MARCELL DAREUS POWER

shares of profit... :wallbash:

again, if i invest 100$, and workers create millions and billions through labor, im pretty sure the teet belongs to the free loading capitalist...

i agree on the public debt, only the money supply cannot pay it back... its mathematically impossible. with private debt, just like when the govt borrows from the fed, it is paid back on interest. the amount owed in total private debt is waaaaaaay more than the actual money supply in circulation because of interest. its as simple as trying to pay back 10$ when you only have 1$. either you cut back, or you borrow more... its a pyramid scheme... you can slow it down from collapsing through bond markets or borrowing more, but eventually the debt gets so great that to many people lose and contraction occurs. hell, a massive margin call could trigger it tomorrow.

then explain how you cover the debt with less money in the money supply? you either borrow more, or you have austerity. if people cut back, dont borrow, the economy collapses if we borrow more, the economy collapses...

except for the shares tom...

all i know is that our current banking system will collapse eventually. the amount of private debt is nuts... and with globalization, that contraction could lead to extreme political/govt consequences. ie riots in the streets. who knows what will happen... like i said, the only way out is a technological breakthrough. this is not an opinion, it is fact.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/us/politics/retirement-deal-keeps-bain-money-flowing-to-romney.html?pagewanted=all "Though Mr. Romney left Bain in early 1999, he received a share of the corporate buyout and investment profits enjoyed by partners from all Bain deals through February 2009: four global buyout funds and 18 other funds, more than twice as many over all as Mr. Romney had a share of the year he left. He was also given the right to invest his own money alongside his former partners. Because some of the funds and deals covered by Mr. Romney’s agreement will not fully wind down for several years, Mr. Romney is still entitled to a share of some of Bain’s profits." :wallbash:

yes, eventually...

tom, im simply saying its a fraudulent system and will implode. there will never be enough money in the money supply to cover the debt. because you have to borrow more and more to cover the new debt... if governments and people stop borrowing, credit stops, and we contract. ie were !@#$ed. if we continue to borrow, knowing full well that it will eventually collapse, we are !@#$ed. lose lose austerity equals collapse stimulus equals collapse you cant win, the money supply cant cover the debt unless it borrows more... and when they borrow more, they go into more debt... the only way out is a technological breakthrough..

no, all debt, public or private creates money, money=debt. the problem is that the debt is greater than the money supply, creating a perpetual debt crisis that gets bigger until it implodes. its a lose, lose situation. for example, the credit card worth 1000$ is created from debt, which must be paid back on interest. but in order to get the interest, you need more debt to cover the lack of current money supply. like the vid said, its musical chairs, and eventually it contracts and implodes because debt get higher and higher with smaller and smaller deposits...

a debt bubble is a mathemathical certainty in our system. the current money supply is always less than what is owed. if not there is massive contraction, if we go further in debt, we default, and we have massive contraction. the system will eventually implode...

i said part, as in shares.... :wallbash: :wallbash:

i think thats your dept.

what does enron have to do with debt creating money? how else do you come up with means to create? you cant build a factory or skyscraper yourself....

you dont think those costs get passed on to other people? we are still talking about privatization and the govt protecting those pro business interests...

im totally for voter id, as long as it is really just a voter id, and the state helps poor people get it. no, he only owned part of it :wallbash: :wallbash:

bain capital did...

debt creates money, and then consolidates property. so you are wrong on private debt, without debt, then there is no money. its even more comical because tons of public debt is from tax dollars going to corporations. public debt at 100%, then yes, thats leninism. we are talking about a rational social contract, education, securtity, roads, some form of welfare to protect against market forces, etc.

yeah, but part of that was on free money from tax subsidies. 14% of 80 is less than 14% of 100. you have to count the gains after 80 against the 14% of 80, and then you will see how much he really paid... its probably close to zero

have you read the book? its really good.

cant deal with reality? :wallbash:

ever heard of alienation of labor? you see its this fact that production creates substantially more in wealth than the initial investment, yet loses that wealth to initial capital. in other words, i created the plant, with my tools, and with my brain, and my weatlh, yet i dont get those profits. or i invest a 100$, but the millions and billions created by others belong to me. its called neo-feudalism :wallbash:

romney paid zero, so your post is bs... was the buffett rule just imaginary...lol

to bad you dont count the alienation of labor, and you didnt mention the capital gains rates, which are sometimes below 10% or even zero if you count tax subsidies. but yes, generally and most of the time, people making under 250,000 and more so, around 60,000( usually jointly, ie a family or household income) a year, are paying a highter tax rate than billionaires... again, 20% of 20,000 or 40,000 or 60,000 is less in amount but more harmful and hurts more compared to 10% on 100 million. its called purchasing power...

10- You do realize that 20% of 20,000 is less in amount but hurts more compared to 15% of 100 million... you see, we have this thing called purchasing power. :wallbash: