I see an economic diasater coming...

[ATT]

I really want a copy of that info att, is there anyway to get a copy.

Sheeze, d3, you're on a roll, you stay up all night on this stuff?

You keep this up and you'll have the worlds problems all solved before the rest of us have a chance to get -our- licks in (and that wouldn't be any fun, huh?).

Anyway, what info is that?

Tony

[exxcomm0n]

<snip>
I agree with you on all your points exxcom, But heres the rub, getting small businesses for a lot of things is not a possibilty in this business structure, there is so much regulation that no one can do it and make any money. This is a shame and will change.

Thank you d3. I didn't think you would have issue with any of the suggestions I laid out, and I'm glad that was a correct assumption.
These were laid out as suggestions because of the fact that freedom to choose is one of the most important rights the country I'm from (USA) was formed under, even though it may not be reflected in its (USA gov't) present day aims.

As to how the change you cite above will happen, there are 2 ways I see.

1.) Trying to legislate them out of existence.

2.) Mass refusal to live in fear of incarceration or persecution for refusing to obey those laws.

#1 has been tried time and again and has a very, very high failure rate.
#2 seems to be very faintly  removed from complete anarchy, but does historically have some rather compelling evidence as to its effectiveness.

I'll leave it up to the individual as to which they deem best, but would like to offer the reason why I see these as the 2 major ways major change happens and why one may be more effective than the other.
It was a sci-fi short story I read when young and impressionable called "And Then There Were None" (no, not the Agatha Christie story of the same name.)

Read it here: http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php and see why it could have made such an impression on me. There are many other pieces of literature that say the same thing, but none I know of that are as easy and entertaining to read and understand.

P.S. #2 only works when you refuse to allow fear to rule your actions. Bravery is doing something even though you fear it for one reason or another. It takes others seeing your refusal to fear to empower them to make the same choices as you.

But to blame normal people who barely get by for shopping from walm@rt isn't really going to give a solution. Remember to put the blame of their actions squarely on wal  marts shoulders. They made the choices not to buy their products from the US. Its easier to change that one decision than millions, and yet the result is the same.

I do blame the individual for walm@rt mentality (nice allegorical reference and much less ambiguous than mine), but not completely by any means. The reason I feel this way you point out in a later post:

Businesses exist because the community in which it exists allows it to, this business owes its exsistance to the community that created it, and it should exist only to benefit the community, not to hurt it.

I blame walm@rt administration for the little regard for the ramifications of their actions, and gov't for making that expansion and exportation so easy with tax breaks that allowed them to occupy the entire country in a relatively short time.

Walm@rt made the choices they did because they were rewarded for them with higher profits. The only way those profits occurred was because people allowed them to.
I can't fault people for making the "hard and fast" decision to maximize their purchasing dollar, but I can blame them for not thinking farther than that as to the ramifications of those decisions.
Walm@rt (and MANY other businesses!) and gov't just made it possible and easier for them to not think farther into the long range implications of their actions because TIME to think seems the scarcest commodity we have these days.

On your enumerated points, RIGHT THE F ON!!!!! exactly

Good to know I'm not alone.

On some of the other points d3 and others make in later posts, I'd like to offer my 2¢ (I just noticed again the near impossibility to type that cent character. Hmmmmmmmm.....)

Money vs. Barter.

Money used to be almost the same as barter as you got a physical good (metallic coin) in payment for a good or service. You can do other things with that metal besides exchange it. You can fashion a tool or good from it, use it as a weight, etc.
It was still taxed (as it was manufactured by gov't of one type or another), but it had value outside just the idea of its worth.

Money (larger denominations anyway) then became an IDEA represented by a paper note that has little other use besides its destruction as you cannot use it for any other purpose besides exchange that will not destroy its perceived value in some way.
It has no use that can be converted back into either: an exchangeable form if it is used for another purpose, or a good that is equal to the value it had as money.

You're taxed if you make money, you're taxed when you spend money, you're taxed if you save money. That makes it very easy to reason that money = tax, and it's not always the tax you see clearly printed out.
The other "hidden" tax is the disproportionate percentage of that spent dollar that goes to one of these:

a.) The materials and machining to make the product
b.) The labor it takes to make and sell the product
c.) The administration that creates and governs the manufacture and sale of the product

Where do you think the largest percentage goes to? Why is that the place?

