CDZ Humane Capitalism : an introduction

[SeaGal]

quick question : what are your feelings about instituting a sort of wealth-cap for individuals and companies? something that would see their total wealth heavily taxed if it grows beyond a certain point?
there would be problems with companies teaming up, and companies buying expensive luxury items as gifts for their most loyal leaders and employees, but with the proper tax oversight, these encroachment risks can be averted, i think..

A wealth cap?...to what end?

It is interesting that you find 'compensations' (gifts, bonuses, etc) to be 'encroachments'. Encroachments on what? As you can see we have a progressive income tax system - the higher income folks pay a higher percentage of their income. The lower income folks pay little or nothing with some receiving back all they paid and more. As to state sales tax, gas taxes and state income taxes including personal property taxes - the more you buy, the more you consume, the higher your tax burden.

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2018 Update

The federal income tax data demonstrates that the U.S. individual income tax continues to be very progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners

taxfoundation.org

Though it is popular to blame the 'wealthy' for the ills of society it is ultimately 'for sale' politicians who are to blame for debt and deficit spending - the government is the only entity that can take your property (income) , by force if necessary. Unless changed by our lawmakers we have a voluntary association with corporations - our association with our government is not.

 

[SeaGal]

Those are the ruling elites. The people within government, the unelected that use their unlimited influence that surpasses who is in office, that are controlling everything.

We just saw this by the way. Trump is not part of the in-crowd, and they tried to get rid of him, because he wasn't using their infinite wisdom.

I think this is a good point that needs to be reinforced. Trump is not for sale, he doesn't play by the 'rules', which makes him a threat to the comfortable elite in DC - on both sides of the aisle. The swamp-dwellers are fighting for their political lives and, as in most cases historically, using us lowly pawns to do their dirty work. I'm only surprised by how many seemingly smart people are so willing to be used - and the enmity directed toward those who are not.

btw - I really like your signature.

 

[gipper]

Those are the ruling elites. The people within government, the unelected that use their unlimited influence that surpasses who is in office, that are controlling everything.

We just saw this by the way. Trump is not part of the in-crowd, and they tried to get rid of him, because he wasn't using their infinite wisdom.

I think this is a good point that needs to be reinforced. Trump is not for sale, he doesn't play by the 'rules', which makes him a threat to the comfortable elite in DC - on both sides of the aisle. The swamp-dwellers are fighting for their political lives and, as in most cases historically, using us lowly pawns to do their dirty work. I'm only surprised by how many seemingly smart people are so willing to be used - and the enmity directed toward those who are not.

btw - I really like your signature.

The problem with that is he hasn’t limited the swamp. He’s expanded it. He may not be for sale, but he may be desperate for the approval of the ruling class and wants their loyalty.

 

[SeaGal]

The problem with that is he hasn’t limited the swamp. He’s expanded it. He may not be for sale, but he may be desperate for the approval of the ruling class and wants their loyalty.

Expanded it how?

Can you name a politician, any politician who doesn't seek approval of the ruling class? This president is the least likely to be influenced by the 'ruling class' than any other president in the past 50 years. That's why they hate him so.

 

[gipper]

The problem with that is he hasn’t limited the swamp. He’s expanded it. He may not be for sale, but he may be desperate for the approval of the ruling class and wants their loyalty.

Expanded it how?

Can you name a politician, any politician who doesn't seek approval of the ruling class? This president is the least likely to be influenced by the 'ruling class' than any other president in the past 50 years. That's why they hate him so.

You’re dreaming and not paying attention.

Merely look at his cabinet. It’s chock full of swamp creatures. Pompeo, Munuchin, Barr, Pence, Esper, Devos...all from the swamp. Plus he hired Bolton, the most famous swamp creature of them all.

 

[Trotsky's Spectre]

wealth-cap for individuals and companies

This is reformism.

Fearing revolution, petty bourgeoisie class reformism seeks to thwart proletarian struggle for political power. So its attempt to defend social democracy against very real dangers is thereby flawed fatality, bankrupt and destined to disaster. Reformism affirms the privilege of the bourgeoisie [ownership] class, seeking only to insulate it from proletarian class revolution by ameliorating a few of the abuses laid on toilers. The petty bourgeoisie class presents these 'reforms' to the proletarian class.

