Linked Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 I like how you bring up the Koch brothers win all corporations are being "bought" https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000019 Here is an article from Forbes that might interest you and you'll see where the money is going. http://www.forbes.com/sites/chloesorvino/2015/09/30/the-biggest-most-influential-political-donors-on-the-2015-forbes-400/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maturin Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Yep, I think it's terrible to see how many corporations Clinton will be in debt to should she win the presidency. That's why I haven't mentioned her at all, she represents the same old bullshit. I mean, Time Warner, Bank of America, JP Morgan??? For God's sake, how and why do people accept the fact of the amount of leverage that companies can have on the American President? Literally, what the fuck?! :D The Koch Brothers on the same side of the coin are the personification of all the worst parts of corporate America distilled into 2 people, and they basically own the Republican party. If I was a Red I would be ashamed of this state of affairs. The only person I've mentioned is Sanders, if you look at his funding it's all from the workers and unions, the majority of American working people. Tell me, who would you trust to make American lives better, the guy or woman who's funded by the corporations that are responsible for the fall of America (through unpaid tax debts, taking American jobs offshore and twisting policy making for the sake of only profit) - or the guy who's only financial responsibility is to the men and women of working America who gave him the financial means to run against the coporatocracy that is tearing America and democracy apart?! https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000528 C'mon, it's not hard to see who the good guy is here! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foamy T. Squirrel Posted December 28, 2015 Author Share Posted December 28, 2015 Politicians are greedy for political power, and they will gladly pass legislation for those who will pay the most protection money to them. This generally results in legislation that eliminates competition, as well has promoting regulations that keep small businesses from growing. As it is, small business start-ups in the United States (and that means mom & pop shops) have not been this low for decades. Personally, I'm not afraid of mom & pops: some were my customers, some were my vendors. We all did what we could do to make each other successful. But when my company's medical insurance doubled in 2010 and I realized I was now dealing with 15 different governmental entities instead of serving my customers, I shut down the business. It was no longer cost effective. I'm Atlas shrugged. Hence, I now have time to bully CC members around with my Mod status although I'd prefer have enough money coming in to travel the world. Alas, Barcelona is but a dream. :'( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodworker Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 I'll take the Koch brothers over George Soros any day of the week. And to say that the super rich Hollywood producers and other rich individuals in the media business, along with that of teachers unions and other major contributors aren't buying or influencing the Democrat party is absurd. Anyone who has had their eyes open, and who actually lives here in the United States knows just how corrupt the Democrat party truly is. And if you want to say, well, they both are,.. fine. But in that case I'll continue to stand with the party who's issues itself still reflect those that have been granted to us by the constitution. Just a quick example of the difference between the two: The Democrat party, and most notably, that buffoon Bernie Sanders, espouses that it is climate change that has brought about Isis, and terrorism, and as a solution to this problem, they, (The Democrat party) want to confiscate from lawful citizens their guns. They also a few months back suggested that if we could only but give these terrorist some jobs, then they wouldn't be doing all these terrible things. Can you believe that! The Republicans on the other hand would never be so illogical, or deceitful in their efforts to try to get Americans to believe that Islamic terrorism which has caused so many to have been brutally killed is actually due to this absurd notion of climate change. They also realize that in the states where gun control is strictly enforced, such as in Washington DC. Detroit, Chicago, LA, ect. There is a much higher rate of murder by the criminals in those cities than in those cities and states to where carrying a gun and protecting yourself is still permissible. But that's just common sense now, isn't it. I mean, if you were a rapist, or a thug, who would you rather select for your targeted victim? Someone who may well end your criminal career permanently, or someone who doesn't have any real means of being able to protect themselves at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozi Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Firstly, I’m not the one that raised the issue of tax and my right to expect certain benefits from these taxes. In theory those expectations are accurate, but theory doesn’t work. Someone said take 10 economists and you’ll get 10 different solutions. So don’t theorise, don’t spout ideology, get off your arse and look at what’s really happening. I work in Australia and I pay tax. I also pay a Medicare levy, which contributes to the public health system. I say contributes because in doesn’t generate enough funds on its own. Most families to survive now have two incomes. If our combined income is over a certain amount, we either take out private health cover, in addition to the Medicare levy we already pay, or pay a higher levy. We don’t have a choice. The Federal Government has calculated 34% of its expenditure this year is on welfare. Not the low figures some idiots have spouted of 5%, not 10% or even 20%, but 34%. And that doesn’t include health and all the additional state welfare payments. Health and education are a state expenditure paid for by government grants, state taxes and the Goods and Services Tax (consumption tax) collected on behalf of the States by the Federal government. I didn’t send my kids to a private school because I could afford to, I sent them because that was the only guarantee I had they would get a half decent education, in a half decent environment. Those classes of 35 to 40 with