ch ch ch ch changes…
youtube.com/watch?v=gEaS-K3j3M8
same old song and dance…
-Imp
It says a lot about the state of government in this country when nearly every candidate thinks that being pro-change will sell. What do you think, Imp, time for socialism to sweep in and save the day?
socialism?
no, we need another revolutionary/civil war.
-Imp
Everyone will need to work together. . . in order for that to happen. Like Marx always wanted.
As a wise man often says, “history never repeats.”
work together to seperate along race, sex and class lines…
history never repeats… new blood will be spilled…
-Imp
hahaha. The last minute got so good. What a funny video 
We need to change our forms of relationship. -Look for it in the declaration of independence. Changing forms never needs to be violent, but the reaction to a change of forms often is. And if anyone would try to change our form of government so that the goals set forth in the preamble of the constitution were actually a product of government, then everyone with a stake in the system of injustice would look for some innocent to kill. The rich only tolerate us because we slave to produce, and slave to borrow, and slave to pay taxes, and slave to buy. Change our form of relationship to leave the rich out in the cold, and they will turn on us like a snake. They do not love our guts. They love our cowardice.
And you know what; we do need change. If we do not rejuvinate this country by revolution we we be over run by invaders. They do not realize the terrible genii they are letting out of the Bourbon bottle. How will they get it back in? They all think they can ride that horse called change, and it has run down more people than have ridden it. There are many people who asked for the very change that swept them away. I ask for change, and I will take my chances. I know, that the division used so ruthlessly to keep the people powerless, is nothing that cannot be resolved in an afternoon, if the dividers are remove from the discussion.
the only “change” these politicians want is for themselves to be your master.
-Imp
Ya. But their wanting to be masters means managing change, keeping the rich, rich and the poor, poor; and throwing some sop to people with the sop bill sent to their children. This society is running out of promises faster than hell is running out of snowflakes. It is time for a change. It is time to get in the pockets of the rich, and stay there until the money runs out.
it sure is.
stick your finger tip in rich man’s pocket and poof. your children are dead.
but history never repeats.
-Imp
I bet if they were hung up by their Achilles heels they would grunt money. It is not money I want, but what money means, and that is America. Our history to this point is the power to mint money, tax wages, and turn the wealth of a nation into a private possession. Sure, we have to control our money only because money can plant a political tree in a vulnerable mind. If we want this country to work we have to unwind our clock, and go back to a former time. Taxes once made property hop. It ended with those who would do the best with it. Sort of. Property free of obligation does not move and does not serve the public good. Put property to work or set it free. It is not property in private hands or in banks that makes a nation wealthy, but property on the move. Wealth on the move makes everyone rich.
no nation ever taxed itself into prosperity.
-Imp
In the greatest age of capitalism it was property that paid the cost of government. People had to make their property pay or sell it. Property was cheaper while still having speculative value, and the price of labor was dear since people could easily purchace land and live on its bounty. And this high price of property and the great pressure on wages has forced most americans into an absolute slavery. Think of it. When you work for wages you must make your wages, make a profit, and pay taxes. When you buy property on credit, because it has such an artificially high value you must borrow four times the cost of a modest house. That was certainly the case for me, and the government does not help, but cuts me some slack on the interest I pay, which only encourages bigger debt, and higher interest. If the government wanted to manage with interest it could be the prime lender.
The best thing it could do would be to make productive property pay its way. Then labor would be on equal footing with capital, and there would be higher wages for everyone. Labor carries every country, and every economy. There is such a thing as killing the goose that laid the golden egg. When the government is forced to give money that it must borrow or print to working people to turn them into consumers it is a sure sign that too much value has been sucked out of the economy. And High profits are responsible.
the point stands. no nation has ever taxed itself into prosperity.
-Imp
no nation has ever been prosperous indefinatly
You are standing on the point, but you are not making it. The British drove themselves into poverty while ensuring the prosperity of a single class. We are doing the same. But we are a common wealth, and the way taxes are applied really do determine if the ruination of the nation is a slow process or lightning quick. Allowing property to accumulate in few hand does nothing to defend this country. When the poor have nothing to fight for and the rich refuse to pay for their own defense we are done. Then, I assure you, prosperity will be the least of our problems. If you want heriditary wealth forget equitable government. If you want to give the rich a free ride, then saddle the babes of the poor and force bits into their mouths. If we are going to be a free nation the rich are going to have to pay for the privilage. It cannot all be done on debt and chinese arithmatic.