Accepting petty bourgeoisie reformist arrangements, the working class [to its own detriment] surrenders the struggle for revolution against the ownership system maintained by the bourgeoisie class. Worker organizations subsequently are robbed of all efficacy or annihilated, and the proletariat is reduced to a leaderless, amorphous state.

I spoke of the separation of the ownership of productive means from the operation of productive means in terms of irreconcilable contradiction.

Either these contradictory tendencies have objective validity or they do not.
Either these contradictory tendencies relate to historical law or they do not.
These contradictory tendencies are either irreconcilable or else they are not.

If these contradictions ARE reconcilable, then the supposition that proletarians [the 90%] have claim to representation of their unique interests lacks objective validity, and does not relate to historical law. Reform is the false report that intractable contradictions are NOT intractable but ARE reconcilable.

The US worker is where s/he is precisely because for decades, social democracy reformism withdrew proletarians from combat at the cost of concession after concession. These arrangements are now breaking down. This requires an increasingly coercive response to the population to 'maintain "law and order"' and thwart 'revolution.'

This disruption of the proletarian revolutionary tendency is the single, most important factor in the rise of totalitarianism and the shift toward authoritarian forms of rule.

Edit: Corrected form.

 

[SeaGal]

You’re dreaming and not paying attention.

Merely look at his cabinet. It’s chock full of swamp creatures. Pompeo, Munuchin, Barr, Pence, Esper, Devos...all from the swamp. Plus he hired Bolton, the most famous swamp creature of them all.

You mean unlike DC swamp creatures, the makers and shakers of US policy for decades, such as Biden - 47 years, Pelosi - 30+ years and Schumer - 22 years? Trumps folks are tadpoles by comparison in time spent as parasites - Barr being the exception, and he's helping drain the swamp.

 

[gipper]

You’re dreaming and not paying attention.

Merely look at his cabinet. It’s chock full of swamp creatures. Pompeo, Munuchin, Barr, Pence, Esper, Devos...all from the swamp. Plus he hired Bolton, the most famous swamp creature of them all.

You mean unlike DC swamp creatures, the makers and shakers of US policy for decades, such as Biden - 47 years, Pelosi - 30+ years and Schumer - 22 years? Trumps folks are tadpoles by comparison in time spent as parasites - Barr being the exception, and he's helping drain the swamp.

Exactly...but Barr is a major swamp creature. Just research his background.

Do you think I support the D Party? LOL. You partisans can’t believe anyone would dislike both foolish ignorant and almost alike, political parties.

 

[SeaGal]

Exactly...but Barr is a major swamp creature. Just research his background.

Do you think I support the D Party? LOL. You partisans can’t believe anyone would dislike both foolish ignorant and almost alike, political parties.

I have, and he's not.

I couldn't care less who you do or don't support. I couldn't care less about your personal opinions on folks who disagree with you.

But this I do know - sometimes what a person doesn't vocalize reveals more that what they do.

 

[Andylusion]

Every time the rich start to hoard wealth and intellectual property...

Wealth hoarding doesn't arise from 'disposition' or undisciplined traits or even reactionary tendencies among the wealthy. When ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution are separated, irreconcilable class interests are put into motion. In addition to the basic contradictions between private ownership and social production, there are also basic contradictions arising from the contrary interests of nation states competing for dominance of global economic markets.

The particulars of life under this system can be discussed endlessly to no avail. Without resolution to those basic contradictions, the meaningful and permanent changes that are needed are not forthcoming. The problem is, Capital HAS no resolution of those contradictions.

As an aside, I see no socialist/Marxist country in the world today; that includes the nation states you name.

that's the first sensible response i got so far..

i'll be thinking about this long & hard..

quick question : what are your feelings about instituting a sort of wealth-cap for individuals and companies? something that would see their total wealth heavily taxed if it grows beyond a certain point?
there would be problems with companies teaming up, and companies buying expensive luxury items as gifts for their most loyal leaders and employees, but with the proper tax oversight, these encroachment risks can be averted, i think..

The problem with a wealth cap, is that it will accomplish nothing good, but will cause harm.

How? If Bill Gates lost $100 Billion net worth tomorrow... name one person, anywhere on the entire planet, that will be better off?

The answer is, no one.

That isn't opinion by the way, that is fact. How do I know that is fact?

During the recent 2020 economic crash, the super wealthy lost a combined total of $38 Billion dollars.

Do tell.... who is now better off?