If you chose c, it's my opinion you are correct.
I don't think its irresponsible to reward that administration for the risks it took to create that manufacture, but I do think it's irresponsible for them to reward themselves again and again for taking that risk when it no longer is a risk by disproportionately taking a larger and larger percentage as time goes on.

Barter seems to mostly ignore the part c as that part is assumed to be in parts
a and b, and rightly should be.
People used to have and go to "barn raisings", and not just because of immediate personal benefit if it was their barn, but the benefit it afforded the community which came back in little benefits for everyone that over time that greatly outweighed immediate reward.

This dovetails nicely into the next point.

Local vs. foreign

The money saved by administration in exporting jobs to a cheaper environment works until those exports raise the standard of living in the land to which they were exported to the point where that country's standard of living supersedes the standard of living in the exporter country. Then wages and prices become higher there than they are "locally", and the pattern shifts back the opposite way.
It takes decades (if not longer) for this shift to happen, but history seems to have proven that it does in fact happen that way.

The people in the countries exported to benefit in the short run depending on whom is "cheaper" @ the moment, but who ALWAYS benefits?

Seems to me those that always benefit owe no allegiance to a country, but to the segment of society they are in, and act accordingly. It doesn't matter which country they are in, it matters how much they control that country (or those countries).

These OPINIONS I outline above seem to be very close to, if not outright communism. Does that mean we should go out and destroy the rich with physical force and abolish the notion of administration?

No.

Even communism has administration, and time has proved it can be as corrupt and self serving as any other form of gov't.
You can't have a society without some SORT of administration unless every individual is blessed with equal intelligence, and that just won't ever happen.
It all depends on what type of administration we choose to allow to happen.

My opinion is that we should stop obscenely rewarding a very small percentage of society for its administration, and that will only happen when a "hundredth monkey" paradigm shift occurs due to EDUCATION and reasoning. Things most don't seem to have TIME for these days.
Those that do have the time to think about these things (and seem to be paid for it) seem to be in administration. Hmmmmm.........

These are opinions only, and are worth what you paid for them = nothing (to simplify things greatly by not counting the cost of your PC, the time it took to learn to use it, the cost of your electricity to power it, the cost of your internet service, and the time spent to come to this thread and read my opinions).
They ONLY have worth if you take the time to think about why I might have personally felt it was worth my time to write them, how they could be reasoned to be right or wrong, and to take the time to post a response.

I invite debate on any and all opinions I have written as I value the time you may take to teach me their errors, if that's the way you choose to use your time and address them, as much as you've valued my opinions by choosing to respond to them.

Now since I have no job bringing money in, I have to go spend my TIME weatherproofing the house so the little "extra" money I would otherwise spend inefficiently heating it can be saved this year, and next year, and the year after that to the greater benefit of myself and my community by forcing administration at the power company to lower costs because I need (pay) them less.
I'm only reason I'm here (OU) is because the only probable way I see the power company administration cutting costs (by cutting administrative wages or "workers", instead of cutting workers from other segments of the utility or buying cheaper foreign fuels), is if I (and many others) prove how much less they are needed via the profits they make.

Why didn't I just do that before when I had a job?
Because I didn't think I had the time it takes to invest in myself and my community that way.
Hmmm.......It seems time, and how I choose to spend it is the most important commodity I have.

See a pattern? 

[the_big_m_in_ok]

exxcomm0n said:

Good to know I'm not alone.

Almost out of time on this computer, but I strongly agree with what you and some of the others say.
Think on your feet and think for yourself!

--Lee

[d3adp00l]

att i was refering to that pdf. is that yours? i was under that impression.

Since a corporation is a legal fiction, and entity that exists by the will of the people, for the benefit of the people, it does not have the rights human beings have.

We have the right given to us by God to earn profit, to contract work, to sell goods, etc.

Businesses which employee humans and corporations do not have those rights, since we created them, we exist as a higher level of authority, but below God. As such we have the right to tell these entities what they can and can't do.

Personally I believe that a business should have the right to pay its employees, and to earn 10% profit, of which 5% is paid as a tax to the community in which it exists.

