[Cid_Yama]

Society, however, cannot subsist among those who are at all times ready to hurt and injure one another. The moment that injury begins, the moment that mutual resentment and animosity take place, all the bands of it are broke asunder, and the different members of which it consisted are, as it were, dissipated and scattered abroad by the violence and opposition of their discordant affections. If there is any society among robbers and murderers, they must at least, according to the trite observation, abstain from robbing and murdering one another. Beneficence, therefore, is less essential to the existence of society than justice. Society may subsist, though not in the most comfortable state, without beneficence; but the prevalence of injustice must utterly destroy it. (TMS II.ii.3.3)

What chiefly enrages us against the man who injures or insults us, is the little account which he seems to make of us, the unreasonable preference which he gives to himself above us, and that absurd self-love, by which he seems to imagine, that other people may be sacrificed at any time, to his conveniency or his humour. The glaring impropriety of this conduct, the gross insolence and injustice which it seems to involve in it, often shock and exasperate us more than all the mischief which we have suffered. To bring him back to a more just sense of what is due to other people, to make him sensible of what he owes us, and of the wrong that he has done to us, is frequently the principal end proposed in our revenge, which is always imperfect when it cannot accomplish this.(TMS II.iii.1.5)

No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged. (WN I.viii.36).

An educated populace can, to a degree, regulate political actors who may wish to take advantage of inequalities for their own benefit. The uneducated are easily misled and suffer for it. The more the ‘inferior ranks of people’ are instructed, Smith says,

the less liable they are to the delusions of enthusiasm and superstition, which among ignorant nations, frequently occasion the most dreadful disorder. An instructed and intelligent people besides are always more decent and orderly than an ignorant and stupid one. They feel themselves, each individually, more respectable, and more likely to obtain the respect of their lawful superiors, and they are therefore more disposed to respect those superiors. They are more disposed to examine, and more capable of seeing through, the interested complaints of faction and sedition, and they are, upon that account, less apt to be misled into any wanton or unnecessary opposition to the measures of government. In free countries, where the safety of government depends very much upon the favourable judgment which the people may form of its conduct, it must surely be of the highest importance that they should not be disposed to judge rashly or capriciously concerning it.(WN V.i.f.61)

link

Smith does have a lot to say about Social Justice, but it is ignored by those who's actions would not be justified by it.

If Capitalism is to survive, it must work hand-in-hand with social justice. To ignore that part of the equation, invites dissent and revolution that will reduced us to the equality of poverty.

[americandream]

Capitalism by its very nature, inculcates those impulses that are the antithesis of the socialised. With the increasing commodification of the commons in globalisation, these impulses increasingly overwhelm the socialised to the point where the personal reigns supreme and finally confronts it's ultimate contradiction, the necessity for the socialised.

Any tinkering on the march to full globalisation is merely superficial and cannot be sustained. Sentiments such as social justice become as empty as rhetoric that promises change.

[Sixstrings]

No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged.

Good post, Cid. This is just good common business sense. Henry Ford understood this when he caused a national stir by overpaying his workers. He thought that the men making his cars should be able to afford them (without a loan). When workers earn a truly livable wage, they can afford to purchase the products and services that other workers produce. The economy as a whole benefits. When workers earn a living wage, they can also pay taxes to the government rather than draw checks from the government.

In a closed system, a natural balance would be achieved since it's not sustainable for workers to earn too little to afford the product of their own labor. The problem we have now is globalism -- it's no longer a closed system. And so, the marketplace has become a race to the bottom. And since the world is mostly very very poor and will work for pennies, in this new globalist system we are doomed to becoming a third world nation.

The funny thing here is that globalist capitalism is essentially global communism -- a planetary race to the bottom, a global leveling out of living standards. Or, an almost-leveling out I should say, since the rich will continue to do quite well for themselves.

EDIT: Some more info on Henry Ford:

Henry Ford was a pioneer of "welfare capitalism", designed to improve the lot of his workers and especially to reduce the heavy turnover that had many departments hiring 300 men per year to fill 100 slots. Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers.
Ford announced his $5-per-day program on January 5, 1914. The revolutionary program called for a raise in minimum daily pay from $2.34 to $5 for qualifying workers. It also set a new, reduced workweek, although the details vary in different accounts.

