Comments on: Casino Royale

By: VXXC

VXXC — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 11:20:58 +0000

It was made easy to plunder and hard to build for a reason, for they wished plunder and destruction and not to build. . These are your genius plutocrats, the ones who took the easy path to great wealth through legal and subsidized plunder. No more deliverance for a people seeking Tribunes than Black Single Mothers would be the cornerstones of renewed family. At any other time their respective depradations would have been marginal and venal. It took GOD [Progressive Theocracy] to make them PLUTO.

By: VXXC

VXXC — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 11:12:55 +0000

The people elected do not run the government, the people have not ruled in 80 years.

The issue with the 600 elect is 550 of them got that way by plundering the nation. Neo-Liberalism is the logical end state of socialism, and here we are…these are not the 19th century magnates who built the nation’s industry. They’re politically connected looters of the productive. In the most bloody and demonstrative slaughters of cities neither Timur nor Chinghis killed skilled artisans. And yet that is what our elites do…

Look at Detroit, and understand that is emblematic of the Rust Belt, CA, NJ. Elsewhere. The Prog enriches himself through plunder, delights himself in ruin and degradation. Malice beyond Tamerlane is unfit to rule.

Acela rules this land as a conquered province to be plundered and reduced by the Morgenthau plan with porn. These are our elites. The Robber Barons built cities, these financial Marcher Lords ruin them utterly. Nudus confractione contractus.

There is no salvation in them, personally or for others.

By: Jack Crassus

Jack Crassus — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 01:46:09 +0000

In my social group, there is a habit of referencing tech billionaires as “the aristocracy”. Plutocracy may not be perfect, but it has merits. Commercial competition selects for competence in leaders better than earnest sanctimony or public demagoguery.

I would much rather have the ~600 richest men in the USA run the government than those that get elected.

By: Jack Crassus

Jack Crassus — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 01:45:34 +0000

@VXXC In my social group, there is a habit of referencing tech billionaires as “the aristocracy”. Plutocracy may not be perfect, but it has merits. Commercial competition selects for competence in leaders better than earnest sanctimony or public demagoguery.

I would much rather have the ~600 richest men in the USA run the government than those that get elected.

By: VXXC

VXXC — Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:22:11 +0000

Yes Sovereigntry is conserved…except..except..except…just above all no mess. no trouble.

That’s pure fantasy.

Ah the eyes that see all but can’t stomach the pudding. Too Bad. It’s done and the Mitochrondrials are all over it. The Drummer Boy is never innocent.

History’s Ryhmes always find their way.

By: VXXC

VXXC — Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:09:42 +0000

@ P. Taylor –That’s a great summary of the Federal Budget and governance. Stolen.

By: Peter A. Taylor

Peter A. Taylor — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 18:06:01 +0000

Much of the purpose of the US federal government is to move money around in ways that don’t show up on the budget. The tax code is so complicated not to collect money, but to selectively not collect it. The main reason the US health care system is so screwy is so that indigent care won’t show up on the budget. The costs of regulations don’t show up on the budget. Theatrical issues like gay rights don’t show up on the budget. Government borrowing doesn’t show up in current taxes. The effects of inflation don’t show up explicitly on the budget.

Taxpayer’s oligarchy is too easy to game. But a push for honest accounting would be nice. It would be interesting if a political party were to draw up a “shadow budget” in which off-budget financial shenanigans were accounted for, possibly with penalty factors for opacity.

By: spandrell

spandrell — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 17:08:33 +0000

But you can’t measure power like that.

Power moves between offices, offices are created and modified, agencies appear from nowhere. Any formal system can’t account for that.

By: spandrell

spandrell — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 17:03:28 +0000

The basic structure of sovereignty / government / society / law / property remains intact’

Except when it doesn’t because noble/eunuch/general X has got influence over the king and has passed the law Y which screws with all this sector/region/whatever he fancies.

Laws and economies were not more necessarily more stable in the old days, not more than communication technology can account for. See monetary policy in China for instance.

By: admin

admin — Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:51:06 +0000

Over here, we call that idea commutative tax politics.