just one teacher are also half full of kids that can hardly speak English, so how well do you think the rest are allowed to advance. My family sacrificed a lot to make that happen, including a second mortgage. So now 34% of my tax is spent in welfare, from which I get nothing. I won’t even get a pension when I retire because the amount I have invested in superannuation is above the maximum I’m allowed, even though it puts me below the poverty line on financial returns, which means each year I have to dip into the principle. We are fine as long as we die within 7.5 years of retiring. I get no benefit from the Medicare levy I pay because I have to pay private health cover whether I like it or not. And even that is a rort. A politician, our famous Treasurer, on a massive six figure salary, boasted recently that when his son broke his leg, he opted to use the public hospital because it was closer and he ended up paying just $25.00 which was an extra for a waterproof cast. So here is a guy that earns at least 8 times my salary, pays the same private health fees that I do, but chooses to utilise the public hospital who get no benefit from his private fund. If I get sick, something simple like the flu, that requires prescription drugs, I have to go to see a doctor. After the medicare contribution, and by the way, my private health only covers hospital treatment, it doesn't cover a trip to a doctor or emergency department, I'm out of pocket around $35 to $40. I then go to the pharmacy and pay approximately $25 to $30 as part of my contribution to the medication. So medicare levy, private health fund costs, $60 to $70 for the doctor and 1 script. Sent home to bed. If I'm unemployed, receiving benefits, I can just turn up at the Emergency Department at the local public hospital, they won't turn me away. They will provide me with access to a doctor, free, provide me with medication, free, and if I'm an alcoholic or a junkie, a hot shower and a warm bed for the night. I got nothing from the public education system. The roads are a disgrace and power and water bills are high because successive governments, both labour and liberal, have allowed the services to deteriorate to such a point the nation can no longer afford to replace them but we spend billions patching them up. So the small fraction of my taxes that aren’t spent in areas from where I receive no benefit, are spent on illegal immigrants and refugees, and let’s not forget the millions thrown at our black cousins, with the balance used to cover the high costs of administration, mostly exorbitant salaries. I don't need to go out and research my own life or that of my friends. We are the middle income, working class poor. An unemployed man, with a wife and six kids, living in a government provided house, actually has a higher standard of living than I do now and a more comfortable future ahead of him because the government, thanks to us taxpayers, will look after him. Governments have mismanaged funds and wasted resources for years, always have and always will. Corporations have always found ways to avoid paying their share, always have, always will. What's different now is the creation of the welfare state, sometimes second generation in the same household that have never had a job, never will. Some can't find work, but many don't even try. Why should they, the taxpayers will look after them. But many have cars, most go out drinking, most can afford to smoke, they nearly all have flash clothes. Except for their kids of course, barefoot and hungry in many cases. And this is the scum that get the benefit of my hard earned dollars that pay my tax. And that hasn't happened overnight, it wasn't caused by one party or the other when in power, it's not down to one form of government over another. Society has become week, people have no self esteem, they have no respect for other people or other people's property. There are no consequences for negative actions anymore, no respect for law and order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBsq69 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Firstly, I’m not the one that raised the issue of tax and my right to expect certain benefits from these taxes. In theory those expectations are accurate, but theory doesn’t work. Someone said take 10 economists and you’ll get 10 different solutions. So don’t theorise, don’t spout ideology, get off your arse and look at what’s really happening. I live in the real world Ozi so don't come round with your ideology comments. First of all armchair nonsense and then this. Have you considered that people might disagree with you maybe because they've had different lives and experiences? You do not have the the only outlook on reality. I can only tell you this. If my family had lived in America we would be utterly fucked through no fault of own so I very grateful I live in a country which actually has a free health service. And as for public services like education and the health service being bad then how could they actually be better if a right wing government cut their spending? How does that work? There's a pretty strong correlation in all aspects of life between how much you spend and how good the thing is that you are spending it on. I went to private school because it happened to the right education for me and my parents didn't have to pay for it because they couldn't afford it. My brother went to state school and received a better education. In my school there were 30 in a class and got great results (but that was largely due to the selection criteria rather than the quality of the teaching) and when my my mother taught it was 40. It was the 'D' stream in a poor area and every one of them came out being able to read and write so state schools are not inherently bad. I used to work in education and in the UK and our results in international tests put us level with or above the other big European countries and just behind those in the Far East and certainly above the US. What you describe is your experience of Australia and the services are poor then people will vote the government out, surely? It's democracy. Australia's a rich country - perhaps there's a fault in your system of government? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foamy T. Squirrel Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 I'm all for public education. But you're begging for trouble if you allow a huge bureaucracy (such as the U.S. Federal government) control education. It can't even fulfill its primary duty to defend the borders and enforce the Bill of Rights. And it certainly has no business conducting wars if it won't use its military correctly. Like medicine, the Federal Government started over-reaching its authority in the 60's and 70's. Since then, the cost of medical insurance has necessarily skyrocketed along with that of education. The highest SAT college entrance examination scores belong to the high school class of 1972. And now, since A.C.A., people are forced to pay twice as much for medical insurance premiums, and even those who are subsidized can't afford the deductibles and their subsidies are taxed as income at the end of the tax year. I hope my European friends can learn to understand that, by nature, Yankees don't do Socialism (aka State Capitalism) very well. It's an expensive luxury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozi Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Australia promotes itself as a rich country, but is far from it. A political storyline to push up our worth, our value on the world circuit. Classic example, we have a small defence force that we can hardly sustain in a peacetime role, but we beat our chest and involve ourselves in what are probably worthy overseas conflicts, but that we can ill afford. So let’s blame the previous Labor government, our version of America’s Democrats. The new Coalition government, our Republicans, claimed they inherited all the shit from Labor. Problem of course is that Labor claimed they inherited the problems from the Coalition when they were last voted in. The reality is that it doesn’t matter who is in power, its taken decades to get to where we are. The issue isn’t Labor or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, Socialism or Communism; no system can work if they aren’t managed properly. Labor - “centre”, Coalition – “centre right”. They could almost swap policy documents on most issues and no one would know the difference EXCEPT when it comes to our welfare society, Labor will bankrupt the country quicker. Australia, like many other countries, is now blaming the rich and powerful, the multi-nationals, for not paying their share. So when did this new phenomenon start? I don’t know what’s been happening in other countries in the past, but in Australia they’ve never paid their fair share, so that can’t be the cause of our current dilemma. The real cause is decades of bad management that is now catching up with us, but what government, no matter what ideology they follow, is going to admit to that. Australia’s 3 biggest imports are oil and now machinery and vehicles, things everybody needs but we can no longer produce. A Royal Commission has just announced findings of how corrupt our union system has been, add that to years of government mismanagement, and kiss goodbye our motor industry. Two of our biggest exports are iron ore and coal that nobody wants. In 2013/14 we exported 650m tonnes of iron ore worth $750 billion. But in 2014/15 we increased the export to 750m tonnes of iron ore but instead of the expected $900 billion it was only worth $550 billion and still falling. Now, not only has the price fallen further, but so have the quantities exported. Coal went the same way. In Jan 2011 it peaked at around $185 per tonne, but in Jan 2015 it was well below $50 per tonne. Couple that with the fear of global warming and the problems with fossil fuels, we are in serious trouble. The Labor government did exactly the same as the Coalition government they took over from, they looked at the mining boom and decided it would last forever, so borrowed against it, spent future projected income, made commitments years in advance. The trouble is the GFC did impact on Australia; it crippled our exports, bursting the mining boom bubble. Add to that their philosophy of increasing welfare support and weakening our borders with increased asylum seekers, it’s like any other business, if your income is less than your expenditure, you go broke. And the cost of illegal migrants and asylum seekers, and I'm not talking normal immigration policy, is crippling every country in Europe, including the UK. Announced this week; “The Australian Federal Government will spend more than $900 million to resettle an additional 12,000 refugees fleeing Syria and Iraq.” That’s $75,000 each! At least in the very near future, if we want to shoot muslim terrorists, we won't have to travel abroad anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timewarp Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Throughout the course of my life, I too have always sought to make poor people ultimately responsible for all my problems. Desperate people are just soooooo annoying! I mean really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maturin Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Throughout the course of my life, I too have always sought to make poor people ultimately responsible for all my problems. Desperate people are just soooooo annoying! I mean really! Migrants, especially refugees are my favourite go to blame shoulderers. The cheek of these people, coming over here, turning in a net benefit to the economy to the tune of billions of pounds. Why can't they just continue living in the rubble of their former lives, caught between 3 or 4 opposing armies, instead of coming over here and providing a neat diversion for our politicians to use to get simple minded voters on their side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozi Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Migrants, especially refugees are my favourite go to blame shoulderers. The cheek of these people, coming over here, turning in a net benefit to the economy to the tune of billions of pounds. Why can't they just continue living in the rubble of their former lives, caught between 3 or 4 opposing armies, instead of coming over here and providing a neat diversion for our politicians to use to get simple minded voters on their side? Isn't Greece so lucky then. Will all the illegal refugees they've just had land on their doorstep, they should be able to pay off their debts by the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maturin Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Isn't Greece so lucky then. Will all the illegal refugees they've just had land on their doorstep, they should be able to pay off their debts by the end of the year. You do know that Greece is the first stop on their transit through Europe and that the EU is provding monetary aid to transit countries right? I mean I was making a joke, but it did open the can marked "Immigration", better go grab my bullshit brolly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts