he'd build the wall.

[Daywolf]

https://youtu.be/ZtLznfIDEzI
lol

[pgerman]

wealth inequality ?

No one is getting the 1% to pay for anything. Lets be clear about that.





Look at the % of taxes you pay from earning, to buying. If you pay an extra 15 % in various taxes, and get 8% in benefits ...........eh whatever.



I like how people treat the federal government like they are someones mom that just has your best interests at heart.

Federal government going to bring you a warm blanky and some soup?

They are going to tax and control you, until you can't open your asshole and take a shit without getting a permit first.

I also like how all these self noted "independent thinkers" Have the same ideas as every other Clinton/banks/big government zombie.

You are so smart, give yourself a hug.

[JurisDictum]

Originally Posted by pgerman [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

wealth inequality ?

No one is getting the 1% to pay for anything. Lets be clear about that.





Look at the % of taxes you pay from earning, to buying. If you pay an extra 15 % in various taxes, and get 8% in benefits ...........eh whatever.



I like how people treat the federal government like they are someones mom that just has your best interests at heart.

Federal government going to bring you a warm blanky and some soup?

They are going to tax and control you, until you can't open your asshole and take a shit without getting a permit first.

I also like how all these self noted "independent thinkers" Have the same ideas as every other Clinton/banks/big government zombie.

You are so smart, give yourself a hug.

I like how people think huge multi-national corporations like they have their best interest at heart...and I can go on with the reverse strawman but I'm not going to.

Talking about government like its a monolithic entity with an agenda of its own just advertises your own brainwashing. The government is not one person, one agency, one anything.

The countries with high GDP per capita and low wealth inequality don't use our system, "liberal market economy." They use systems like democratic socialist and corporatism. The jury is out, our system inflates the top one percent until were in the streets like those BLM people. Our entire system is predicated on keeping labor cheap. We aren't -- and never were -- a free market. We don't subject the elites in this country to "market discipline," only the rest of us.

The government is a tool that people in lower classes need to learn to use. Rather than adopting your defeatist attitude. News flash -- there's more of us than them. I'm not suggesting the 1% pay us, I'm suggesting we never let them get as much to begin with moving forward.

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I like how people think huge multi-national corporations like they have their best interest at heart...and I can go on with the reverse strawman but I'm not going to.

Talking about government like its a monolithic entity with an agenda of its own just advertises your own brainwashing. The government is not one person, one agency, one anything.

The countries with high GDP per capita and low wealth inequality don't use our system, "liberal market economy." They use systems like democratic socialist and corporatism. The jury is out, our system inflates the top one percent until were in the streets like those BLM people. Our entire system is predicated on keeping labor cheap. We aren't -- and never were -- a free market. We don't subject the elites in this country to "market discipline," only the rest of us.

The government is a tool that people in lower classes need to learn to use. Rather than adopting your defeatist attitude. News flash -- there's more of us than them. I'm not suggesting the 1% pay us, I'm suggesting we never let them get as much to begin with moving forward.

Damn this edit is beasting on them. Just getting caught up on this thread.

Lot of bombs being dropped. JurisDictum is going in heavy.

[pgerman]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I like how people think huge multi-national corporations like they have their best interest at heart...and I can go on with the reverse strawman but I'm not going to.

Talking about government like its a monolithic entity with an agenda of its own just advertises your own brainwashing. The government is not one person, one agency, one anything.

The countries with high GDP per capita and low wealth inequality don't use our system, "liberal market economy." They use systems like democratic socialist and corporatism. The jury is out, our system inflates the top one percent until were in the streets like those BLM people. Our entire system is predicated on keeping labor cheap. We aren't -- and never were -- a free market. We don't subject the elites in this country to "market discipline," only the rest of us.

The government is a tool that people in lower classes need to learn to use. Rather than adopting your defeatist attitude. News flash -- there's more of us than them. I'm not suggesting the 1% pay us, I'm suggesting we never let them get as much to begin with moving forward.

Federal Government = consolidation of multinational corporation power


Local and state government powers should always exceed those of the Federal government, we are going in the wrong direction on that.

It is VERY hard to individually corrupt many smaller governments, to corrupt a consolidated form of power in which we have now is VERY easy.

So let me break this down for you. I don't care what candidate is what. Or how many lies they tell.

It comes down to a couple simple things.

1. Who will shrink the federal government powers
2. Who will collect LESS taxes thus giving less power to federal government

Everything else on a national level is just hot air. Because both sides are almost identical in actual policy.

The more money you give to the federal government , the more % share of power they have. You basically sell your freedom 1% at a time. Until you are working for the federal government, and they are working for the multi nationals.

Support the power of individual states, and local governments. Don't get caught up in vague arguments from the Feds.
Trust me they don't give a shit about gay rights, or what bathroom anyone uses. They will use any excuse to extract another % of freedom from the public.


They got you distracted with slight of hand. Don't be fooled.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by pgerman [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Everything else on a national level is just hot air. Because both sides are almost identical in actual policy.

Not true really, but this is an attractive state of mind because you don't even need to understand or think about issues to have it. Yet it gives the impression that you're edgy and seditious and have 'ascended' beyond normal politics.

No, the world is just not that simple that you can boil it down to a rule like this. There are gigantic practical differences in policy, even when you operate under the assumption that every member of both parties are corrupt corporate puppets.

