The theme continues; the majority of Americans still’re slower than retards wearing ankle weights. Through a failure of doin’, I point that the wellspring of our democrakatic republic - voting - has been commandeered by the same bloc that put us into [what? a... mess of ecolutionary, economicary, terrorist-spawning rhetorictions,?]; the same bloc that refers to computers as ‘light machinations’ and whose blow jobs are still called ‘five-cent warmth bonuses’, i.e., Anyone Over Forty and Sometimes Thirty Five.
How to define this stupidity? Is following advice from the peddler who advises you to vote against your own interests; is that make you stupid? Is it depend on the advice or your reaction thereof? If I’m in the practice of ink-mixing, and a politician comes along and says “all ink-mixers are going to get a tax break if I’m elected”, and it turns out that he’s a lying, cheating, war-mongering chick with a dick, well, at what point do I become an ass for voting for this guy? If he is a lyer then I won’t vote for him again and democracy remains pure. But what if he pulls through with his promise and breaks my taxes so that I may use the extra capital to hire on a few extra workers, expand and improve my process, etc.? At what point in this democracy should I start being concerned about the poor humanitarian decisions of our elected officials so long as the general economy, ahem, hummm.
Why care about your money? Usually, if you’re over 35 (and (definitely) if you’re over 40), then you’ve got much more at stake than the uni-limbed victims of foreign policy. Besides, we don’t actually hack arms off. Our violence is more like “we, the American representatives to Panama, would like to offer you training and guns and the like,” so that we can, say, overthrow the current hostile government and build a canal. I would argue that most of the time these interventions are worth it, and that the amount of lives destroyed (or maimed) should never be as bad as the overall uplifting powers of economic progress! Think of all the jobs created by the canal, then and now; globalization! And this scope is quite international.
As I’d say to a friend: is being a bigot not enough to grain credit with the autistic masses? There are plenty of bigoted things to do, but in a civilization where lynching nigroes or employing under-age sex girls is widespread and encouraged, then there’s nobody to draw a comparison to. There’d be no Sara Palin to say “those east coast caviar suckling faggots can suck on my hairy flaps” because everybody would be too busy lynching folks or teaching creationism to the seven children of their seven wives. What gets Palin elected is some smarmy strutter with a few years of civilization in his breeches coming along and pointing a stritched finger at her and saying “thar’s the she-devil! Thar’s the one that believes in some-odd God”!
1 comment:
Whatever happened to the belief in a fair and progressive tax system that is incremental - which puts, proportionately greater burden on the wealthiest Americans - a pay what you can afford approach b/c allowing the upper class to accumulate disproportional wealth at the expense of the middle class is what? Destabilizing to a viable democracy?
Where are the facts and proofs that you have to say one way or the other? Even if we managed to elect the most competent person to every office in the land, we would still not have good government if the people were unwilling and pay to fully finance it. If, as I hear the Recrackisons repeatedly preach, it is a privilege to live in America, why don't they want to pay for it?
Without a incremental tax system, which is the just - the wealthiest needs to be reminded that they need competent workers, transportation and communication networks, laws and regulations (yes, regulations, such as those making their rarefied air fit to breathe) ... and for this vast web of support, the rich do in fact have a greater debt to society than the poor or even the middle class.
If by taxing the rich will de-incentivize them to invest into private equity or any kind of fixed income investing - which will in return make banks have less capital - which will then make chances for small business owners to borrow money - which will then not allow the inventory of said small business to sell, then we're in a Kafka fuck story.
Post a Comment