Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Bastard Elites are at it again.

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    yekahs wrote: »
    Ok here's my take on this.

    I think charity is a great thing, and someone giving to a charitable cause, regardless of who they are should be commended.

    But......

    You have to wonder about a system where this can come about. Why exactly should a small few control such a huge amount of the wealth. Who is the real philanthropist? Is it a multi-billionaire american industrialist, or is it the worker in India who works his hole off for 20 quid a month to produce the products and the huge profits that these billionaires can then give a portion of back to charity. Who is risking more, Warren Buffet as he gambles on the stock market, or the African mine worker who is forced to risk life and limb for a few measly bucks.

    In one sense, you have to admire these guys like Bill Gates, George Soros, etc. who weren't born into vast wealth, but just made it for themselves. But then again, a lot of the time, their wealth creation comes at the expense of the suffering of others. Like the whole hedge fund and speculative unsustainable stock market that the likes of Soros and Buffet created. It earned them huge, inconceivable wealth, but then the cost is, when it can no longer be sustained, it crashes, causing huge suffering and job losses world wide.

    Another problem I have with this, is its another way these billionaires can avoid tax. As charitable donations are tax deductable, it allows them to hand pick which charities their money goes to, rather than leaving it up to the people/government to decide.

    But I do think that they are genuinely interested in helping people, particularly Bill & Melinda Gates. What I am against is the system that got them there in the first place. I do not think that a system whereby half the world starves, while a tiny minuscule percentage can hold inconceivably large amounts of the wealth. It is fundamentally unfair.

    So the obvious question is then....."What do you suggest?"

    Well, I don't know exactly, but, that doesn't change the fact that it is a very uneven and biased system.

    Just because the fuedal system peasants didn't know of a better system in the Middle Ages, doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

    BOLD I agree with, this I don't, but your last sentance I REALLY agree with, I believe there is a better system, but bill and melinda and the billionaire club would not let it happen, good old bill has destroyed people's lives and livelihoods on his way to where he is now, its common knowledge, and his involvement in miracle crops, feed the world etc are to enslve these poor farmers much less well off than bill.


  • Options
    #63
    robtri
    Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    yekahs wrote: »

    So the obvious question is then....."What do you suggest?"

    Well, I don't know exactly, but, that doesn't change the fact that it is a very uneven and biased system. Just because the fuedal system peasants didn't know of a better system in the Middle Ages, doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

    only other option you have is communism, proper communism... where wealth is spread.


  • Options
    #64
    Yitzhak Rabin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,225 ✭✭✭Yitzhak Rabin


    robtri wrote: »
    only other option you have is communism, proper communism... where wealth is spread.

    Well I'm not sure. Thats the point I was making that because there seems to be no better alternative thought up yet, doesn't mean one doesn't exist, it just means we haven't evolved a better one yet.

    As for communism. Maybe in its purest, purest form it might work. I'm still not convinced though, because given human nature, it will always require coercion to have it enforced. Also it stifles innovation and creativity, and economically it is less efficient than capitalism.

    So, as I said, I can't think of a better alternative, but I still think we can do better. Maybe one thing, off the top of my head might be, that when you die, your fortune does not go to your family, but instead to the society that allowed you to accrue such wealth. That would at least prevent the huge powerful elite families controlling the wealth over successive generations.


  • Options
    #65
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,068 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    robtri wrote: »
    only other option you have is communism, proper communism... where wealth is spread.

    Not really.. what about a resource based economy? Have a look at The Venus Project.. it's far fetched alright, but is it a bad idea? And if so, why?


  • Options
    #66
    pablo_escobar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 240 ✭✭pablo_escobar


    robtri wrote:
    only other option you have is communism, proper communism... where wealth is spread.

    my sentiments exactly.

    proper communism would just mean a return to feudalism where the gap between rich and poor would widen.nobody wants that...

    give me capitalism anyday where everyone can be rich!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    My name is URL wrote: »
    Not really.. what about a resource based economy? Have a look at The Venus Project.. it's far fetched alright, but is it a bad idea? And if so, why?