This country in the age of capital was prosperous because it taxed property when property was the greatest sign of wealth. Now, we had not opened all the mines, polluted all the water, cut down every available tree, or killed all the indians; but we were making great strides in industry, and in technology. More than that, taxes on property kept it out of few hands, which avoided extremes of wealth and poverty. Forcing people to make a profit to pay taxes or disgorge it made the labor necessary for profit more expensive. Admittedly, people imported labor then like they export jobs today. The only reason is that both were allowable, but today, wages cannot be driven lower. The minimum wage does not support much life. But exporting capital, and wages, and then importing product eventually drains the wealth out of the country. No one ever became a prosperous country on imports either, and we allow it because a fraction of the money the rich should pay to support their government they us instead spend to subvert the government. They act in their individual interests, and not even the interests of their class; because if all could do it- export jobs and import products, we would be finished fast.
and you don’t see the writing on the wall?
the revolution is near…
-Imp
Sir;
I have read more history than you and your biggest friend can pick up and carry, and I know because I own most of it still, and have moved it enough to know it is heavy.
Jobs are exported to places where people have no infrastructure to support, need no fuel for their houses, have no public medicine, nor insurance, nor autos, nor life expectancy. They are not supporting the world’s largest military bought for the purpose of defending our markets, our resources, and our exploiters in foreign lands. So no, we cannot have our wages depressed further unless we want to see ourselves made fools of for the pleasure of being called Americans.
What moral standard do I hold to say the rich should pay for the privilege of being rich? It is the same moral standard I hold for myself. I would not expect a person born crippled to carry what I can carry, and the rich who are born rich should carry a significantly greater load than those born poor. People should know the reward of their hard work, their intelligence, and their invention. There is no reason that wealth should be left entirely unmolested. It should be harrassed. Each generation should have to prove its own value. Each person should have to find their own place, and if we are truly a rich nation that should not be hard. If everyone is at an approximatly same level of wealth what if one is born rich only to find he is poor upon his fathers death? He has fallen out of bed and not out of a penthouse. We should give the same opportunity to be wealthy to all, and a good education so that each can carry their treasure, their health, and their able minds on their own two feet. As the philosopher said, to be able to swim to shore with it and make your living from it. So my morality is based upon the common morality, and as all ethics, upon the concept of ones community. We are a nation, but not as other nations of a common mother. We are a made nation diluted by many nations in the traditional sense. Now, some of these nations coming here and seeing what is happening have joined in feeding on the body politic. We should cose up Chez America, and kick out the parasites. If they don’t want to go we have to tell them put out or get out, which is to say, create the value you live on. And we have to say the same to the rich. No more starting wars this people do not benefit from, that earn for us the hatred of the world, which you bear no cost of. This country was made for the rich, but when it was made the rich paid. They have shifted that burdon onto working people, and as poverty has grown so has the power of the rich to control government. Look how many rich people are in congress and have been president. Did Hillary Clinton get rich selling books? The government, which is unresponsive to the needs, and pleadings of labor is in a great love fest with wealth. They are thrilled by the possibility of turning wealth into political power and turning political power into wealth. But they forget that nature, or God, if you prefer, and working people create wealth; and as much as we can jump on the wagon to exploit the wealth of others, and working people in distant lands; that it is as immoral as our own exploitation here. As in Rome, it was the dispossed, those driven from their property by slaves who were the support of empire. These people were citizens, but their support of Caesar could be bought for a pittance, and they were ultimately swept away when no longer needed. So, the Roman maxim: divide et empera rings always in my ears, because we could not be more divided, nor more ruled. And this is unethical. We need strength to defend ourselves. Our parasites want us weak so we cannot brush them aside. If they make us enemies we must unite under the only qualities all humans have in common, and that is our need for liberty and justice.
unite to steal from the rich…
-Imp