FBI to investigate Wall Street's high frequency trading

actually, we also somewhat disagree about the problem as well. See, I agree the problems are mostly due to corporations, however, I also believe they only derive power from the government. When corporations were getting people sick in the 60's, we didn't have liability. Today we do, and corporations would have virtually no protections or government benefits in my system, which is obviously the reason for this transfer of wealth, to the top 1%.

Yes, but there are many other problems as well. Like, government being in bed with the corporations. This, allows corporations to use force, and infringe on our freedom. Liberals seem to ignore this very real aspect of politics (especially with regards to Obama)

Well, that's your opinion. In my opinion, the problem was caused by the massive expansion of government, which promised to protect us from all the bad corporations, when, most of these organizations take bribes and/or work with certain industries, involved in the Military-industrial complex.

Liberals refuse to shrink government an inch, then, you blame the last 30 years on my views?


The past 40 years is a prime example of how the elite have hijacked our government, and, they're not willing to give it up, without robbing the people of every dime first.

and whether you leftists believe it or not, that robbery is done through taxes that we're told is used to "fix the crumbling roads," when it is actually used to bribe foreign governments and sometimes Jihadists, prop up dictators, smuggle drugs into our own country, smuggling guns into mexico etc etc etc.

Now, you Liberals tell me that corruption in Government isn't wide-spread, but, I think that is an utterly deceptive statement. The amount of people government killed by "accident" is astounding. Moreover, many times these accidents is merely someone walking with a folded pocket knife

Come on now, I live in NY- they do not remake roads. The amount of money and time it costs to fill a pot hole, is pennies on the dollar of what we pay for government. Plus, when we pay government all this money, most of these problems go ignored, and most of that money goes to the government and the corporate elite. So, I believe this only way to fix this mess, is to prosecute these individuals, (including Government) who took part in this robbery. It's been going on 101 years, and it was started due to the institution of the Federal Reserve Bank, which is a private bank, ran by the very same bankers behind: Bush, Romney and, Obama

Seemingly is the key word. But, in reality, it is government that furthers the dominance of wealth- and, neither political party addresses that. The two main political parties have become outlets of control, by corporate influence.

as long as Liberalism denies that, and seeks government force against peaceful people, I will morally disagree with their premise.

as I've said, we understand it's wrong to kill, lie, steal and manipulate people for your own benefit. But, these are things Government has perpetually done, yet, you Leftists are literally trying to tell me that government corruption isnt "wide-spread"

It is my opinion, that, not only is the corruption wide-spread, I would also argue that it has become entwined with the very fabric if government.

"War is a racket."
I'm sorry, but I think the reason why you Leftists try so hard to patronize or demonize me, to make your views look "fairer" and, me look like someone who just wants to help corporate america, when the truth is, that most of our problems are caused by government, and industries connected to them.

i think the biggest fallacy of liberalism is pretending none of this is happening...

 

Btw, I made 2 responses to you, Balbus. One is on the last page, but, it is important with regards to understanding my views.


btw, i agree with Adam Kokesh, because I think he understands what's really going on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyCAIQl5zx4"]Adam destroys one Democrat argument after another - YouTube

 

25

No what you are saying is not true – neither video addressed any of the criticisms leveled at your views – claiming otherwise is a lie –

But please prove me wrong and point to the specific places you think they do?

LIAR – I’ve asked you many times to produce any evidence that you have addressed the criticisms in any rational or reasonable way and YOU CAN’T DO IT – you lie.

Oh you’ve told us we are wrong and you are right many times but that isn’t a rational defense. Calling anyone that just doesn’t accept what you say without question ignorant is not a rational defense of your views.

You have stated your views many times BUT YOU REFUSE to answer the criticism of them in any rational way.

 

25

As I said many of the things you complain about are also the complaints of those you oppose – we often agree on the problems what we disagree on is the solutions. I know about the size of US military spending - and I’ve pointed this out time and again along with the reason behind it and its detrimental effects– but that still doesn’t address the problem of wealth’s power and influence.

If you cut military spending then end up giving the money saved in tax cuts that favour wealth then all you are going is increasing the power of wealth.

I’m not sure what you mean by “protect us from all the bad corporations” do you mean health and safety regulations, environmental controls and legislation, what?

Have you any direct evidence of them taking bribes – you’ve claimed this before and when asked to give actually evidence you could NOT produce any, yes corruption can take place but are you claiming it is institutional, part of the system?

The idea that it does stimulate economic growth has long been on of the propaganda points of the wealth sponsored free market/neoliberal lobbyists. But many question this assertion

BOMBSHELL: New Study Destroys Theory That Tax Cuts Spur Growth Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/study-tax-cuts-dont-lead-to-growth-2012-9#ixzz31mMYKR54

Thing is that if it were true (and the growth was evenly spread) then the incomes of the middle and lower classes should have gone up when in reality while top rate tax rates have fallen by around half over the last 40 years the real term incomes of the middle and lower classes have on the whole dropped or stagnated.

What seems to have happened is that tax cuts have produced little or no growth but have vastly increased the wealth of a few.

 

25

OK here is a chart of the changes in federal spending comparing 50 years and 25 years ago with that in 2011

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/05/14/152671813/50-years-of-government-spending-in-1-graph

As you will see military spending has actually fallen in 1962 Defense spending was 51.7% while in 2011 it was only 22%. Now I think it could be cut more.

