So is most of the world we live in.

You forget to mention that in your rhetoric.

And a few of those committed fraud, crimes, theft, and help set it up and push it to others, helping bankrupt a nation and its people.... which is the actual problem and not corporations that provide jobs and services.

Probably why you don't see down with Gillette protest signs, but hey... that's just me making a guess.

I hope the top 10 rich people in the world go tomorrow in porn business.
They can buy themselves the best camera's, buy the most beautiful girls, the best webdevelopers in the world and sell their porn for $10/month because they have money enough.


And maybe the other 99% little suckers on here will realize then how fair capitalism is.

Please enough with this. let me put it to you this way. If teh US was taken over by say China the millionaires/billionaires lives would change much more than some poor person. In other words the rich have more to gain by the US being free than anyone one else so it's logical they pay more. I really don't want to hear rich people bitch about taxes when the people risking their asses on the front lines so the rich can still be rich make so little they need food stamps.

I don't know if you just don't follow the news or you're just being willfully ignorant? Take the Koch brothers for example, one of their companies was exposed paying bribes to win contracts, they thwarted a US trade ban with Iran to sell them millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment(this is a country that sponsors global terrorism), they rig prices, constantly run afoul of enviromental regulations and they've spent more than $50 million to lobby in Washington since 2006. They also fund Americans for prosperity which funds the Tea Party which pays people like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck to speak. David Koch is in fact the founder of Americans for Prosperity. These two are like real-life fucking supervillains, and they're worth about $30 billion dollars a piece.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...ran-sales.html


As for who to blame for the finacial crisis, Time magazine did a piece on that:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...877339,00.html

If you truly think that George Soros is not funding just as much insidious crap on the left with just as much financial and media resources as the Koch brothers, if not more, then you are allowing yourself to be completely duped IMHO

Start with Soros and Buffet.

George Soros = House of Rothschild Agent :2 cents:

worked great for the soviets...

because the top 1% and the government (none of which are in adult...) are making it harder and harder to succeed in this world. they are threatened by newcomers. don't be fooled, these people do not want you to succeed. they want you to be a worker bee, not a leader.

I watched this piece of a documentary a few years back and kept it in mind in case the guy is right. He's analysing and interpreting information that was released by the MoD back in 2007 as to how they see the world changing over the next 30 years. Interesting listen...

Plenty of 1%era in adult.
It ain't that hard to do.

While it is true that a lot of 'big business' owners have always had a tendency to try and restrict access to the market, they only started to succeed at doing this once they realized they needed the government.

Contrary to what they want you to believe (of course they're not going to be honest about this) a lot of the laws and regulations officially aimed at protecting the consumer are actually aimed at protecting a few big corporations. (either by transferring liabilities to the public/tax payer or by making all kinds of rules that apply to newcomers, but not to older companies or by making false advertising legal (example: if a product contains less than 0.5% of certain substances, they are allowed to advertise those products as 'containing 0% of that substance') etc.)

The sad part imo is that once people become aware of this, a lot of them start asking for more government intervention, while it is government intervention that is the main problem. 'Big business' owners with bad intentions love government intervention, because they control who writes the laws and how they are implemented. Most people would then of course respond by saying that we need to get all lobbyists and corporate money out of government, but to think that is possible is naive at best. 'Big business', money interests, common criminal gangs, big unions and politicians have always intermingled and scratched each others backs.

A blatant example would be Tammany Hall and William 'Boss' Tweet. Tweet ran a 'Fire company' in New York in the 1800s. A Fire Company was synonymous for a gang back then (think "Gangs of New York"). He got into politics to make more money. After a while he basically ran New York. The only thing that has changed since then is that they have learned to be less obvious about this.

The corporations have helped create the structures of wealth production, but as their only concern is profit, this causes terrible damage to societies in the form of low wages, concentration of wealth, destruction of the environment, creation of a class society, war between countries of raw materials etc.

The Revolution will keep the factories, but change the ownership, making them work for the benefit of the whole society not just the wealth of the 0.1%

Yea...... because that has worked so well every time it has been tried. :1orglaugh

You're late to the party...