    URL, that is a brilliant idea, years ago I was thinking why is the world so messed up, people starve while others spend millions on a poxy ring, with a stone that people were enslaved and died to obtain, I saw how wrong it was and the general opinion was "Thats the way it is!"

    This need's a quote for the non-clickers, now I must admit I didn't read it all, I skipped through it, but this system is the way it should be, and not that far fetched from what I read, just means people must be prepared to come down a notch or two for others to raise a notch or two, some would stay the same, but anyway here's the quote, and it may be long, but try read till the end, its Genius!.
    The term and meaning of a Resource-Based Economy was originated by Jacque Fresco. It is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.

    Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.

    A resource-based economy would utilize existing resources from the land and sea, physical equipment, industrial plants, etc. to enhance the lives of the total population. In an economy based on resources rather than money, we could easily produce all of the necessities of life and provide a high standard of living for all.

    Consider the following examples: At the beginning of World War II the US had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war.

    In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources are held as the common heritage of all of Earth's people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative.

    We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.

    Our proposals would not only add to the well being of people, but they would also provide the necessary information that would enable them to participate in any area of their competence. The measure of success would be based on the fulfilment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.

    At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants. Only when population exceeds the carrying capacity of the land do many problems such as greed, crime and violence emerge. By overcoming scarcity, most of the crimes and even the prisons of today's society would no longer be necessary.

    A resource-based economy would make it possible to use technology to overcome scarce resources by applying renewable sources of energy, computerizing and automating manufacturing and inventory, designing safe energy-efficient cities and advanced transportation systems, providing universal health care and more relevant education, and most of all by generating a new incentive system based on human and environmental concern.

    Many people believe that there is too much technology in the world today, and that technology is the major cause of our environmental pollution. This is not the case. It is the abuse and misuse of technology that should be our major concern. In a more humane civilization, instead of machines displacing people they would shorten the workday, increase the availability of goods and services, and lengthen vacation time. If we utilize new technology to raise the standard of living for all people, then the infusion of machine technology would no longer be a threat.

    A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.

    What else would a resource-based economy mean? Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.

    As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. Considerable amounts of energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competitive products such as tools, eating utensils, pots, pans and vacuum cleaners. Choice is good. But instead of hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel required to turn out similar products, only a few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.

    With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.

    If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe or water abundantly flowing down from a mountain stream. Although air and water are valuable, in abundance they cannot be sold.

    Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such.


  • Options
    #68
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    I read it all carefully, that's fukking REVOLUTION material, just imagine, the justice for all, crime would mostly be eliminated, community based life, all do what we're good at, freedom, add to it crime (law of the land, do not hurt, steal, threathen, generally don't do bad on each other or the planet), crime dealt with accordingly, all resources available to all, I don't mean we can all get strung out on heroin, but should somebody, then the wider community gets that person off it.

    Enough waffle, it could be how it is, but the reluctance of people to stand up for their God given right it will never happen.


  • Options
    #69
    robtri
    Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    My name is URL wrote: »
    Not really.. what about a resource based economy? Have a look at The Venus Project.. it's far fetched alright, but is it a bad idea? And if so, why?

    is that not a form of communism???
    sharing or wealth and power among a classes society???


  • Options
    #70
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    robtri wrote: »
    is that not a form of communism???
    sharing or wealth and power among a classes society???

    No you dont get shot for trying to get over a wall.


  • Options
    #71
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,068 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    robtri wrote: »
    is that not a form of communism???
    sharing or wealth and power among a classes society???

    Well there are similarities, but also huge differences. Communism has Governance, trade, banks, military forces and so on while ideally in an RBE there would be none of those things.

    It's not something that could be achieved overnight, or even over a few decades. There's a lot of questions to be answered in regards to crime prevention etc, since one of the ideas is that there would be no police force to enforce any law. The thinking is that with such openness that far fewer people would turn to crime, but what about the likes of rape and child molestation etc? That's one part that I can't see an answer to atm, but maybe with better understanding of things and less social pressures on people, those likely to offend would be quicker to seek help before they do so.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    robtri
    Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    uprising2 wrote: »
    No you dont get shot for trying to get over a wall.

    thats not true communism, thats a perverted angle to it.