Ford and Crowther in 1922 described it as six 8-hour days, giving a 48-hour week,[24] while in 1926 they described it as five 8-hour days, giving a 40-hour week. (Apparently the program started with Saturdays as workdays and sometime later it was changed to a day off.) Ford says that with this voluntary change, labor turnover in his plants went from huge to so small that he stopped bothering to measure it.
When Ford started the 40-hour work week and a minimum wage, he was criticized by other industrialists and by Wall Street.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_ford#Labor_philosophy

See, in a closed system things work out. Turnover gets too high so finally somebody like Henry Ford decides to FREAKING TREAT THE WORKERS BETTER. But under globalism, equitable balance can never be reached since employers don't have to worry about turnover -- they have access to 6 billion people to burn through.

[Pretorian]

Do you read sometimes what you are quoting? Its says tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged. And not just any shmuck from down the street but they who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour. Got that?
In America, where an absolute majority of working force does not produce anything of value whatsoever, all people regardless of whether they pretend to be busy or not, are fed , cloathed and lodged with obscene quantities of real valuables thrown on them in exchange for nothing. No nation in the world in any period of its history wasted as much food, clothes and construction materials as USA does now. No nation in the world in any period of its hsitory had as many morbidly obese people that throw away brand-new clothes with tags attached to them and had enormous amounts of non-occupied living space taht is heated during the winter and chilled during the summer.
So what do u want Sid? You want them to be able to throw away twice as much food and clothes as they do now? You want them to make addition to their houses so they can heat and chill more space? What?

[americandream]

Good post sixstrings. Important point.

Economies are cyclical at a number of levels. Two important cycles are earnings and resourcing. The one without the other in an apparently steady state, is illusory.

No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged.

Good post, Cid. This is just good common business sense. Henry Ford understood this when he caused a national stir by overpaying his workers. He thought that the men making his cars should be able to afford them (without a loan). When workers earn a truly livable wage, they can afford to purchase the products and services that other workers produce. The economy as a whole benefits. When workers earn a living wage, they can also pay taxes to the government rather than draw checks from the government.

In a closed system, a natural balance would be achieved since it's not sustainable for workers to earn too little to afford the product of their own labor. The problem we have now is globalism -- it's no longer a closed system. And so, the marketplace has become a race to the bottom. And since the world is mostly very very poor and will work for pennies, in this new globalist system we are doomed to becoming a third world nation.

The funny thing here is that globalist capitalism is essentially global communism -- a planetary race to the bottom, a global leveling out of living standards. Or, an almost-leveling out I should say, since the rich will continue to do quite well for themselves.

EDIT: Some more info on Henry Ford:

Henry Ford was a pioneer of "welfare capitalism", designed to improve the lot of his workers and especially to reduce the heavy turnover that had many departments hiring 300 men per year to fill 100 slots. Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers.
Ford announced his $5-per-day program on January 5, 1914. The revolutionary program called for a raise in minimum daily pay from $2.34 to $5 for qualifying workers. It also set a new, reduced workweek, although the details vary in different accounts.

Ford and Crowther in 1922 described it as six 8-hour days, giving a 48-hour week,[24] while in 1926 they described it as five 8-hour days, giving a 40-hour week. (Apparently the program started with Saturdays as workdays and sometime later it was changed to a day off.) Ford says that with this voluntary change, labor turnover in his plants went from huge to so small that he stopped bothering to measure it.
When Ford started the 40-hour work week and a minimum wage, he was criticized by other industrialists and by Wall Street.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_ford#Labor_philosophy

See, in a closed system things work out. Turnover gets too high so finally somebody like Henry Ford decides to FREAKING TREAT THE WORKERS BETTER. But under globalism, equitable balance can never be reached since employers don't have to worry about turnover -- they have access to 6 billion people to burn through.

[Cid_Yama]

Pretorian,

We've already made a determination that you have not got a clue what goes on outside the circle of the wealthiest.

You want to deny the poorest in society the basic necessities of existence, be my guest. You and your friends would shortly find yourselves hanging upside down from lampposts like Mussolini.

The working class which makes up 98% of the people in this country make everything. You are a moron not to grasp that.

When they come after you, that means there will be two of you against 98 of them. I wouldn't want to find myself in that situation.

[americandream]

Would that Pretorian had a clue about how the world of capital works. Instead we find here an utterly confused specimen, confounded as he is by the functions of a system and it's effects and who resorts to the schoolyard behaviour of the understandably inexperienced in our species.

Pretorian,

We've already made a determination that you have not got a clue what goes on outside the circle of the wealthiest.

You want to deny the poorest in society the basic necessities of existence, be my guest. You and your friends would shortly find yourselves hanging upside down from lampposts like Mussolini.

