% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Silver Wheaton Corp. Message Board

  • aoeueoa aoeueoa Jun 30, 2011 2:04 PM Flag

    Germany has a super strong middle class. A form of socialism that works.


    America's form of capitalism (outsourcing jobs to the lowest bidder, paying CEO's whatever they want, crappy minimum wage standard) doesn't seem to be working very well.

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You obviously are not aware of what the definition of "middle class" even is. To quote Dante Chinni:

      "Everyone wants to believe they are middle class...But this eagerness...has led the definition to be stretched like a bungee cord — used to defend/attack/describe everything...The Drum Major Institute...places the range for middle class at individuals making between $25,000 and $100,000 a year. Ah yes, there's a group of people bound to run into each other while house-hunting."

      And of course Lenin and his devotees (i.e., Obama, Reid, Pelosi) said: "The way to crush the [middle class] is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.

      I believe there is no middle class in Germany, at least under the historic definition, and if the hacks in DC continue to get their way, the U.S. won't avoid it for long.

      I just pray we get a chance to come to arms over this issue while I am still young enough to fight.

    • America doesn't use capitalism any longer and hasn't for quite some time.

      Instead, that which you've alluded to might better be labeled corporatocracy, which, in social theories that focus on conflicts and opposing interests within society, denotes a system of government that serves the interest of, and may be run by, corporations and involves ties between government and business. Where corporations, conglomerates, and/or government entities with private components, control the direction and governance of a country, including carrying out economic planning notwithstanding the 'free market' label..

      ....I suppose, then, that we ought to include another thought nugget with that one. The system we now operate under here in America is much more Marxist than free market/capitalistic and the direction of the slide is steadily continuing that way.

    • You are repeating the Communisty Party Line. Communists believe that Socialism is on the road to Communist. They like you do not understand the difference. Under Communism the government controlls the corporations. Under Fascism the Corporations control the government. Socialism is Power to the People.

    • Complete freedom does not equal anarchy. Society needs rules so that the rights of everyone are respected but that does not mean controlling the lives of citizens and turning them into servants for the state and the rulers.
      We have an "agency problem" in the current system by which lying crooked a-holes get elected as representatives and once they are there they don't have incentives to care much about their constituency.

    • How about using technology to have true democracy? People could vote directly on important issues over the internet and the community would decide on all important issues for society.
      I know we have a problem with the level of education of the masses but our politicians are not the smartest people either and worse yet they are crooked so we would probably be better off.
      In the short run, the community might do stupid things (look at the behaviour of some people in open forums) but in the long run people would realize that they need to be serious about issues as that would translate in better living conditions for them and their families).

    • It has always been a three-way struggle. In the Middle Ages it was the Aristocracy, Merchant Class and the Peasantry. That became the modern day Politico, Corporate Executives and Citizen Workers. Bankers belong to the Merchant and Corporate Executive Class. It is not now and never has been a simple two-way struggle between just right and left. Democracy was supposed to give citizens control over the politicians. Fascism gives corporations and bankers the control over politicians. Communism would give the politicians control over both the corporation and the citizens.

      The United States if far down the road to fascism with the bankers and corporations controlling government. The banker/corporatist do not practice capitalism. They believe in banks and corporations that are too big to fail and above the law. If a law gets in their way then they change the law.

      It is not so much the size of government that matters, as it is who controls the government. We, the citizenry, have to take the control of government back from the fascist banker/corporatist.

    • Totally agree with you. The thing is that in order to do that we need to rethink the mechanics of politics. I don´t think we can continue with the same system of incentives in politics and see meaningful change.

    • You wrote:

      "Under Communism the government controlls the corporations. Under Fascism the Corporations control the government. Socialism is Power to the People."

      It is clear to me you are not willing to understand what George Washington recognized over 200 years ago:

      “Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant -- and a fearful master.”

      I can not state it better than others have, but I like how GW sums it up - it does not matter what form government takes - it is and will always be an instrument of force. So, if you like freedom, you want government to not have too many powers, save those to guarantee property and individual rights. Such a view is totally the opposite of marxism, socialism, fascism as none of these systems place the rights of the individual above all else.

      As for the so-called "representatives" elected to positions of power in any form of government, they will, at best, exert a derivative of the "people's will".

      In the spirit of the approaching holiday, I quote one more beloved founder (standing with Washington as the only other President belonging on Mt Rushmore):

      "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

      Not the right to secure "social justice". Not the right to free healthcare. Not the right to a good paying job. Just the freedom to secure these things by one's own hard work.

      All that remains in the U.S. is for one group to "dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them".

    • Only True American Presidents:

    • I, too, am a Mason. Palestine Lodge in Princeton, NJ! I would not want the job of President, however, unless we were sever a few "Blue States" first (getting rid of Cal-ee-fornia would do the trick).

    • View More Messages
19.62-0.05(-0.25%)Mar 27 4:02 PMEDT