Liz Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

[edthecynic]

A good example of this is BO signed a bill supported by both parties, cutting social security benefits.

LIAR!

You don’t know this? Really? CNN didn’t tell you? LMFAO.

This should enlighten you to the fact that you are uninformed.

Obama cuts social security...

Baby Boomer Social Security Shocker

It didn't cut benefits, it closed a loophole abused by the rich, but you knew that already.

 

[edthecynic]

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration."

President Abraham Lincoln, annual message to Congress, December 3, 1861

But doesn't.

Lincoln was a lawyer, not a god.

I'll take his word over yours any day and twice on Sunday.

 

[Toro]

I'll take his word over yours any day and twice on Sunday.

Of course you will.

You would take the word of almost anyone who agrees with your views.

But that doesn't mean it's correct.

 

[edthecynic]

I'll take his word over yours any day and twice on Sunday.

Of course you will.

You would take the word of almost anyone who agrees with your views.

But that doesn't mean it's correct.

It doesn't mean it's wrong either!

 

[Toro]

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

Your example from the early 1800s is a good one for your theory because that's a more accurate representation of the relevant time period. It's irrelevant for the 21st century.

For example, you could not not use a computer or a mobile phone because the microelectronics are almost entirely made by machines and could not be made by hand. Similarly, even though agriculture employs only 3% of the workforce in America today compared to 45% in 1900, we produce 50x more agricultural goods now than we did back then.

Both are because of capital. If you removed all the capital from the economy and replaced it with labor, you would have an economy more similar to 1804 than to today, not to mention mass starvation and certainly civil war.

 

[Toro]

It doesn't mean it's wrong either!

It is wrong.

In the bankruptcy code, capital is given priority over labor. Bondholders get paid before wages get paid.

What someone with little knowledge of economics and the law said 150 years ago is irrelevant today.

 

[gipper]

A good example of this is BO signed a bill supported by both parties, cutting social security benefits.

LIAR!

You don’t know this? Really? CNN didn’t tell you? LMFAO.

This should enlighten you to the fact that you are uninformed.

Obama cuts social security...

Baby Boomer Social Security Shocker

It didn't cut benefits, it closed a loophole abused by the rich, but you knew that already.

You can try to minimize it, but a cut is a cut. It had nothing to do with the wealthy, as it impacted all Americans.

Now apologize for calling me a liar and admit you knew nothing about this SS cut.

 

[edthecynic]

It doesn't mean it's wrong either!

It is wrong.

In the bankruptcy code, capital is given priority over labor. Bondholders get paid before wages get paid.

What someone with little knowledge of economics and the law said 150 years ago is irrelevant today.

Lincoln wasn't talking about bankruptcy laws, pushed by lobbyists representing bondholders, he was talking economics. As you well know, there was no Federal bankruptcy law in 1861 when Lincoln made that address.

 

[edthecynic]

What someone with little knowledge of economics and the law said 150 years ago is irrelevant today.

Wait just a minute there Slick, just a few posts ago you said Lincoln WAS a lawyer!!!!

 

[jon_berzerk]

More of that "democratic socialism"

No thanks....and her act doesn't have a prayer

socialism can not survive if it cant feed off its host - capitalism

 

[edthecynic]

A good example of this is BO signed a bill supported by both parties, cutting social security benefits.

LIAR!

You don’t know this? Really? CNN didn’t tell you? LMFAO.

This should enlighten you to the fact that you are uninformed.

Obama cuts social security...

Baby Boomer Social Security Shocker

It didn't cut benefits, it closed a loophole abused by the rich, but you knew that already.

You can try to minimize it, but a cut is a cut. It had nothing to do with the wealthy, as it impacted all Americans.

Now apologize for calling me a liar and admit you knew nothing about this SS cut.

It was a loophole that impacted very few Americans and was ABUSED by the rich.

 

[Toro]

You can try to minimize it, but a cut is a cut. It had nothing to do with the wealthy, as it impacted all Americans.

Now apologize for calling me a liar and admit you knew nothing about this SS cut.

The links you posted said that Obama proposed cutting SS. However, it appears to have not happened.

President Obama Throws In The Towel On Social Security Reform

Do you have something that shows benefits were actually cut?

 

[gipper]

A good example of this is BO signed a bill supported by both parties, cutting social security benefits.

LIAR!

You don’t know this? Really? CNN didn’t tell you? LMFAO.

This should enlighten you to the fact that you are uninformed.

Obama cuts social security...

Baby Boomer Social Security Shocker

It didn't cut benefits, it closed a loophole abused by the rich, but you knew that already.

You can try to minimize it, but a cut is a cut. It had nothing to do with the wealthy, as it impacted all Americans.

Now apologize for calling me a liar and admit you knew nothing about this SS cut.

It was a loophole that impacted very few Americans and was ABUSED by the rich.

Wrong. It was the law. People used it as it was intended. You can't abuse something that is approved of by the State, you so adore.

I am glad it was changed but my son, a cut is a cut. If Trump had proposed such a cut, you know damn well you would be gas lighted by the DNCMSM, and scream about Trump wanting to stave the poor.

 

[gipper]

You can try to minimize it, but a cut is a cut. It had nothing to do with the wealthy, as it impacted all Americans.