The working class which makes up 98% of the people in this country make everything. You are a moron not to grasp that.

When they come after you, that means there will be two of you against 98 of them. I wouldn't want to find myself in that situation.

[IslandCrow]

Good set of quotes.

I have not studied much of Adam Smith, but I recall that his teories do not fit well with the modern corporation...his ideas of competition fitted better with small scale family businesses. But we all tend to read just those quotes that we like (ie that support our theories) and ignore the rest!

[Pretorian]

Pretorian,

We've already made a determination that you have not got a clue what goes on outside the circle of the wealthiest.

Who is " we"? I have not got a clue? I starved, at one point of my life, and not by choice. I remember telling you that in the other thread and I dont remember you accusing me in lies.

You want to deny the poorest in society the basic necessities of existence, be my guest. You and your friends would shortly find yourselves hanging upside down from lampposts like Mussolini.

I dont want to sound sarcastic , but I would really want to hear what are these basic necessities of existence, from you especially. Indulge me. I took an effort and omitted all of my sarcasm here. Please do tell me.

The working class which makes up 98% of the people in this country make everything. You are a moron not to grasp that.

98%? why not 99% or 99.9%? I guess its because you are in that 97th% percentile. What are the income levels there? Well anyway, you want to consider yourself a working person, be my guest (Though I do remember asking you what valuables did u bring to this world in your lifetime and never heard the answer)
So back to our horses: I showed you many times already that people who do work and produce valuables do not need the bulk of " working force" who are washing each other's underwear for a living.
Service economy exists specifically for that-- to keep people busy, to let them "earn" the place at the trough and to give them a meaning , an abstract thought that they do contribute something to the society so they can feel good about themselves. An absolute majority of them do not contribute nothing whatsoever but pollution and destruction.

[americandream]

Utter nonsense. Capitalist economies exist for no one's benefit but the owner of capital. If the worker is therefore employed moving numbers on a sheet, as opposed to welding components onto some tangible product, he or she is still involved in value adding labour.

The mere fact that you consider one or the other person of this or that worth does not detract from the fact that all levels of labour add value or else they would be otherwise employed (or unemployed as the case may be.)

Pretorian,

We've already made a determination that you have not got a clue what goes on outside the circle of the wealthiest.

Who is " we"? I have not got a clue? I starved, at one point of my life, and not by choice. I remember telling you that in the other thread and I dont remember you accusing me in lies.

You want to deny the poorest in society the basic necessities of existence, be my guest. You and your friends would shortly find yourselves hanging upside down from lampposts like Mussolini.

I dont want to sound sarcastic , but I would really want to hear what are these basic necessities of existence, from you especially. Indulge me. I took an effort and omitted all of my sarcasm here. Please do tell me.

The working class which makes up 98% of the people in this country make everything. You are a moron not to grasp that.

98%? why not 99% or 99.9%? I guess its because you are in that 97th% percentile. What are the income levels there? Well anyway, you want to consider yourself a working person, be my guest (Though I do remember asking you what valuables did u bring to this world in your lifetime and never heard the answer)
So back to our horses: I showed you many times already that people who do work and produce valuables do not need the bulk of " working force" who are washing each other's underwear for a living.
Service economy exists specifically for that-- to keep people busy, to let them "earn" the place at the trough and to give them a meaning , an abstract thought that they do contribute something to the society so they can feel good about themselves. An absolute majority of them do not contribute nothing whatsoever but pollution and destruction.

[Cid_Yama]

Before I retired I was a senior diplomat with the US State Dept. My work, in part, kept your ass from glowing in the dark back in the early '80's, and ensured that we are all still here to have this conversation.

You, on the other hand, have never been in a grocery store, where you think they sell bushels of wheat, and that commodity prices reflect retail prices.

It's quite clear you believe that the majority of the world's population is worthless. I argue it is the "leisure class" that provides little of value, and feed like parasites on the labors of the vast majority.

If we chopped off the top 2%, the world would function perfectly well and probably provide a better existence for everyone else.

There are of course exceptions, I respect the work of the Prince of Wales and the Prince of Monaco, who are both working to save the planet. Also Bill Gates and his wife and Queen Rania of Jordan. I am sure there are others.

It is the parasites like yourself we can do without.

As for "basic necessities of existence," an affordable roof over their heads, regular meals, clothes on their backs, basic healthcare, education. Things that most western nations ensure for their population.

That requires far more than the pitence provided by minimum wage in this country. Double minimum wage, then we are in the ballpark. Or provide free education through 4 years of college and basic healthcare along with preventing real estate speculation and they might be able to pull it off at around $10-12 an hour.

As it stands we are creating an impoverished underclass, that leads to organized crime, black markets, and instability.

I know what kind of world I would rather live in.

[americandream]

Pretorian is possibly one of the worst example of the bottom feeders that infect our society with their exaggerated sense of entitlement whilst demanding sacrifices of others they would never in a month of sundays consider making themselves.

Before I retired I was a senior diplomat with the US State Dept. My work, in part, kept your ass from glowing in the dark back in the early '80's, and ensured that we are all still here to have this conversation.

You, on the other hand, have never been in a grocery store, where you think they sell bushels of wheat, and that commodity prices reflect retail prices.

It's quite clear you believe that the majority of the world's population is worthless. I argue it is the "leisure class" that provides little of value, and feed like parasites on the labors of the vast majority.

If we chopped off the top 2%, the world would function perfectly well and probably provide a better existence for everyone else.

There are of course exceptions, I respect the work of the Prince of Wales and the Prince of Monaco, who are both working to save the planet. Also Bill Gates and his wife and Queen Rania of Jordan. I am sure there are others.

It is the parasites like yourself we can do without.

As for "basic necessities of existence," an affordable roof over their heads, regular meals, clothes on their backs, basic healthcare, education. Things that most nations ensure for their population.

That requires far more than the pitence provided by minimum wage in this country. Double minimum wage, then we are in the ballpark. Or provide free education through 4 years of college and basic healthcare along with preventing real estate speculation and they might be able to pull it off at around $10-12 an hour.

As it stands we are creating an impoverished underclass, that leads to organized crime, black markets, and instability.

I know what kind of world I would rather live in.

[MarkJ]

Some more info on Henry Ford:

Ford was a slave driver that treated his workers like $hit, plus pried into their private lives via his Sociological Department.

The thugs in the Service Department stopped unionization efforts as well with threats, intimidation, spying and good old fashioned a$$ beatings.

[Pretorian]

Before I retired I was a senior diplomat with the US State Dept. My work, in part, kept your ass from glowing in the dark back in the early '80's, and ensured that we are all still here to have this conversation.

Sure, it did. Thank you so very much for keeping my ass shady. Your canasta strategies and embassie's parties sure made it possible.. Cid, I did not ask who you "was". I asked what valuables you brought to this world. I expected the answer to be in tons, barrels, bushels, carats, ounces, kilos, liters, meters, units or kilowatts and so on.

You, on the other hand, have never been in a grocery store, where you think they sell bushels of wheat, and that commodity prices reflect retail prices.

They can do so by all means. If a bunch of yokels made a cooperative of sort they can have their bushels at $5 each with a nominal delivery charge. But guess what, they do not. Because going to the shoppe is easier and makes your buns fat faster.

It's quite clear you believe that the majority of the world's population is worthless.

What? Worthless? No. How could you think that of me?! I do not consider it to be worthless. I consider them to have an enormous value, but a negative one unfortunately. Meaning that if they will be gone tomorrow a world will be so much better.. mmm

I argue it is the "leisure class" that provides little of value, and feed like parasites on the labors of the vast majority.

Little of value? They provide none. I have never said that I disagree with you on this one.

If we chopped off the top 2%, the world would function perfectly well and probably provide a better existence for everyone else.

Yes, but that is the case for the top "you name it %" , simply because of overpopulation issues. Just because your parents were rich and left you in 97th percentile despite of a lifetime of leisure and idleness does not mean we cant chop off the top 3, 4, 5 or any other %.

There are of course exceptions, I respect the work of the Prince of Wales and the Prince of Monaco, who are both working to save the planet.

To save the planet? You mean to delay its demise. Prince of Wales said that he would like to come back in his next life as a killer virus, to have some business to discuss with 98% of humanoids you care so much about. Good guy.

Also Bill Gates and his wife and Queen Rania of Jordan. I am sure there are others.

I dont know who this Rania is, but Bill Gates undoes everything that Prince of Wales is trying to do, so its pretty weird you bundled them together. Reducing human mortalities in Third World so they can cut more trees , kill more animals , shit some more and breed some more, ad nauseam? Get a fuck out of here.

It is the parasites like yourself we can do without.

Me being a parasite does not make your being a parasite any more justified. Hey, at least I am honest about it.