No one is. Because rich people having less money, does zero to benefit anyone.

That's reality.

However, at the same time, will there be any negative economic consequences?

Of course.

Let me put it to you another way.

The problem with having a wealth cap, is that you have no control over wealth.

Take a house. If you have a wealth cap of $200,000, and you buy a house and one day the value of the house exceeds $200,000... how is that wealth cap going be enforced?

Will they force you to sell off your house AT A LOSS, so you no longer exceed the wealth cap? Because obviously if the wealth cap is $200,000, and you sell the house for $250,000, you haven't lost any wealth.

So in order to be under the wealth cap, you would have to sell your $250,000 house for $150,000, so you are under the wealth cap.

Owning a company is the same thing. The owners have stock in the company. That stock increases in value, as the company increases in value.

What is going to happen when the value of his stock, exceed the wealth cap? Does he just magically forfeit ownership of the company?

Will that not result in those people, simply not increasing the value of their company? Why would you engage in economic growth, if you know you'll lose your wealth, in doing so?

Apple computer would have stayed a small company employing a dozen people. Why would Steve Jobs risk losing his property, to grow the company?

Better to keep your company, even if you have to remain small, and less productive, then to grow it, and lose what you worked for.

Why work for something that will be stolen from you? So thousands of high paying, high quality jobs, and products that benefit everyone, and people around the world... would never exist. We'd all be poorer, with fewer jobs, thanks to a wealth cap.

And then there is the other side....

Which is, what is more likely to happen, is that the company will go private.

This is one of the dirty secrets of these arguments, which is that the rich wealthy people you know about, you only know about them because of their public wealth.

Take Warren Buffet for example. Buffet is worth $72 Billion dollars. Or so you know....

What most people don't know is that this is only the value of his public assets, which are tied to Berkshire Hathaway.

What you don't know... is all the stock Buffet owns privately. You have no idea how much Buffet has in private stock, because it's none of your business.

Right? In fact there are possibly millions of extremely wealthy people in this country, that you have no idea what their net worth is.

What will more likely happen, is that all the major companies will simply go private. Why would I, as CEO keep my company public, knowing I'll have my property stripped from me, for the sake of some wealth cap?

They'll still be wealthy, you just won't know it.

But here's the negative. Where do common people like myself, invest our money into for retirement? Public companies. What if there are no public companies anymore?

It means most of the common people will retire poorer.

So there is no upside to this... but plenty of down side.

 

[gipper]

Exactly...but Barr is a major swamp creature. Just research his background.

Do you think I support the D Party? LOL. You partisans can’t believe anyone would dislike both foolish ignorant and almost alike, political parties.

I have, and he's not.

I couldn't care less who you do or don't support. I couldn't care less about your personal opinions on folks who disagree with you.

But this I do know - sometimes what a person doesn't vocalize reveals more that what they do.

Do you know Barr’s background? He’s CIA. He is a Bush I acolyte. His ties run deep in big government and big business.

You can wish upon star all you want, but your beloved orange doofus has been completely swallowed by the swamp.

 

[SeaGal]

Do you know Barr’s background? He’s CIA. He is a Bush I acolyte. His ties run deep in big government and big business.

You can wish upon star all you want, but your beloved orange doofus has been completely swallowed by the swamp.

I do, and it's stellar. The only folks who feel threatened by Barr are those with compromised integrity. He's far more honorable than either Holder or Lynch. (though it wouldn't take much honor to beat out Holder).

You know the old saying 'judge me by my friends' - well the same is true with one's enemies. Trump has not become one with the swamp - the swamp critters are as desperately fighting Trump now as in the beginning.

 

[Meister]

Going forward with posting, remember that this is the CDZ. If there are any questions,
look for the rules and guidelines on posting in this forum. From this post forward there
will be thread bans and/or warnings issued. Thanks in advance.

 

[gipper]

Do you know Barr’s background? He’s CIA. He is a Bush I acolyte. His ties run deep in big government and big business.

You can wish upon star all you want, but your beloved orange doofus has been completely swallowed by the swamp.

I do, and it's stellar. The only folks who feel threatened by Barr are those with compromised integrity. He's far more honorable than either Holder or Lynch. (though it wouldn't take much honor to beat out Holder).

You know the old saying 'judge me by my friends' - well the same is true with one's enemies. Trump has not become one with the swamp - the swamp critters are as desperately fighting Trump now as in the beginning.