Corporations have the right to earn 20% profit, 10% of which is to be a tax paid to the community in which it exists.

Pay of people in a business or corporation should be limited.

This keeps the admin from simply paying themselves a rediculous amount and there by lowering their "profit".

People should trade hour for hour, regardless of their skill, or if they are working outside their skill.

Yes I do believe this. I am an electrician, if you ask me to dig a ditch, it is still taking my time, and lets say I suck at digging a ditch, in this system you would want to pay me less, But I say we should pay eachother the same rate no matter what. WHY?
Here is why, This will make people pay more attention to who you ask to do what. If you need a trench dug, you should find out who has a good reputation for digging trenches fast.

This makes people responsible for their own actions, if you don't do your homework, well then you learn. If you are trying to false advertise, you will be found out quickly.

This normally gets people wound up, "but I can't earn what I am worth, how can I get benefit from being good at what I do?, and on and on.

Heres how, if you suck, people won't ask you to work for them, so you must work for yourself in your field, to feed yourself, This will keep you from harming others, and will give you the ability to feed yourself.

If you are honorable and good at what you do, your reputation will be your reward, and people will seek you out to do work for them, and you will benefit from the fact that you will always be busy.

If you are really good at what you do, people will ask you to teach them, and in exchange for that you get to earn 5% profit on their time, and you get to help the community by paying 5% tax for the privilage of earning profit on others, 10% and 10% if you have stockholders and are a corp.

The stockholders are the owners of a corp, and they have the privilage to earn 10% on their investment, if they need a skilled person to run the corp, then they can hire someone and offer them part ownership.

Yes the individuals who buy things will have to pay more for a product made by a corp, but they know that extra money will benefit the community, and they get the benefit from a larger business for its stability.

This system will benefit all, and put the power in the hands of the people.

If you want to shirk your governments BS, then stop buying from businesses, this restricts their money, and riens them in, so you have an imediate, and direct recourse for your grievance against them. You don't have to wait years so you can try and vote someone else in, especially when in this system you are given only two real choices, and both are just as bad as the other.

Also, polictical parties should be illegal, just like gangs are. They hurt our communities, not help them.

I have an entire system for the election of officals.

[d3adp00l]

I have spent a lot more than one night thinking this out, analyzing the intent of the constitution, and the assumptions of the founding fathers. Not because they were the ultimate intelect, but they have experience that I don't and they had a system that benefited the people.

Hour for Hour, a little more info.

Let me ask you this, what is the largest single investment most of us will make?  Our home right.

at the peak of the market 500-600k was no big deal.

Lets say you bought that home for a bargain of 350k.

So what does that mean to you? Well if your a highly skilled worker you make around 25-30 per hour (if you also manage a crew normally)

So lets look at what that 30 year mortgage means to you. After interest you pay 2X the purchase price for the home (for simple math, I could amertize it, but...)

So 700K total cost to you, and you make 30 per hour, that means 23,333 hours of work to pay off that house and thats if you take 30$ home, taking taxes into consideration, it takes around 31,111 hours, if you paid every penny to the house, thats 14 years at 40 hours a week and 52 weeks a year.

14 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

are you insane?!?!?!?!

Do you know what it takes to build a house? well I do, it takes 400 manhours, and an equal dollar value in materials. Most contractors charge around 75 per hour so 30,000 in labor and 30,000 in materials. But lets go back to hours. 400 hours labor, and 400 hours worth of material

Thats 800 hours, Lets double that just to give room for error, so 1600 hours.

1600 hours is 40 weeks, or .769% of a year. Now I want you to think about this, could you build a house in that time? 40 weeks? Yes you could, I personally could do it less than half that time.

Do you now see how if you agree to trade hour for hour, how much you benefit. Sure you COULD charge twice what someone else does, but when you do, so does everyone else, and guess what you pay 14 years for what should cost you less than a year.

So by letting go of your short sited short term benefit, you gain huge amounts of life long benefit. You no longer need to try and get the absolute most money for your time, you just saved 1/2 to 1/3 of your adult life, imagine what else you could do.

How do you think we have so many people sitting on their ass pushing papers, both in govern, and in private businesses, because those of us who actually work are giving them our time our earnings so they can get paid.