Now apologize for calling me a liar and admit you knew nothing about this SS cut.

The links you posted said that Obama proposed cutting SS. However, it appears to have not happened.

President Obama Throws In The Towel On Social Security Reform

Do you have something that shows benefits were actually cut?

The cut was signed into law by Big Ears. The Rs and Ds worked together to limit SS benefits and BO signed it.

 

[Toro]

The cut was signed into law by Big Ears. The Rs and Ds worked together to limit SS benefits and BO signed it.

You haven't proved it.

Can you link it?

All the links you posted said that Obama had planned to cut SS, and nothing is showing up on Google.

EDIT -
OK, I've found what you're saying.

Social Security, Medicare changes are coming with new budget law

That's really more closing a loophole that seems abusive to the system.

 

[Tehon]

The only way to produce a machine is through labor. Capital can't do it alone. But labor can do it without capital, it would just take longer.

In 1804 Joseph Marie Jacquard created a device that was installed on a power loom that increased its automation. Who was the capital investor for this machine?

Your example from the early 1800s is a good one for your theory because that's a more accurate representation of the relevant time period. It's irrelevant for the 21st century.

For example, you could not not use a computer or a mobile phone because the microelectronics are almost entirely made by machines and could not be made by hand. Similarly, even though agriculture employs only 3% of the workforce in America today compared to 45% in 1900, we produce 50x more agricultural goods now than we did back then.

Both are because of capital. If you removed all the capital from the economy and replaced it with labor, you would have an economy more similar to 1804 than to today, not to mention mass starvation and certainly civil war.

When you quoted me before, you did so out of context. I already acknowledged that labor is subservient to capitalism in the 21st century.

Labor is the only means by which humans improve upon nature and therefore deserves the higher rank. But we live in a capitalist world and in such a world labor is reduced to a commodity meant to be bought and sold and thus becomes subservient to capital.

The point you seem reluctant to admit is that capital couldn't have brought us into the 21st century without labor. Human labor is the only way to improve upon nature. Capital is merely a facilitator.

 

[gipper]

The cut was signed into law by Big Ears. The Rs and Ds worked together to limit SS benefits and BO signed it.

You haven't proved it.

Can you link it?

All the links you posted said that Obama had planned to cut SS, and nothing is showing up on Google.

This cut to SS is well known to those of us paying attention.

File and suspend Social Security loophole closing fast

 

[jon_berzerk]

The cut was signed into law by Big Ears. The Rs and Ds worked together to limit SS benefits and BO signed it.

You haven't proved it.

Can you link it?

All the links you posted said that Obama had planned to cut SS, and nothing is showing up on Google.

not sure this is proof


Reality Check: Obama Cuts Social Security and Medicare by Much More Than the GOP - The Atlantic

 

[Toro]

The point you seem reluctant to admit is that capital couldn't have brought us into the 21st century without labor. Human labor is the only way to improve upon nature. Capital is merely a facilitator.

No, I know what you are saying. And I don't disagree that the labor came before capital. As I said earlier in this thread, capital is merely labor in another form. Capital can best be thought of as the accumulation of past labor and knowledge today in a permanent or financial form.

But your argument is still false. Labor cannot replicate what capital offers in today's economy. Therefore, capital is a necessary condition to improve mankind's lot. It is due to investment that we become more efficient and productive, and thus have higher living standards.

If you are looking at the world in a Marxist context, you are looking at the world in a 19th century context.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I was going to start this thread in the CDZ in an effort to keep the wild, goofy, shallow hyperbole to a minimum, but what the hell, the nihilist in me took control and here we are.

And one more thing: This is the kind of proposal that is a natural and predictable reaction to the constantly-expanding wealth inequality in this country. If you defend that increasing inequality, you're going to have to convince people that it's better than Warren's proposal. I'd love to know how you'd do that, person by person.

Warren is introducing a bill that is designed to effectively change the fundamental character of American corporations. Currently, the reason for the existence of a corporation is to maximize shareholder value. Instead, Warren proposes that if corporations are going to have the legal rights of persons, they should be expected to act like citizens and uphold certain social contracts.

So she proposes the creation of an Office of United States Corporations that requires any corporation with revenue over $1 billion to obtain a "federal charter of corporate citizenship". This charter would require the following of the corporation:

• Company directors must (provably) consider the interests of all relevant STAKEholders, including shareholders, customers, employees and communities, when making decisions.
• Corporations under the charter would be required to allow their workers to elect 40% of the membership of its Board of Directors
• Limit corporate executives' ability to sell shares of stock they receive as pay, requiring that such shares be held for at least five years after they were received and at least three years after a share buyback. This is to dis-incentivize them to authorize the use of share buybacks and stock-based compensation to maximize their own pay.
• Require corporate political activity to be authorized specifically by both 75% of shareholders and 75% of board members, to ensure that such activity truly represents the view of STAKEholders.

Currently, about 80% of the stock market is owned by about 10% of the population, and over executive compensation continues to soar, even after the Meltdown of 2008. And people are watching.

Warren and her supporters specifically say that, rather than moving to socialism, she is trying to regulate capitalism enough to save it. Meanwhile, the wealth gap continues to grow and it's fair to wonder how long people will accept it.

Thoughts?
.

Joe Stalin would be proud.