I have no such faith in government bureaucrats, like Barr. The guy is a elitist opportunist.

Trump and his people will do nothing about O’s spying on his campaign, for fear he might be prosecuted after he leaves the WH.

We are officially now a banana republic.

 

[gipper]

Every time the rich start to hoard wealth and intellectual property...

Wealth hoarding doesn't arise from 'disposition' or undisciplined traits or even reactionary tendencies among the wealthy. When ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution are separated, irreconcilable class interests are put into motion. In addition to the basic contradictions between private ownership and social production, there are also basic contradictions arising from the contrary interests of nation states competing for dominance of global economic markets.

The particulars of life under this system can be discussed endlessly to no avail. Without resolution to those basic contradictions, the meaningful and permanent changes that are needed are not forthcoming. The problem is, Capital HAS no resolution of those contradictions.

As an aside, I see no socialist/Marxist country in the world today; that includes the nation states you name.

that's the first sensible response i got so far..

i'll be thinking about this long & hard..

quick question : what are your feelings about instituting a sort of wealth-cap for individuals and companies? something that would see their total wealth heavily taxed if it grows beyond a certain point?
there would be problems with companies teaming up, and companies buying expensive luxury items as gifts for their most loyal leaders and employees, but with the proper tax oversight, these encroachment risks can be averted, i think..

The problem with a wealth cap, is that it will accomplish nothing good, but will cause harm.

How? If Bill Gates lost $100 Billion net worth tomorrow... name one person, anywhere on the entire planet, that will be better off?

The answer is, no one.

That isn't opinion by the way, that is fact. How do I know that is fact?

During the recent 2020 economic crash, the super wealthy lost a combined total of $38 Billion dollars.

Do tell.... who is now better off?

No one is. Because rich people having less money, does zero to benefit anyone.

That's reality.

However, at the same time, will there be any negative economic consequences?

Of course.

Let me put it to you another way.

The problem with having a wealth cap, is that you have no control over wealth.

Take a house. If you have a wealth cap of $200,000, and you buy a house and one day the value of the house exceeds $200,000... how is that wealth cap going be enforced?

Will they force you to sell off your house AT A LOSS, so you no longer exceed the wealth cap? Because obviously if the wealth cap is $200,000, and you sell the house for $250,000, you haven't lost any wealth.

So in order to be under the wealth cap, you would have to sell your $250,000 house for $150,000, so you are under the wealth cap.

Owning a company is the same thing. The owners have stock in the company. That stock increases in value, as the company increases in value.

What is going to happen when the value of his stock, exceed the wealth cap? Does he just magically forfeit ownership of the company?

Will that not result in those people, simply not increasing the value of their company? Why would you engage in economic growth, if you know you'll lose your wealth, in doing so?

Apple computer would have stayed a small company employing a dozen people. Why would Steve Jobs risk losing his property, to grow the company?

Better to keep your company, even if you have to remain small, and less productive, then to grow it, and lose what you worked for.

Why work for something that will be stolen from you? So thousands of high paying, high quality jobs, and products that benefit everyone, and people around the world... would never exist. We'd all be poorer, with fewer jobs, thanks to a wealth cap.

And then there is the other side....

Which is, what is more likely to happen, is that the company will go private.

This is one of the dirty secrets of these arguments, which is that the rich wealthy people you know about, you only know about them because of their public wealth.

Take Warren Buffet for example. Buffet is worth $72 Billion dollars. Or so you know....

What most people don't know is that this is only the value of his public assets, which are tied to Berkshire Hathaway.

What you don't know... is all the stock Buffet owns privately. You have no idea how much Buffet has in private stock, because it's none of your business.

Right? In fact there are possibly millions of extremely wealthy people in this country, that you have no idea what their net worth is.

What will more likely happen, is that all the major companies will simply go private. Why would I, as CEO keep my company public, knowing I'll have my property stripped from me, for the sake of some wealth cap?

They'll still be wealthy, you just won't know it.

But here's the negative. Where do common people like myself, invest our money into for retirement? Public companies. What if there are no public companies anymore?

It means most of the common people will retire poorer.

So there is no upside to this... but plenty of down side.

Please stop posting lengthy posts that say nothing.

 

[SeaGal]

Going forward with posting, remember that this is the CDZ. If there are any questions,
look for the rules and guidelines on posting in this forum. From this post forward there
will be thread bans and/or warnings issued. Thanks in advance.

