The largest transfer of wealth in the history of the world...

[georgephillip]

We Republicans decide what their fair share is when we get ultimate power in the federal government, and the Democrats do the same. That is unless you can find me a dictionary or encyclopedia that states what the term fair share actually means, then it's up to whoever is in charge to decide the definition--not one party.

Democrats and Republicans decide "fairness" in favor of the (richest) ten percent of voters who fund their campaigns.

Capitalists created the government of this country, not the other way around. Which is another way of saying the material success of a few citizens has always been of more importance to government than the welfare of the vast majority of citizens (and others).

Turning a profit is the only possible basis of private ownership of the means of production, and the profit motive compels "free" labor to work or starve for the benefit of a privileged few.

 

[georgephillip]

Then they forced us to start using Diesel Emission Fluid (DEF). If you don't know what that is, it's a fluid that squirts into your exhaust pipes to supposedly makes it burn cleaner. Then when Bush was President, they forced diesel fuel providers into strictly manufacturing low sulfur diesel fuel. Prior to that,

Have you confronted the reality that fossil fuels are as obsolete as capitalism?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then they forced us to start using Diesel Emission Fluid (DEF). If you don't know what that is, it's a fluid that squirts into your exhaust pipes to supposedly makes it burn cleaner. Then when Bush was President, they forced diesel fuel providers into strictly manufacturing low sulfur diesel fuel. Prior to that,

Have you confronted the reality that fossil fuels are as obsolete as capitalism?

What fuel should I use in Chicago, today, to heat my home?

 

[georgephillip]

In order for the workday to begin, the capitalist must somewhere have acquired money in advance to pay for the raw materials, the instruments, and the labor power of the worker

Where and how did the first capitalists acquire their money, raw materials, and especially their "free" labor?

"Then they were packed aboard the slave ships, in spaces not much bigger than coffins, chained together in the dark, wet slime of the ship's bottom, choking in the stench of their own excrement.

"Documents of the time describe the conditions: The height, sometimes, between decks, was only eighteen inches; so that the unfortunate human beings could not turn around, or even on their sides, the elevation being less than the breadth of their shoulders; and here they are usually chained to the decks by the neck and legs.

https://www.stetson.edu/other/alana-ia-caucus/media/12 Howard Zinn, Drawing the Color Line.pdf (P. 4)

"In such a place the sense of misery and suffocation is so great, that the Negroes... are driven to frenzy."

Capitalism born in the space where human beings suffocate in the stench of their own shit.

$ounds like $omething you would profit from.

MAGA?

 

[georgephillip]

What is good old selfless Bernie's networth now?

Less than Amazon's and Apple's:

Bernie Sanders on Economic Inequality

"Bernie wants to reform the tax code by removing tax loopholes and tax breaks that only benefit the rich and large corporations, raising the tax rates for the wealthiest Americans, taxing the fortunes of the top 0.2%, taxing capital gains and qualified dividends income as ordinary income, and taxing Wall Street speculation."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In order for the workday to begin, the capitalist must somewhere have acquired money in advance to pay for the raw materials, the instruments, and the labor power of the worker

Where and how did the first capitalists acquire their money, raw materials, and especially their "free" labor?

"Then they were packed aboard the slave ships, in spaces not much bigger than coffins, chained together in the dark, wet slime of the ship's bottom, choking in the stench of their own excrement.

"Documents of the time describe the conditions: The height, sometimes, between decks, was only eighteen inches; so that the unfortunate human beings could not turn around, or even on their sides, the elevation being less than the breadth of their shoulders; and here they are usually chained to the decks by the neck and legs.

https://www.stetson.edu/other/alana-ia-caucus/media/12 Howard Zinn, Drawing the Color Line.pdf (P. 4)

"In such a place the sense of misery and suffocation is so great, that the Negroes... are driven to frenzy."

Capitalism born in the space where human beings suffocate in the stench of their own shit.

$ounds like $omething you would profit from.

MAGA?

Where and how did the first capitalists acquire their money, raw materials, and especially their "free" labor?