As for "basic necessities of existence," an affordable roof over their heads, regular meals, clothes on their backs, basic healthcare, education. Things that most western nations ensure for their population.

And so does US of A. Better than many, many, many others, btw. Only hubris of some enlightened individuals impede them from recognising it.

That requires far more than the pitence provided by minimum wage in this country. Double minimum wage, then we are in the ballpark. Or provide free education through 4 years of college and basic healthcare along with preventing real estate speculation and they might be able to pull it off at around $10-12 an hour.

H U B R I S
1500-2000 calories, 70-100 grams of protein, water and a dry warm place to sleep can be had for much less than that. Something tells me there are quite a few of elephants that you trying to hide there as " basic needs" as a nice ride, big-screen TV, cable service ets.

By the way you know how CIA says Obama now? O B A M A

As it stands we are creating an impoverished underclass, that leads to organized crime, black markets, and instability.

I know what kind of world I would rather live in.

It should read like this: The hubris of "less well-off" underclass are leading them to organized crime, black markets and instability. My grandma lived till 86 without any TV, refridgerator, microwave, vacuum cleaner, phone, car, airplane rides, indoor plumbing, air conditioning, fan, fancy cloth or fancy food and I somehow doubt she was plotting some crime with other babushkas to get it all.
Oh , and also she never saw a doctor or took any pill or shot in her lifetime, though all of that was available to her at no charge, and that werent unusual in her neighbourhood at all. Thats about how much basic healthcare is important.


PS And finally: "The state exists to protect the rich from the poor" That is Adam Smith for you, Sid.

[Cid_Yama]

As I said before, you haven't got a clue.

Adam Smith was quite eloquent.

No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged. (WN I.viii.36).

Hubris is YOU determining that

1500-2000 calories, 70-100 grams of protein, water and a dry warm place to sleep.

is all they should be entitled to. May God have mercy on your soul.

[Pretorian]

Entitled to? I have not said anything about entitlement. Nobody is entitled to anything. This is a competitive world we have here, in case you don't know. Adam Smith surely did know.

Anyways, there is a saying , very eloquent in its original language, so forgive me for a very rough translation.
It says : "Somebody will be pissing in your eyes, and you will keep saying that its a God-sent dew"

That is all I am going to say to you.

[americandream]

You're one of the offending species you evidently despise. You can always make the first move, you know.

Before I retired I was a senior diplomat with the US State Dept. My work, in part, kept your ass from glowing in the dark back in the early '80's, and ensured that we are all still here to have this conversation.

Sure, it did. Thank you so very much for keeping my ass shady. Your canasta strategies and embassie's parties sure made it possible.. Cid, I did not ask who you "was". I asked what valuables you brought to this world. I expected the answer to be in tons, barrels, bushels, carats, ounces, kilos, liters, meters, units or kilowatts and so on.

You, on the other hand, have never been in a grocery store, where you think they sell bushels of wheat, and that commodity prices reflect retail prices.

They can do so by all means. If a bunch of yokels made a cooperative of sort they can have their bushels at $5 each with a nominal delivery charge. But guess what, they do not. Because going to the shoppe is easier and makes your buns fat faster.

It's quite clear you believe that the majority of the world's population is worthless.

What? Worthless? No. How could you think that of me?! I do not consider it to be worthless. I consider them to have an enormous value, but a negative one unfortunately. Meaning that if they will be gone tomorrow a world will be so much better.. mmm

I argue it is the "leisure class" that provides little of value, and feed like parasites on the labors of the vast majority.

Little of value? They provide none. I have never said that I disagree with you on this one.

If we chopped off the top 2%, the world would function perfectly well and probably provide a better existence for everyone else.

Yes, but that is the case for the top "you name it %" , simply because of overpopulation issues. Just because your parents were rich and left you in 97th percentile despite of a lifetime of leisure and idleness does not mean we cant chop off the top 3, 4, 5 or any other %.

There are of course exceptions, I respect the work of the Prince of Wales and the Prince of Monaco, who are both working to save the planet.

To save the planet? You mean to delay its demise. Prince of Wales said that he would like to come back in his next life as a killer virus, to have some business to discuss with 98% of humanoids you care so much about. Good guy.

Also Bill Gates and his wife and Queen Rania of Jordan. I am sure there are others.

I dont know who this Rania is, but Bill Gates undoes everything that Prince of Wales is trying to do, so its pretty weird you bundled them together. Reducing human mortalities in Third World so they can cut more trees , kill more animals , shit some more and breed some more, ad nauseam? Get a fuck out of here.