My apologies. My recent posts have strayed far from the original topic.

 

[Trotsky's Spectre]

'...mis-direction of the populations, making the populations blame each other en-masse for what’s wrong in their societies,' etc.

’…mis-direction of the populations, making the populations blame each other en-masse for what’s wrong in their societies, and those who call for an ability to acknowledge one’s own team’s mistakes, are made fun of or ignored.’

This enormously privileged social class comprises a mere 1% of the population. BUT for such hostilities and divisions as you reference, the ruling class would vanish without a trace quite literally ‘overnight.’ What else can the ruling class do but stir up prejudices of every kind? In a unified working class, the ruling class beholds a true horror. Far better to keep people fighting among themselves than seem them unite against the 1%!

’…it’s easier for the populations to blame the other groups, far away, than it is to fix themselves by acknowledging their own mistakes.’

Hostility and division is necessitated also because there are no system ‘fixes’ where brokenness is integral to the system.

’This is fundamentally wrong, and leads to real wars, that cause mass suffering, and much desire to reproduce into large new families after the war, which are then used and abused by the rich to produce the goods required to keep the populations happy until the next (cold) war.’

Thus in 1921, the greatest political theoretician of the last century opened his report on global economic crisis and the tasks of the International:

‘Capitalist equilibrium is an extremely complex phenomenon. Capitalism produces this equilibrium, disrupts it, restores it anew in order to disrepute it anew, concurrently extending the limits of its domination…’ -- Leon Trotsky.

’I believe it’s about time these cycles of hatred and violence came to an end.’

Which I identify with the struggle for socialism and align myself accordingly.

 

[Blues Man]

i have decided that the Democrats in the US should have a real chance at winning the upcoming US national elections.

i don't like Trump's calls for a new cold war one bit, you see.
i don't see anything wrong with China "stealing" some intellectual property, because the Republican-led super-wealthy Americans were probably engaging in unfair trade practices for decades, which led to this whole escalation.

let's stop this encroaching cold war dead in it's tracks by electing a Democrat as US President!

and for the record : i have stopped believing you Republican haters entirely.
all you do is sprout rehashed propaganda that you're fed by Republican media outlets like Fox News, which i watched quite a lot in recent times. it kinda disgusts me now though..

There is not one single person on this planet, rich or poor, that is stopping you from bettering your situation.

What's really wrong is you r attitude that you are somehow a victim and that other people are causing your problems

 

[Trotsky's Spectre]

'...adults believe there is a need to replenish the workforce with new workers as these workers mature,' etc.

‘…adults believe there is a need to replenish the workforce with new workers as these workers mature.’

This is not so much what ‘adults believe’ as it is a necessity under the rule of Capital. In his Manifesto, Marx explained that Capital requires that vast armies of workers be retained at a subsistence level so that they MUST present daily in the market to produce on whatever terms Capital will allow.

‘…the student must make a choice of which profession to pursue, to learn … Some will make more money than others…’

But what binds all professions together is that as a CLASS, they acquire what wealth they have NOT by owning [as does the 1% which is the bourgeoisie], OR by investing [as does the next 9% which is the petty bourgeoisie] but by labor [which is the 90%, or the proletariat].

‘Only a very few are born into (super-)rich families, which oversee the flow of money, which in turn oversees the flow of material resources and produced goods.’

As the World Socialist Web Site wrote early January, in the face of mounting crisis, the great questions concern HOW societal resources will be allocated, WHO will make those decisions, and on WHAT basis that will be determined.

 

[Trotsky's Spectre]

'Technological development ... requires that the rich are able to enjoy certain luxuries like private jets and expensive cars (which they use to establish a hierarchy between themselves that is displayed in their commerce choices).

The question is, 'how is this wealth acquired.' Marx' term for accumulated Capital was 'worker blood.'

Private jet and Rolls Royce ownership [plus ultra-luxury yachts, privately owned South Pacific islands, etc.] are indeed 'displayed' as CLASS hierarchy symbols as you say. But basic, democratic principles are not sustainable where where society is 'hierarchically' CLASSified on the basis of property and productive relations.

Moreover, the Capital CLASS based system cannot and will not provide the benefits of advanced technology to society at large. In agriculture alone, we have the capacity to feed the world. Yet in the world center of global Capital, food insecurity and its attending miseries rise.