  • Options
    #73
    pablo_escobar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 240 ✭✭pablo_escobar


    robtri wrote:
    is that not a form of communism???
    sharing or wealth and power among a classes society???

    so what system do we have at the moment?

    how would you define the current system which is allocating more and more resources to the rich and powerful in society?

    is that capitalism? eh..no it's not, we are in a feudalist system where rich will get richer and poor poorer.

    see the latest hike in electric? 5% from november. see the cuts in health services?

    and have you seen the government take any wage reductions? hell no! it's full steam ahead, spending as much money as they can!!

    i've moved my savings to switzerland!


  • Options
    #74
    robtri
    Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    pablo_escobar wrote: »
    so what system do we have at the moment?

    how would you define the current system which is allocating more and more resources to the rich and powerful in society?

    is that capitalism? eh..no it's not, we are in a feudalist system where rich will get richer and poor poorer.

    see the latest hike in electric? 5% from november. see the cuts in health services?

    and have you seen the government take any wage reductions? hell no! it's full steam ahead, spending as much money as they can!!

    i've moved my savings to switzerland!


    :confused::confused::confused:

    you lost me, i didnt make any comments on whether is as good or worse than our current one.


  • Options
    #75
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    I think these questions deserve a thread of their own. Mods are ye listening? ;)

    My name is URL wrote: »
    Not really.. what about a resource based economy? Have a look at The Venus Project.. it's far fetched alright, but is it a bad idea? And if so, why?


    I've just read it. It would make a big imporvement on the current system. They say that Americans were wealthiest in the 70's. One parent would work normal hours and they family would have eveything it needed. Since then however women are working more (thanks to feminism which was designed to get them to work so more people paying taxes) and still after all this time more and more people are in deep debt.


    As soon as the banks engineered the debt based system all those years ago everything has been based on money. Its a system that has to collapse every now and again because its a fraud. The money has no real value only a value based on peoples happiness/confidence basically. Its the reason why everybody is encouraged to spend spend spend. Buying sh!t they don't need and trying to keep up with the Jones'.


    Another interesting point made is about the products that are being sold. I was on a train a few weeks ago talking to an old lady and she raised the subject about things breaking easily these days. She was correct. Things are designed to last over a few years. Those electric kettles are good examples. They have to be replaced every other year. Why can't they make things that last? Well its because people will stop buying things.


    There are some things about that system that raise a few questions. I have a system in mind which I'll explain later. (It's basically basing economies around the locality and theres a monetary system being tried out in many countries using a newly formed local money, in addition to the Euro).


  • Options
    #76
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    profitius wrote: »
    There are some things about that system that raise a few questions. I have a system in mind which I'll explain later. (It's basically basing economies around the locality and theres a monetary system being tried out in many countries using a newly formed local money, in addition to the Euro).

    In short, people would have to decide what sort of society they want and then have appropiate laws drawn up so people can live in the boundaries of this vision.

    I'd like to see the following.

    -Change the banking system to what banks were originally for. Storing wealth. Scrap the debt based system.
    -Local currencies. Keep local money circulating. This is begining to happen in areas of Europe and its going well.
    -Keep the money local so the work the locals do get rewarded and the wealth stays in the locality and not in the pockets of the owners of tesco.
    -Smaller shops with bigger shops being heavily taxed
    -Working hours greatly reduced because of the new wealth.
    -Luxury goods being heavily taxed and essential goods having very little tax. If people want to waste money keeping up with the Jones' at least most of it will come back to the economy in tax.
    -Proper education system. Young people will learn right from wrong and how to live a life with high standards. School would also be about making young people feel great about themselves. That can't be underrated.
    -Governmental run research and development facilities.
    -More taxes on goods coming from abroad. Once again its designed to prevent globalization. Instead of buying wheat from England we produce our own. It'll cost more but people would be wealthier anyway the money stays local meaning they benefiit in other ways.
    -Town planning. More areas for bikes and walking and less for cars. People look after and maintain their own area.
    -Facilities. Lots of parks and green areas to play sports.