When were the first capitalists?

$ounds like $omething you would profit from.

Oh, yuck, profit. Better to be a pure, poor communist, eh comrade?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Then they forced us to start using Diesel Emission Fluid (DEF). If you don't know what that is, it's a fluid that squirts into your exhaust pipes to supposedly makes it burn cleaner. Then when Bush was President, they forced diesel fuel providers into strictly manufacturing low sulfur diesel fuel. Prior to that,

Have you confronted the reality that fossil fuels are as obsolete as capitalism?

What's obsolete about it? Just about everybody uses fossil fuels. Those who don't are paying an arm and a leg for energy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Democrats and Republicans decide "fairness" in favor of the (richest) ten percent of voters who fund their campaigns.

Capitalists created the government of this country, not the other way around. Which is another way of saying the material success of a few citizens has always been of more importance to government than the welfare of the vast majority of citizens (and others).

The only reason you think that is left-wing propaganda, and of course your wealth envy.

Our federal government was not designed to take care of the people; that's what religion and families are for. Our founders created the federal government to govern. However with capitalism, freedom, and limited government interference, it gave us the ability to take care of ourselves so the government didn't have to.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is good old selfless Bernie's networth now?

Less than Amazon's and Apple's:

Bernie Sanders on Economic Inequality

"Bernie wants to reform the tax code by removing tax loopholes and tax breaks that only benefit the rich and large corporations, raising the tax rates for the wealthiest Americans, taxing the fortunes of the top 0.2%, taxing capital gains and qualified dividends income as ordinary income, and taxing Wall Street speculation."

Less than Amazon's and Apple's:

Obviously. He produces no useful goods or services.

Besides selling his vote. And rolling over to Hillary and Biden.

Bernie wants to reform the tax code by removing tax loopholes and tax breaks that only benefit the rich and large corporations,

Which ones?

taxing the fortunes of the top 0.2%,

Wealth taxes are unconstitutional. And really inefficient.

and taxing Wall Street speculation.

Wow! Funny. No speculation in USSR, eh comrade? DURR

 

[georgephillip]

It's not something politicians need to rectify, it's something individuals need to rectify. If you are not making enough money to be in the middle-class, it's not up to a politician to do it for you. You need to do something yourself.

90% of individual voters have virtually no influence over tax and trade policies written by corporate lobbyists and implemented by elected politicians working at the behest of the "investor class" which is the richest ten percent of citizens. When workers toiling at two or three jobs every week working in excess of 70-80 hours no longer have the disposable income to qualify as middle class, the problem lies with government and those it serves.

 

[georgephillip]

He's been in the House and Senate for 30 years.....why is the middle class still disappearing?

Too many Democrats and Republicans.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

90% of individual voters have virtually no influence over tax and trade policies written by corporate lobbyists and implemented by elected politicians working at the behest of the "investor class" which is the richest ten percent of citizens. When workers toiling at two or three jobs every week working in excess of 70-80 hours no longer have the disposable income to qualify as middle class, the problem lies with government and those it serves.

It has nothing to do with policies. How many people do you know that are working 80 hours a week and don't have disposable income? I don't know anybody like that and never have. Anybody working those kinds of hours either has no home life and all they have to do with their time is work, or they made a lot of really stupid choices in their life.

If you have to work that many hours, then the problem is you didn't take up a trade, get an education, or pursue a line of work that pays much better. The government doesn't do that for us. We do that for ourselves like the tens of millions of Americans that already do these things.

I made a moderate middle-class living during my life. I did some shit jobs, and when I decided the money was insufficient, I got into a career that paid better. Instead of driving around in new cars, taking expensive vacations every year, later on the newest smart phone, the premium cable plan, I invested my money in real estate. I had no children mostly because I didn't want the expense. I haven't taken a vacation in over 30 years, and hell, at the age of 60, I've never seen an ocean in my life outside of television or an airplane window.