Now the things that seem to have grown since 1962 are Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and Safety Net programs (“include unemployment compensation, food stamps and housing assistance. Spending on these programs surged during and after the most recent recession, as unemployment rose sharply”)

Social Security – people have paid in to this pension scheme so I don’t think it could be cut.

Now as I’ve argued many times that I think the whole healthcare system in the US needs reform it’s actually more expensive and inefficient compared with other developed countries. So I think savings could be made here by bring in the type of universal healthcare system that many European countries have or a US NHS.

Safety Net programmes – As has been pointed out a lot of public assistance goes to people who are working but getting such low wages that they need assistance. So savings could be made here by getting employers to pay a decent living wage.

It seems to me that these things are of benefit to a large number of middle and lower class people (and could be even more) and that lowering or cutting out would do more harm than good to those groups (it would have little impact on the more wealthy) and it makes things even worse if then the money saved is given in tax cuts that would mainly benefit wealth.

*

This is why for all your claims that you are fighting for the ‘little guy’ all the things you propose and push would only be of benefit to the wealth few.

 

Watched the video

You claim you are just not accepting what Adam says but you seem to be copying verbatim what he says.

And again we get unsubstantiated assertion’s, either/or mentality and invalid attacks - Adam claims that government should run a voluntary contributions? Giving wealth even more control over it.

He does the same thing you do he makes claims of bribery, but produces no evidence of bribery then uses that claim of bribery to condemn the whole system, that is not a rational argument is making things up.

He thinks that people’s wages at the moment are too high even though the real term wages of the middle and lower classes have on the whole fallen or stagnated, basically he wants to make them poorer which would of course boost the profits of the employers.

 

He didn't say "wages are too high," he's basically saying prices are too high. Without the Federal Reserves system of inflation, the dollars we owned would actually be worth more. If the dollar went up in value, we wouldn't need to continually raise minimum wage.


this point makes alot of sense. We keep printing money, which goes into the hands of the elite, whereas, if we stopped the printing, value of the dollar would go up, and the same wages, would go much further.


btw, adam's views show alot more sensibility and logic than the idea that we can use government, to fix all the problems, that they caused in the first place. Printing money is a good example, but there's plenty others...

 

25


Again you are not addressing the criticisms – telling us that to you the things you believe in make sense and seem logical to you – does not make the logic or sensible – especially when there are outstanding criticisms of you view that you continually refuse to address.

 

I'm sick of you using the phrase "outstanding criticisms."

You know I believe how I do, because I don't trust the Federal Government, based on years and years of them lying and manipulating our citizens into war. Of course those of you who thinks everything government does is "justified" would believe differently than I.

You trust the government to fix everything based on your faith and belief, that more money to Washington DC, means more money for the people, and, I think people should realize it's utterly false. Only a small percentage of spending on "Humanitarian" government programs, actually end up getting to the people, anyway.

Once the government pays all their employees, overhead or, contractors, the prices are much higher than any person or company could pay, thusly, making prices raise to nearly impossible levels. THIS is what happened to our Healthcare industry.

It's my opinion also, that the government knows full well they're hurting us, but, they believe no one will ever catch on, because of the wide-spread assumption, that government spending benefits us as an arbitrary "collective"

 

25

I use it because the criticisms are outstanding – you repeatedly refuse to address them in any rational way and you keep lying about having done so.
Please stop lying and begin answering.

And please stop just repeating your grips about the present political system we all know them by now and many people agree with you on some to one degree or other it’s just that we disagree with your solutions.

The criticisms levelled at those supposed solutions are that they would seem to be all about giving greater power and influence to wealth – been about amongst other things - little or no taxes, little or no regulations on the pursuit of profit, little or no welfare and a government that’s main concern would be the protection of property and wealth.

 

This is why I say Liberals don't listen to any opposing views.


Everything I mentioned is factual, but since you Liberals are so hard- headed, you wont believe it, until you see first hand, that government is totally corrupted.

Until then, it isn't worth arguing with you. Because Government relies on force against peaceful people to exist in the first place. So, although, you don't want to hear why I dislike politicians, however, that contributes to their overall liability. and, although you Liberals love to praise them on the few somewhat "peaceful" things, they took place in, like "building the roads" as an excuse. But, I, on the other hand, believe that they only exist due to force, and, a rhetorical idea, that it is just, because the "collective" (as a whole new person) has. Ie why, does this "collective" have the authority to ban plants. Liberals would have us believe it's because they "care about us," but, really, if the goal was truly getting people off drugs, we would institute rehabilitation instead of prison.

The government is merely a racket, that's in bed with the corporate elite.

 

25

I’m listening and the truth is you lie when you claim that you have addressed the outstanding criticisms in any rational way.

I ask again can you please stop just repeating the same old grips about the present political system we all know them by now and many people agree with you on some to one degree or other it’s just that we disagree with your solutions.

I mean for example

I agree but you should know that since we have already been through the whole drugs issue a number of times - (hell and he says we don’t listen) - and how the left wing approach is different from that of right wing libertarians.

Maybe try reading this -
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=368871

 

25


The criticisms levelled at those supposed solutions are that they would seem to be all about giving greater power and influence to wealth – been about amongst other things - little or no taxes, little or no regulations on the pursuit of profit, little or no welfare and a government that’s main concern would be the protection of property and wealth.