    About the government:
    -As far as I'm concerned everybody SHOULD NOT be allowed to vote. Its nonsense saying everybody should be allowed to vote. I'd like to see a system where the people in charge of running the country actually knew what they were doing and were experts in the area and picked out because of that. Unlike todays politicans who are in the job because of their over-inflated egos. I'd also like to have very strict rules regarding their pay and how they recieve money and even who they socalise with. With better education and a higher stand of person there would naturally be less corruption in the government.

    Media:
    -The greatest tool for mind control and social engineering. It simply has to be banned with all negativity that flows out of it. Educate young people to see that negativity and the industry will go broke when they stop buying the magazines/watching it.


  • Options
    #77
    robtri
    Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    Interesting thought, hope you dont mind me adding a few comments....

    profitius wrote: »
    -Change the banking system to what banks were originally for. Storing wealth. Scrap the debt based system.
    Where do people get loans then to set up business, invest, buy a house?
    in the days when banks just stored wealth, money lenders profitted and the working class people couldnt afford to get loans and improve their lifestyle.
    This system ensured the rich stayed rich and the poor stayed poor...


    profitius wrote: »
    -Local currencies. Keep local money circulating. This is begining to happen in areas of Europe and its going well.
    -Keep the money local so the work the locals do get rewarded and the wealth stays in the locality and not in the pockets of the owners of tesco.
    well you too can become an owner of tesco and share the wealth, if you decide to invest your money there....
    tesco's provide massive job creations into the local communities, and massive taxes to the local community, much more than a few small shops...

    also what defines local???? say i live in North county Dublin, will i be punished punitively if i open a small shop in wicklow????
    profitius wrote: »
    -Smaller shops with bigger shops being heavily taxed
    what will this achieve??
    profitius wrote: »
    -Working hours greatly reduced because of the new wealth.
    why is 38 hours a week too much?? if it is get a part time job....
    tesco and big places like that have been a god send for a lot of families who need flexible working hours to earn income..

    profitius wrote: »
    -Luxury goods being heavily taxed and essential goods having very little tax. If people want to waste money keeping up with the Jones' at least most of it will come back to the economy in tax.
    i would agree with this, but what defines a luxury good???
    profitius wrote: »
    -Proper education system. Young people will learn right from wrong and how to live a life with high standards. School would also be about making young people feel great about themselves. That can't be underrated.
    why is it the responsibility of the state/government... to teach kids right from wrong is the parents responsibility... parents need to be held accountable for their childrens actions, not the state or community...

    profitius wrote: »
    -Governmental run research and development facilities.
    already in place, millions a year are invested by the government in R&D and reduced taxes for companies setting up R&D here...
    profitius wrote: »
    -More taxes on goods coming from abroad. Once again its designed to prevent globalization. Instead of buying wheat from England we produce our own. It'll cost more but people would be wealthier anyway the money stays local meaning they benefiit in other ways.
    no only shop owners will be wealthier.... how will shopping local make me wealthier???
    profitius wrote: »
    -Town planning. More areas for bikes and walking and less for cars. People look after and maintain their own area.
    -Facilities. Lots of parks and green areas to play sports.
    absolutely agree on this.....
    and kids or adults found damaging, vandalising these areas should be made pay for the damage or made repair the damage themselves and be fined heavily
    profitius wrote: »
    About the government:
    -As far as I'm concerned everybody SHOULD NOT be allowed to vote. Its nonsense saying everybody should be allowed to vote. I'd like to see a system where the people in charge of running the country actually knew what they were doing and were experts in the area and picked out because of that. Unlike todays politicans who are in the job because of their over-inflated egos. I'd also like to have very strict rules regarding their pay and how they recieve money and even who they socalise with. With better education and a higher stand of person there would naturally be less corruption in the government.
    so if you dont meet certain criteria you dont have a vote......
    medieval times is springing to mind... sorry but everybody is entitiled to vote imho....
    like would you be happy being told, sorry you dont have a good enough grasp on these financial matters, you cant vote...

    I would agree about the pay part, they should get average industrial wage, therefore if they do a good job running the country their pay will rise as the industrial wage will rise... simple
    profitius wrote: »
    Media:
    -The greatest tool for mind control and social engineering. It simply has to be banned with all negativity that flows out of it. Educate young people to see that negativity and the industry will go broke when they stop buying the magazines/watching it.
    so no one is allowed to publish items about the negative side of life????
    not very fair is it.... and since our kids will never know about the bad stuff, will that mean they will be too stupid to be able to vote??


  • Options
    #78
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    robtri wrote: »
    Interesting thought, hope you dont mind me adding a few comments....

    No bother. I'll answer half now and half tomorrow. Theres many points! :D
    robtri wrote: »
    Where do people get loans then to set up business, invest, buy a house?
    in the days when banks just stored wealth, money lenders profitted and the working class people couldnt afford to get loans and improve their lifestyle.
    This system ensured the rich stayed rich and the poor stayed poor...

    I hear what you're saying. The way the system is currently its out of control. Banks are allowed produce new money and they've created a bubble that will burst sometime its only a matter of when.

    Everything should be simplified and made easy to understand. The reason why theres so many rules and regulations these days is because they're trying to confuse people. By doing that people can easily be taken advantage of. Therefore simplify banking rules and let them be heavily policed or run by the government.

    Banks should be run by the government or regional government and be a non profit making tool to help the nation develop. When I say non profit I mean thats not the main goal. It can make profit but they go back to the government and to the people. Bankc are screwing people these days like most businesses.

    People should still be allowed borrow for mortgages etc and with some interest applied but not the crazy compound interest.
    robtri wrote:
    well you too can become an owner of tesco and share the wealth, if you decide to invest your money there....
    tesco's provide massive job creations into the local communities, and massive taxes to the local community, much more than a few small shops...

    also what defines local???? say i live in North county Dublin, will i be punished punitively if i open a small shop in wicklow????

    Thats one of the myths they like to talk about. Tesco and all those big shops are very bad for the Irish economy. In some towns the arrival of Tesco and other big shops on the outskirts have transformed the town. Sure tesco creates employment as we always hear but we don't hear about all the local shops closing down. Family run businesses going out of business because of the tescos of this world.

    The money people spend in tesco will make alot of profits for tesco. That money will be going into the pockets of the owners in Britian or some tax haven somewhere.

    The tesco buy in bulk. They buy little or no local products. So Irish people are buying mostly foreign made food = more money go out of the country.

    Lets say Tesco employs 50 people in a new shop. Well with all the small shops closing down and farmers and food producers going out of business the reality is tesco is a disaster and other big shops. There could be 100 people out of business.

    The prices are cheaper in tesco but the hidden price of these shops is very dear for the Irish people.

    Local basically means somewhere near you. Theres isn't any hard rules saying people must go to the nearest shop but its more of an attitude change.
    robtri wrote: »
    what will this achieve??

    It'll achieve fairer competition for the small shops. Tesco have all the money and are like weeds in a garden. The extra tax would be like weed killer. ;)
    robtri wrote: »
    why is 38 hours a week too much?? if it is get a part time job....
    tesco and big places like that have been a god send for a lot of families who need flexible working hours to earn income..

    In the old days in the USA 1 parent could support a big family easily working a normal working week. These days in America theres 2 parents doing overtime with just one kid and still probably in debt. The reality is people don't even have to work 38 hours a week.

    You might ask where is all the wealth going? Its going to those at the top of the pyramid. People are working their asses off to buy sh!t they don't need. Dumps are full and resources are getting less. Its like a giant snowball. The money system is set up to brainwash people into buying things (by using celebs as role models) because thats what it needs. Money going in all directions but most of it ends up in the pockets of the elites.

    Its all a vicious circle that means people have to work harder and harder while in reality things should be getting easier!!

    Why easier? Because machinery has replaced alot of the manual work of the olden days. We should all be able to have every basic thing we need and have money to save just by working a basic amount of hours per week. That IMO should be less than 38. People are brainwashed into thinking thats a normal working week. Also do a few hours per month maintaining the local area.
    robtri wrote: »
    i would agree with this, but what defines a luxury good???