The 1% is not a reference to the top 1% of the countries tax payers, it's a reference of those in control that are too big to fail. And nobody in this Industry, not you, a processor, or the entire Industry combined together reaches that 1%, or did, at all.... which is why 100% of our Industry is in the 99% that got fucked over by the 1%.

Corporations don't "cause low wages". Employers are able to pay the wages they pay because employees ARE WILLING to work for those wages.

If an employer can't find enough people to work for him, there's only one thing he can do: make the job offer more attractive (more benefits, better hours, increased wages).

</law of supply and demand>

There's nothing wrong with corporations per se. There is something wrong with organizations (such as certain corporations) that commit acts of aggression such as forcing people to buy their products/services or using force to prevent others from entering the market.

There's nothing wrong with greed. Greed is what drives every human being who has a job or wants a job. Greed is what drives every human being who by the end of the day wants to have improved his current condition. Greed is good.

The bad thing is aggression. The bad thing is trying to improve your own condition at the expense of others. Aggression is the violation of other people's property rights. Without absolute property rights, we'll return to pre-human conditions. Without property rights, we'll return to the animal kingdom where the strong eat the weak.

Greed is not what drives successful people... passion is.

Greed is what makes one man step over a dieing man for a dollar, no part of greed is good... not for yourself, business, or the world.

Ok, we'll agree to disagree on the different connotations of the word. Fact remains that whatever it is that drives a person, the problem still is aggression. The problem still are people who violate other people's property rights. Whether it is by forcing them to buy something they don't want to buy or by stealing part of their property to make up the losses of some shady corporation etc.

A free and prosperous society is one where people are free to use their own property, one where people feel secure to save their property for later use if they want (unlike our current system that encourages people to spend their income because otherwise they would lose part of it to the tax man or to inflation),...

How do you feel about trade unions?

Unions and their influence are different in different parts of the world, but in general: there's nothing wrong with a union per se.

If workers want to organize themselves and have someone represent them in negotiations etc with their employer or potential employer, there's nothing wrong with that. People are free to associate themselves with whoever they want. Employers are also free to hire whoever they want, so in a free world, employers would also be free to refuse to hire people who are represented by certain organizations like a union for example. Freedom works both ways.

The problem with unions and the way they operate in most countries these days is that they have become a part of the state. In this part of the EU for example, every couple of years a small number of people who represent a couple of 'employers organizations' and the unions get together and discuss how wages will go up or down etc. These talks influence not only the people who are a member of those unions but also the people who aren't.

Years ago, before I became (full time) self employed, my boss asked me if I wanted to work on a holiday. They needed a small group of people to work that day and offered 3 times the normal pay. I agreed to work that day, as did a lot of other people. But in the end we weren't allowed to work that day because some union (that I wasn't even a member of) refused to ok this deal. So my boss voluntarily agreed to the deal. I, as an employee, agreed. But because of some union (and the powers it has) we weren't allowed to complete "our voluntary transaction".

Yes, some of the employees are so will they commit suicide at the awful conditions and poor wages corporations pay making western gadgets.

The employers control the STATE and the STATE makes sure that wages are kept low by outlawing and restricting Trade unions, creating unemployment, importing cheap foreign labor.

The idea that the market is free is deluded. On one side is the employer backed by the courts, wealth and power and on the other the worker who has little or nothing and the need to feed his family.

The result of this can be see in the fact that the economies have grown over the last 30 years but wages have not. The workers are just "Willing" to give more of the money to the rich....

:1orglaugh
Sure kid, let's change the meaning of 1% so you can seem to be right.

Because our govt. gave the money to them.
Meanwhile how many people that really NEEDED that money got a penny of it?

I'd say we start first with voting out of office EVERY elected official. One term and then OUT.

All of this class warfare nonsense is just another smokescreen to cover the crooks in Washington D.C. and the media is perpetuating it.

It's "con man 101" kind of stuff. Distract you with something flashy while picking your pocket with the other hand.

NRA nuts seem pretty sane now. Seems very wise idea to keep the middle class armed.

Sad that you're too stupid to realize nobody is talking about your pennies.

:1orglaugh