I don't credit my middle-class life to government, I credit myself for making a lot of sacrifices, working hard, investments, and making the right choices at the right time. Government didn't do any of that for me, and there are few people who can't do what I did.

 

[jasonnfree]

90% of individual voters have virtually no influence over tax and trade policies written by corporate lobbyists and implemented by elected politicians working at the behest of the "investor class" which is the richest ten percent of citizens. When workers toiling at two or three jobs every week working in excess of 70-80 hours no longer have the disposable income to qualify as middle class, the problem lies with government and those it serves.

It has nothing to do with policies. How many people do you know that are working 80 hours a week and don't have disposable income? I don't know anybody like that and never have. Anybody working those kinds of hours either has no home life and all they have to do with their time is work, or they made a lot of really stupid choices in their life.

If you have to work that many hours, then the problem is you didn't take up a trade, get an education, or pursue a line of work that pays much better. The government doesn't do that for us. We do that for ourselves like the tens of millions of Americans that already do these things.

I made a moderate middle-class living during my life. I did some shit jobs, and when I decided the money was insufficient, I got into a career that paid better. Instead of driving around in new cars, taking expensive vacations every year, later on the newest smart phone, the premium cable plan, I invested my money in real estate. I had no children mostly because I didn't want the expense. I haven't taken a vacation in over 30 years, and hell, at the age of 60, I've never seen an ocean in my life outside of television or an airplane window.

I don't credit my middle-class life to government, I credit myself for making a lot of sacrifices, working hard, investments, and making the right choices at the right time. Government didn't do any of that for me, and there are few people who can't do what I did.

Ray, I know of many people busting their butts and can't make ends meet with mom and dad working. It's not eze like in the '70s where a guy like me could go to school on the g.i. bill, maybe just work part time on weekends. This was in high priced Los Angeles county. Lot of things changed. People aren't making it on prevailing wages. You could say people buy too many toys but people buying stuff keeps the economy afloat.

 

[georgephillip]

A wealth tax is unconstitutional.

Bernie is worth $2 million?

Hypocritical old commie bastard!!!

"We were told that lowering tax rates on the rich, financialization, and globalization would result in higher standards of living for everybody.

"Instead, the U.S. growth rate fell to around two-thirds of its level in the post-war era — a period of tight financial regulations and a top marginal tax rate consistently above 70% — and a greater share of the wealth and income from this limited growth was funneled to the top 1%."

Three decades of neoliberal policies have decimated the middle class, our economy, and our democracy

 

[georgephillip]

No one died in the commie purges or the commie gulags or because of commie caused famines, eh commie?

Capitalism killed more Russians than Hitler.
Moron.

 

[georgephillip]

Nobody died from speculators. The commodities market was created to stabilize prices. It's a bit difficult to explain in a few paragraphs, but that's what it does. Otherwise when drought or floods take place, you'd be paying $25.00 for six ears of corn.

Millions died in India and Ireland from British capitalists diverting food surpluses into exports instead of feeding the local populations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_speculation#:~:text=Food%20speculation%20is%20betting%20on%20food%20prices%20(unregulated)%20financial%20markets.&text=For%20the%20global%20poor%2C%20food,increased%20poverty%20or%20even%20famine.

"Food speculation is betting on food prices (unregulated) financial markets.

"Food speculation by global players like banks, hedge funds or pension funds is alleged to cause price swings in staple foods such as wheat, maize and soy – even though too large price swings in an idealized economy are theoretically ruled out: Adam Smith in 1776 reasoned that the only way to make money from commodities trading is by buying low and selling high, which has the effect of smoothing out price swings and mitigating shortages.[1][2]

"For the actors, the apparently random swings are predictable, which means potential huge profits.

"For the global poor, food speculation and resulting price peaks may result in increased poverty or even famine.[3]"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Instead, the U.S. growth rate fell to around two-thirds of its level in the post-war era

Wait one second.
Are you saying that we grew slower once the destroyed economies
in Europe and Asia recovered?

******* duh.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No one died in the commie purges or the commie gulags or because of commie caused famines, eh commie?