    Good question! That would be tricky to figure out. I can picture what would be luxury but I'd imagine it would be hard to police it. I reckon you'd have to have different categories of things eg cars, chocolate, furniture etc. Anything in the high range of these would be taxed.

    I'll have to think about the luxury goods part of the system over night because I think simplicity is key but things could get complex with luxury goods. :D


  • Options
    #79
    robtri
    Registered Users Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    profitius wrote: »
    No bother. I'll answer half now and half tomorrow. Theres many points! :D



    I hear what you're saying. The way the system is currently its out of control. Banks are allowed produce new money and they've created a bubble that will burst sometime its only a matter of when.

    Everything should be simplified and made easy to understand. The reason why theres so many rules and regulations these days is because they're trying to confuse people. By doing that people can easily be taken advantage of. Therefore simplify banking rules and let them be heavily policed or run by the government.

    Banks should be run by the government or regional government and be a non profit making tool to help the nation develop. When I say non profit I mean thats not the main goal. It can make profit but they go back to the government and to the people. Bankc are screwing people these days like most businesses.

    People should still be allowed borrow for mortgages etc and with some interest applied but not the crazy compound interest.

    banks here are not allowed produce new money, they have to get it from the European Central bank.... so the banks here have not created the bubble. Like you and me they borrow money and ahve to repay it to the ECB.

    Considering teh bank is owned by shareholders and the government already, surely this is money coming back to the people???
    And what about the people who are screwing the banks, the ones with the mortgages and loans who arent paying them back on time or in full???
    It is not the banks fault completly... people of the country need to take resposibility for their part as well.

    what is considered crazy compund interest???? what do you suggest as a fair way??





    profitius wrote: »
    Thats one of the myths they like to talk about. Tesco and all those big shops are very bad for the Irish economy. In some towns the arrival of Tesco and other big shops on the outskirts have transformed the town. Sure tesco creates employment as we always hear but we don't hear about all the local shops closing down. Family run businesses going out of business because of the tescos of this world.

    The money people spend in tesco will make alot of profits for tesco. That money will be going into the pockets of the owners in Britian or some tax haven somewhere.

    The tesco buy in bulk. They buy little or no local products. So Irish people are buying mostly foreign made food = more money go out of the country.

    Lets say Tesco employs 50 people in a new shop. Well with all the small shops closing down and farmers and food producers going out of business the reality is tesco is a disaster and other big shops. There could be 100 people out of business.

    The prices are cheaper in tesco but the hidden price of these shops is very dear for the Irish people.

    Local basically means somewhere near you. Theres isn't any hard rules saying people must go to the nearest shop but its more of an attitude change.

    a lot of if and could be in there..... any stats to back this up???

    Tesco and other large retailers do support and purchase massive amounts of local produce.....massive amounts.



    profitius wrote: »
    It'll achieve fairer competition for the small shops. Tesco have all the money and are like weeds in a garden. The extra tax would be like weed killer. ;)
    what about your local shop when he wants to expand open more stores... should he be put out of business then as well?

    profitius wrote: »
    In the old days in the USA 1 parent could support a big family easily working a normal working week. These days in America theres 2 parents doing overtime with just one kid and still probably in debt. The reality is people don't even have to work 38 hours a week.

    i disagree with that completely
    profitius wrote: »
    You might ask where is all the wealth going? Its going to those at the top of the pyramid. People are working their asses off to buy sh!t they don't need. Dumps are full and resources are getting less. Its like a giant snowball. The money system is set up to brainwash people into buying things (by using celebs as role models) because thats what it needs. Money going in all directions but most of it ends up in the pockets of the elites.

    so what you are saying is that no one should be successfull or earn more than a certain amount of money no matter how good they are??????


  • Options
    #80
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    robtri wrote: »
    banks here are not allowed produce new money, they have to get it from the European Central bank.... so the banks here have not created the bubble. Like you and me they borrow money and ahve to repay it to the ECB.