[JurisDictum]

Originally Posted by pgerman [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Federal Government = consolidation of multinational corporation power


Local and state government powers should always exceed those of the Federal government, we are going in the wrong direction on that.

It is VERY hard to individually corrupt many smaller governments, to corrupt a consolidated form of power in which we have now is VERY easy.

So let me break this down for you. I don't care what candidate is what. Or how many lies they tell.

It comes down to a couple simple things.

1. Who will shrink the federal government powers
2. Who will collect LESS taxes thus giving less power to federal government

Everything else on a national level is just hot air. Because both sides are almost identical in actual policy.

The more money you give to the federal government , the more % share of power they have. You basically sell your freedom 1% at a time. Until you are working for the federal government, and they are working for the multi nationals.

Support the power of individual states, and local governments. Don't get caught up in vague arguments from the Feds.
Trust me they don't give a shit about gay rights, or what bathroom anyone uses. They will use any excuse to extract another % of freedom from the public.


They got you distracted with slight of hand. Don't be fooled.

Accountability at a state and local level is far below that of the national level. There is a complete lack of voter interest in anything below a gubernatorial election. The turn out for local level elections is something like 20% at HIGHEST. Government corruption at the city level is famously common.

There are no examples of any country with high GDP per capita and low wealth inequality that use our decentralised system. As far as I can see, this system works great for a divide and conquer strategy by large corporations. It creates a "race to the bottom," where states and municipalities are competing with each other to offer the most subsidies and tax breaks to potential "job creators." It's pretty common for them to use up their subsidy package and then move on to the next state.

Ask Daywolf how happy he is with that super accountable state government in California*. Where the Democratic party is the only game in town -- so you get rich assholes like Gavin Newsom running the show. Watch that dumbass try to stand up to a guy that barely graduated high school:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42wbI7LxRns (Adam Carolla)

I'm not going to get into to Republican state corruption unless someone implies it isn't there.

Look, states made sense in the 1800s. People in each state had a lot more in common then, and the federal government wasn't nearly as accountable as it is now. When we were using horses for travel I don't think I would have been a big fan of federal government. And it is not that I'm a "big fan" now, its just that I recognize that it is the only tool powerful enough to actually stand up to elites. And we know the sword can cut both ways...we just need the right wing to know that too.

*for some reason I think Daywolf is from CA, I can't remember why and don't want to take the time to confirm.

Edit: There is no "individual" in control of the U.S. government. All a president can do is try to get CONGRESS (535 people all over the country) to pass a law. That law must be upheld by 9 Justices. It is far easier to prevent something from happening in our government than it is to make something happen. That's the way it is designed.

[Nirgon]

Originally Posted by pgerman [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

wealth inequality ?

No one is getting the 1% to pay for anything. Lets be clear about that.





Look at the % of taxes you pay from earning, to buying. If you pay an extra 15 % in various taxes, and get 8% in benefits ...........eh whatever.



I like how people treat the federal government like they are someones mom that just has your best interests at heart.

Federal government going to bring you a warm blanky and some soup?

They are going to tax and control you, until you can't open your asshole and take a shit without getting a permit first.

I also like how all these self noted "independent thinkers" Have the same ideas as every other Clinton/banks/big government zombie.

You are so smart, give yourself a hug.

bam.

[Jarnauga]

Who here thinks that paris hilton works more than the regular janitor in the US ..? you have to be retarded to think "you just have to work a lot to get rich".

This:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

is not communism. Nobody wants wealth equality. Everybody just thinks that you should be able to work any job 35, 40, 45 hours a week and live a decent life. If you think someone who's already working 3 part time jobs for 80 hours a week and can't make ends meet is not working enough, well, i'm sorry but you're just blind.

you guys should try to read that if you have the courage:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita...-First_Century

written by a french [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The central thesis of the book is that inequality is not an accident, but rather a feature of capitalism, and can only be reversed through state interventionism. The book thus argues that, unless capitalism is reformed, the very democratic order will be threatened.

Piketty bases his argument on a formula that relates the rate of return on capital (r) to economic growth (g), where r includes profits, dividends, interest, rents and other income from capital and g is measured in income or output. He argues that when the rate of growth is low, then wealth tends to accumulate more quickly from r than from labor and tends to accumulate more among the top 10% and 1%, increasing inequality. Thus the fundamental force for divergence and greater wealth inequality can be summed up in the inequality r > g. He analyzes inheritance from the perspective of the same formula.

The book argues that there was a trend towards higher inequality which was reversed between 1930 and 1975 due to unique circumstances: the two world wars, the Great Depression and a debt-fueled recession destroyed much wealth, particularly that owned by the elite. These events prompted governments to undertake steps towards redistributing income, especially in the post-World War II period. The fast, worldwide economic growth of that time began to reduce the importance of inherited wealth in the global economy.

The book argues that the world today is returning towards "patrimonial capitalism", in which much of the economy is dominated by inherited wealth: the power of this economic class is increasing, threatening to create an oligarchy. Piketty cites novels by Honoré de Balzac, Jane Austen and Henry James to describe the rigid class structure based on accumulated capital that existed in England and France in the early 1800s.

Of course it's economics so open to criticisms and interpretations, but tell me the world we live in is not more and more like the bolded part.