Capitalism killed more Russians than Hitler.
Moron.

You're lying.
Silly ****.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nobody died from speculators. The commodities market was created to stabilize prices. It's a bit difficult to explain in a few paragraphs, but that's what it does. Otherwise when drought or floods take place, you'd be paying $25.00 for six ears of corn.

Millions died in India and Ireland from British capitalists diverting food surpluses into exports instead of feeding the local populations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_speculation#:~:text=Food%20speculation%20is%20betting%20on%20food%20prices%20(unregulated)%20financial%20markets.&text=For%20the%20global%20poor%2C%20food,increased%20poverty%20or%20even%20famine.

"Food speculation is betting on food prices (unregulated) financial markets.

"Food speculation by global players like banks, hedge funds or pension funds is alleged to cause price swings in staple foods such as wheat, maize and soy – even though too large price swings in an idealized economy are theoretically ruled out: Adam Smith in 1776 reasoned that the only way to make money from commodities trading is by buying low and selling high, which has the effect of smoothing out price swings and mitigating shortages.[1][2]

"For the actors, the apparently random swings are predictable, which means potential huge profits.

"For the global poor, food speculation and resulting price peaks may result in increased poverty or even famine.[3]"

Adam Smith in 1776 reasoned that the only way to make money from commodities trading is by buying low and selling high, which has the effect of smoothing out price swings and mitigating shortages

He was right, of course.

For the actors, the apparently random swings are predictable, which means potential huge profits.

Who said that? Not Smith.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nobody died from speculators. The commodities market was created to stabilize prices. It's a bit difficult to explain in a few paragraphs, but that's what it does. Otherwise when drought or floods take place, you'd be paying $25.00 for six ears of corn.

Millions died in India and Ireland from British capitalists diverting food surpluses into exports instead of feeding the local populations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_speculation#:~:text=Food%20speculation%20is%20betting%20on%20food%20prices%20(unregulated)%20financial%20markets.&text=For%20the%20global%20poor%2C%20food,increased%20poverty%20or%20even%20famine.

"Food speculation is betting on food prices (unregulated) financial markets.

"Food speculation by global players like banks, hedge funds or pension funds is alleged to cause price swings in staple foods such as wheat, maize and soy – even though too large price swings in an idealized economy are theoretically ruled out: Adam Smith in 1776 reasoned that the only way to make money from commodities trading is by buying low and selling high, which has the effect of smoothing out price swings and mitigating shortages.[1][2]

"For the actors, the apparently random swings are predictable, which means potential huge profits.

"For the global poor, food speculation and resulting price peaks may result in increased poverty or even famine.[3]"

Trust me, without the market, those price swings would be ten fold.

It's a commodities strategy called hedging. In short, what it means is companies bet against themselves. Commodities are not like stocks where you only make money if the stock goes up. In commodities, when you choose a market, you make the decision on how to make money. You can make money on the item going up, or you can choose to make money when the product goes down. It's a 50/50 shot right from the beginning. Yes, in the stock market you can short sell, but that's not always available depending on the stock, and even when it is, it's seldom used. However (supposedly) in commodities, for every contract bought (betting the price will increase), another contract is sold (betting the price will go down).

Here's how it works: A company that produces products is made from corn. Corn is expected to have a terrible year. Of course that's going to drastically increase the price of corn. So the company buys corn contracts. In this instance, the predictions were true. The crop has a terrible year. The food manufacturer will lose money if they want to keep their prices stable. But......they bought corn contracts. So the profit they lose on the product because of the cost of corn is somewhat offset by the corn contracts they bought, so they actually stabilize the price of their items and make the same amount of profit.

Okay, but what if they were wrong, and corn has a great year? It works just the opposite. The company will lose money on the corn contracts, but they will make additional money on the products they produce because they are able to buy corn cheaper in which to make their products.

Without the commodities market, if the price of corn doubled, so would the price of corn made products. But because we have a commodities market, those prices might go up a bit, but certainly not double or more in cost.