    Well the European Central Bank does so. When the Irish banks agree to loan out money to anyone they create debt.
    robtri wrote: »
    Considering teh bank is owned by shareholders and the government already, surely this is money coming back to the people???
    And what about the people who are screwing the banks, the ones with the mortgages and loans who arent paying them back on time or in full???
    It is not the banks fault completly... people of the country need to take resposibility for their part as well.

    No its going into the shareholders pockets and they could be Americans or British. Banks have actually cost the ordinary people alot of money due to the bailout. They're certainly not benefitting the people.
    robtri wrote: »
    what is considered crazy compund interest???? what do you suggest as a fair way??

    The current system is designed to steal from the people. A fair way would be to do what I've said before. Set up banks that are controlled by the government and designed as a tool to help the people generate wealth.

    The Irish banks have failed because they were both investment banks and commercial banks. They failed big time because they acted like any company with investors and tried to make them profits.

    I don't know all the finer points of banking and what Irish banks' relationship is with the ECB is but I know what the end result is.
    robtri wrote: »
    a lot of if and could be in there..... any stats to back this up???

    Tesco and other large retailers do support and purchase massive amounts of local produce.....massive amounts.

    I just done a quick google search 'irish farmers association tesco'. I found this which is a good example of how the heavyweights use their power to crush small food producers.

    http://www.thepoultrysite.com/poultrynews/20540/ifa-tesco-attempting-to-smash-egg-producers

    IFA: Tesco Attempting to Smash Egg Producers

    IRELAND - IFA National Poultry Committee Chairman Alo Mohan has said Tesco’s recent change in pricing strategy on eggs is clear evidence of the multinational’s intention to steal market share and smash the viability of small egg producer brands across the country.

    Mr Mohan said, “Tesco without cause increased prices for local branded eggs by up to 30 per cent while at the same time maintaining own-brand eggs at the original lower price. This practice is forcing consumers who have had a preference to support locally branded eggs to choose Tesco’s own brand on price difference.”

    He said, “This makes branded eggs less competitive against Tesco’s own-brand products, and in producers view, this is anti-competitive as they primary producer gets no more of the extra margin foisted on the product. Tesco cannot be allowed to drive consumers towards their own-brand products by increasing the price of the locally sourced produce.”

    Mr Mohan called on Tesco to immediately address the situation as producers cannot and will not accept further attempts to undermine local brands which to this point were well supported and provided farmers with viable livelihoods.

    ThePoultrySite News Desk
    robtri wrote: »
    what about your local shop when he wants to expand open more stores... should he be put out of business then as well?

    Not at all. Anyone can expand but they just have to pay more tax. Entrepreneurs should be encouraged and rewarded. The whole basis of my system is to make thing more even between rich and poor.
    robtri wrote: »
    i disagree with that completely

    Thats ok. I know its true.
    robtri wrote: »
    so what you are saying is that no one should be successfull or earn more than a certain amount of money no matter how good they are??????

    Nope. As I said REAL entrepreneurship should be rewarded but the differences between wealth should be alot less than it is now. They say 99% of all the wealth in the world is controlled by 1% of the people. I think the difference is bigger but the point is thats a shocking stat.


  • Options
    #81
    profitius
    Registered Users Posts: 3,976 ✭✭✭profitius


    robtri wrote: »
    why is it the responsibility of the state/government... to teach kids right from wrong is the parents responsibility... parents need to be held accountable for their childrens actions, not the state or community...

    People today don't know how to teach kids. The adults don't even know how to behave themselves! Monkey see monkey do. If kids are brought up in a certain enviornment they'll copy the behaviour of the people.

    Its a visicous circle but the way to stop it is to educate people in how to behave properly. Basically have high standards. Those "scumbags" on the streets were not born that way, its a learned behaviour.

    Look at the behaviour of any young person and you could start to guess what sort of upbringing that person had.
    robtri wrote: »
    already in place, millions a year are invested by the government in R&D and reduced taxes for companies setting up R&D here...

    How many millions though? Its probably peanuts and I'm sure I saw somewhere that in terms of R&D Ireland is well behind other countries.
    robtri wrote: »
    no only shop owners will be wealthier.... how will shopping local make me wealthier???

