The End of the American Dream?
- Thread starter karrie
- Start date
So, when some government official comes and tells you to surrender half your worth because it is 'obscenely disproportional', you will be happy to do so, because you are such a nice guy. Right?
Remember that the dividing line between 'obscenely disproportional' and what you feel is yours, because you earned it would be decided by somebody, who is more than likely not as well-to-do as you.
Would you be happy with that?
I heard he was striking 'conservatism' from the constitution and replacing it with democratic socialism.
Damn right I would.
If I somehow got 'lucky' enough to make billions or trillions, I would give as much of it away as possible and still maintain a perfectly happy life style.
You sure it's not National Socialism?I heard he was striking 'conservatism' from the constitution and replacing it with democratic socialism.
But mentalfloss... they can always eat cake.
That works out well historically, right?
Stephen Harper is a Fabian Socialist. Bail outs. Private Public partnerships, Canada fully backs the International Trade Union, HealthCare, Quasi free education, OAS, CPP, Welfare, subsidized utilities, Stimlus money...goes on and on and on.
Not all measures that attempt to even out the economy taret individual pocket books to that extent. Of course, catastrophizing is a lot easier than actually sitting down and discussing what WOULD be worthwhile ways to address the chaos and disparaties.
Cake? **** no. Me and my skill professional socialist friends want Key Lime pie. Made with REAL limes.
lol
All we have to do is stick to one simple rule:
"Every single person over the age of x should be able to afford at least one really nice vacation per year."
We just have to figure out what x should be and get the pipeline moving from the rich into their pockets.
I'd be happy just with seeing the American corporate model create a rule that no upper management may receive profit bonus if that profit is made via layoffs. The fact that executives stand to profit from firing people, at this point, is one of the singular most damaging things to the economy.
Then you have to get rid of the law that demands Corps have profits to pay shareholders every quarter. I have to take my losses on the chin as you or any other person has to except one. The Dead Hand. The Corporation.
Yukon Jack still hasn't answered my question of why he lives in one of Canada's most Socialist of provinces. I know why. He knows why but be damned if he'll admit it on these boards.
Yukon Jack still hasn't answered my question of why he lives in one of Canada's most Socialist of provinces. I know why. He knows why but be damned if he'll admit it on these boards.
I heard he was striking 'conservatism' from the constitution and replacing it with democratic socialism.
Damn right I would.
If I somehow got 'lucky' enough to make billions or trillions, I would give as much of it away as possible and still maintain a perfectly happy life style.
Billions and trillions, I believe you because it is unlikely that you ever make that, but I would question your bravado if we were talking about millions, and I would call you a liar if we were talking about thousands.
Not in this thread, petros, but I did elsewhere. Look it up.
The argument could be made that the layoffs were necessary as the corporation had to downsize, but I agree. And again, the crux begins with "fair" profit.
Of course, we don't know the exact specifics of what a fair profit would entail, but we already inadvertently employ that technique.
For instance, mandating the use of more expensive, safer materials. This is what a staunch capitalist should technically argue is "evil pinko socialism", but you won't get that because it would reveal him to be a complete arsehole. Regardless, it would have a negative impact on the bottom line, and making such an ethical mandate cuts into the profit margin - evolving it into a "fair profit."
We can already come up with a few very valid amendments to profit to make them fair:
The environment
Unfair wages
Inappropriate layoffs
Political advantage
Social duress
I think a good net income to have every year, would be a solid, $10 - $15,000. Whatever my annual salary is, whether it was $50,000 or $300,000, as long as I had 10 - 15K left over, I would be very satisfied. Chuffed even.
Now, I agree, that everyone should earn their way to have that sort of residual income - but, beyond that, I personally think it's not only unnecessary, but you get diminishing returns of satisfaction anyway.
You can probably get some really good hookers and blow for much less.
Last edited:
I don't have to look it up. You said you moved there because of family AND that it was dirt cheap. Dirt cheap had more to do with it though. Family is only never further than 4 hours away by jet in Canada. I can drop a G-Note and spend 4hrs to travel to my kid in heartbeat. Why can't you?
Isn't the supposed obesity epidemic effecting poor people more? Looks like Marie-Antoinette's vision came true. They're all eating cake!
How about we let them eat locally grown organic kale?
Your Walmart sells cake!!!?
I wish our crappy Walmart here sold cake...
Where do you live again?
Uhh.. In Canada?
Walmart sells everything.
Doesn't it?
Oh sh!t, don't ruin my fantasy.