It is the parasites like yourself we can do without.

Me being a parasite does not make your being a parasite any more justified. Hey, at least I am honest about it.

As for "basic necessities of existence," an affordable roof over their heads, regular meals, clothes on their backs, basic healthcare, education. Things that most western nations ensure for their population.

And so does US of A. Better than many, many, many others, btw. Only hubris of some enlightened individuals impede them from recognising it.

That requires far more than the pitence provided by minimum wage in this country. Double minimum wage, then we are in the ballpark. Or provide free education through 4 years of college and basic healthcare along with preventing real estate speculation and they might be able to pull it off at around $10-12 an hour.

H U B R I S
1500-2000 calories, 70-100 grams of protein, water and a dry warm place to sleep can be had for much less than that. Something tells me there are quite a few of elephants that you trying to hide there as " basic needs" as a nice ride, big-screen TV, cable service ets.

By the way you know how CIA says Obama now? O B A M A

As it stands we are creating an impoverished underclass, that leads to organized crime, black markets, and instability.

I know what kind of world I would rather live in.

It should read like this: The hubris of "less well-off" underclass are leading them to organized crime, black markets and instability. My grandma lived till 86 without any TV, refridgerator, microwave, vacuum cleaner, phone, car, airplane rides, indoor plumbing, air conditioning, fan, fancy cloth or fancy food and I somehow doubt she was plotting some crime with other babushkas to get it all.
Oh , and also she never saw a doctor or took any pill or shot in her lifetime, though all of that was available to her at no charge, and that werent unusual in her neighbourhood at all. Thats about how much basic healthcare is important.


PS And finally: "The state exists to protect the rich from the poor" That is Adam Smith for you, Sid.

[Cid_Yama]

This is a competitive world we have here

No, this is a subjugated world we have here.

A competitive world would entail a truely free market.

Instead we have a rigged financial and political system that ensures the rich get richer and the poor get buried in debt.

Everyone knows that in a rigged game, the outcome is a forgone conclusion. No risk, no competition.

Churchill spoke eloquently about how debt was a far better weapon against rowdy natives than the Gestapo or the state-capitalists in the Soviet Union’s KGB.

Debt would allow “great men” to reach their destiny without insufferable wretches, the public, getting in their way. Institutionalize debt internationally and it would also allow great nations to rule quietly and with Adam Smith’s “silent hand.” “Or else we should be forever trapped within our mansions.” said Churchill.

Adam Smith however would today be classed as a left wing economist, the Joseph Stiglitz of his age. He wrote, also eloquently, about how markets needed justice in order to function, otherwise the merchant class would spew despair and misery around the world. He was correct.

link

I have no illusions about ever living in a world free of subjugation, but I deliver a warning.

Throughout history, whenever the concentration of wealth at the top became this great, and the needs of the masses ignored, revolutions have occurred.

The Russian and French revolutions are good examples. In neither case was the outcome for the wealthy a desirable one.

In other words, loosen the financial grip, before they loosen it for you. Trust me, you won't like it.

[Pretorian]

This is a competitive world we have here

No, this is a subjugated world we have here.

A competitive world would entail a truely free market.

Instead we have a rigged financial and political system that ensures the rich get richer and the poor get buried in debt.

Everyone knows that in a rigged game, the outcome is a forgone conclusion. No risk, no competition.

To subjugate, you need to be competitive. I agree with most of what u say here, we probably never had real Capitalism in action and never will, neverthless the rich do become poor and the poor do become rich, quite often. Chinese say no fortune survives 3 generations, and for the most part they are right. History is filled with nobodies. There were 7 or 10 Roman Emperors who were born in one small Serbian or Croatian town. All of them were sons of peasants and soldiers.

Anyways Sid as I stated in the previous post I do not think there is anything out there that will force you to face the facts, you behave like a vegan who doesnt want to count bunnies that are chopped up in the name of his tofu salad. You are a rich guy who believes that everybody is equal, and should live like the rich at the cost of, of course, the super-rich. It would be really weird if you'd think it is possible, at your age, but you can have them for asking, if it would be up to me, however frankly if I had to choose between a small group of Uber-Predators (parasites, if you like) and masses of self-entitled lumpens with hubris bigger than antlers on the husband of a Californian woman, I'll ditch the lumpen in a blink of an eye.

[americandream]

All talk, Pretorian, and no action.