    Its more expensive likely to be more expensive but as I've explained if everybody started to shop locally and keep that money in the local economy the people would become alot wealthier instead of the shareholders of the giant multinational companies.

    Think of it like a bubble. The wealth is going in and out. If you shop locally you're keeping the wealth in the bubble. The problem with the Irish economy is we're producing not enough products and buying too much from abroad.

    Buying local is also better than the major brands and usually better quality and more likely to be organic.
    robtri wrote: »
    so if you dont meet certain criteria you dont have a vote......
    medieval times is springing to mind... sorry but everybody is entitiled to vote imho....
    like would you be happy being told, sorry you dont have a good enough grasp on these financial matters, you cant vote...

    Should criminals be allowed vote? Mad people? Greedy people? The only people who should ba allowed vote should be the normal people who are mentally sound.

    The problem with people these days are they're all brainwashed. Look how the people reacted to the puppet Obama a few years back. The media make him out to be the messiah and the sheeple buy it! Its so easy to influence people.
    robtri wrote: »
    so no one is allowed to publish items about the negative side of life????
    not very fair is it.... and since our kids will never know about the bad stuff, will that mean they will be too stupid to be able to vote??

    Nope, everything should be reported but done in a manner of fact way. These days the way the news is reported is we're hearing peoples opinions about things. They start to use emotional words and when that happens all logic goes out the window. I refer back to the Obama example.

    The main thing about the media is the unbalance between negative and positive news. Theres alot more time spent talking about negative things. For people who understand how the subconscious works will know that constant negativity seeps into the mind and influences the world view of the people especially young people.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    digme
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,584 ✭✭✭digme


    Di0genes wrote: »
    You'll never get what those bastard elites are doing now



    Well you know if there's a Rockerfeller involved it's going to be rotten.



    Thats right the sinister elites are giving money away to charity.

    God dammit.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/aug/04/us-billionaires-half-fortune-gates

    Very naive post.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP1va-wUgfg


    Sunday Update is a public service of The Corbett Report podcast. Download the latest episode from the home page:

    http://www.corbettreport.com

    Billionaires Sign "Giving Pledge"
    http://ur1.ca/15d65

    Elite Billionaires Meet in Secret
    http://ur1.ca/15d69

    The Eugenics Records Office of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
    http://ur1.ca/15d7h

    Alexis Carrel, Rockefeller Researcher and Eugenics Advocate
    http://ur1.ca/15d7u

    Hideyo Noguchi, Rockefeller Researcher, Injected Orphans With Syphilis
    http://ur1.ca/15d8a

    Cornelius Rhoads, Rockefeller Researcher, Bragged About Giving Porto Ricans Cancer
    http://ur1.ca/15d8k

    Rockefellers Funded Nazi Eugenicists Through Kaiser Wilhelm Institute
    http://ur1.ca/15d92

    Population Control: The Eugenics Connection
    http://ur1.ca/15d96

    Rockefeller's "Population Council" and Eugenics
    http://ur1.ca/15d9r

    Testimony of Norman Dodd
    http://ur1.ca/15d9y

    The Tetanus Toxoid Vaccine Was an Abortofacient (hCG)
    http://ur1.ca/15daa

    More Info on the Tetanus Vaccine Scandal
    http://ur1.ca/c5po

    Even More Info on the Tetanus Vaccine Scandal
    http://ur1.ca/15daw

    Bill Gates: "Innovating to Zero"
    http://ur1.ca/15db0

    We Are Change Confronts Rockefeller on Eugenics
    http://ur1.ca/15db6

    China Examines Milk Powder "Premature Puberty" Reports
    http://ur1.ca/15dbj

    American Girls Showing Signs of Puberty Earlier, Study Says
    http://ur1.ca/15dbs

    Information on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals
    http://ur1.ca/15dc9

    Dr. Elizabeth Whelan Pimping BPA on CNN
    http://ur1.ca/15dcl

    Activists Take on Fluoridated Water in Wichita
    http://ur1.ca/15dcs

    We Are Change Edmonton Street Action - Poison in Tap Water
    http://ur1.ca/15dcu


Advertisement