nada

So why am I writing this. I had thoughts in my head, but writing them down doesn't...it seems...no it is self-indulgent. I like reading things that I have written before. I hope that a few people have read a bit and gotten something from it. That is at the back of my head, but to make it my focus would be to think that I have something to say that is more important. The aporia of life, the fact of existence being a denial of some other existence. If you save the fly, you starve the spider. We are all in a constant process of deferral of our moral responsibilities. Myself most certainly included, I bear personal responsibility for the choices I make. Nobody can deny free will or the sovereignty of the self. There is no escaping this fact. Every living thing has a tactical position that they defend and push. If this was not true, these living things would have chosen to stop living. Anyone who can read this, any living thing has a reason for existence that keeps them going, a tactical position that must be secured against the randomness of suffering, and an agenda in order to further secure such illusory safety. Again, identification of all security narratives as false hope does not mean that I have found the true hope. This does not mean that I can see the truth, but only that it seems apparent from the de facto state of reality that the future can never be predicted. Not simply the social activities of complicated life forms, but the entire fabric of reality. The amount humans do not know is staggering, we know god damn nothing about death. We do not comprehend insanity, is it simply socially constructed abnormality? completely biological? completely psychosomatic? permutations of these? Death, sickness, insanity, etc. can happen to any individual at any time. No matter how effective we become at tilting the probabilities in our favor. God does play dice with the fate of the world, every fraction of a second of every blink of an eye trillions of dice are rolled where the stakes are human lives and suffering. Empirically proven systematic ways to shift probabilities lead to the fantasies of immortality and invulnerability for the wealthy ubermensch. The finish line, the winners circle: celebrity. It is not a profession to be on television it is some sort of pseudo-religious ritual. One does not want money anymore, only to have their image reproduced and beamed to the far corners of the world. The reward is their clones spread out, repeating the thoughts and words: making them significant. The american dream is ....cliched. But this is another word for normal.

Vocations are a joke in this dream. Vast swaths of individuals sitting at desks pretending to do work. Their high credit limit gives them the fleeting feeling of celebrity. The feeling flees, because it is being chased with such bloodlust. The ignorance as to the cost: the slavery. The husb/ife the slow (re)production of magistrates, professionals, and land owners. The drugs. Be honest: The drugs. Something to dull the noise that crescendos as years pass. The stress, the isolation, the long hours, the money troubles...the divorce.

Then there is labor. Labor sells the hours of a human's life for gold... Well... you know... metaphorically; literally labor sells the hours of a human's life for fiat currency. But the deal is rigged. The contract was written by the boss's lawyer. The contract is enforced by a jurist who is the boss's BFF. But this is Upton Sinclair shit. Nowadays labor is no longer useful, it is obsolete. A sign of an older paradigm of economic growth. It is not a worthy profession, it is looked down upon. In the same way that smiles' self help gave people canon which legitimized not feeding the poor, the homeless non-people. That you and I see often when we walk in the city (that is any fucking city or town, humans without money to make rent are everywhere). This same mentality affects the working class. This condescension that "they are not doing the best they can considering their tactical positioning" that exemplifies attitudes towards the homeless is now how people look at labor. Which is silly considering the shrinking of the middle class and that the strike-slip fault lines of global laissez-faire capitalism are becoming apparent. The laborer spends a large portion of their time working, but not actually getting paid. In fact, they spend a large portion of their time working, and paying for the privilege to be able to do so. They spend their time and money procuring the correct attire for the environment. They spend the time before punching in waiting to be able to punch in not getting paid.Commuting an hour there and an hour back (if you're lucky). The commute means you pay before you even work: either exorbitant gas prices or overpriced antique public transit. But these are very simple little things. Now that the industrial economy is in its death throes (I do not say this like it is bad, I don't fucking know whats good or bad, just a subjective observation). The service industry. I want you to ask yourself how many people do you actually know and chill with that work in the service industry? If you are young or a minority my money is that the answer is a lot: Bartenders, Waiters/waitresses, cooks, cashiers, landscapers, essentially these are all things that people can easily do for themselves, but they pay a premium to others in order for them to do it for them. I mentioned earlier how the middle class is shrinking. This may seem to be unrelated, but in my opinion there will be a strong correlation. As the middle class shrinks(go into this next) they will have less disposable income. Less disposable income will lead to less consumption of service products: They will just make their own coffee, or their own drink, or mow their own lawn. If this correlation is true, than the service industry will suffer a decline leading to an extended period of high unemployment. I do not know how this will be alleviated, clearly these individuals will seek training and other jobs. But such an extended period of high unemployment, would have other repercussions on the entire economy. But most importantly would further catalyze the dissolution of the middle class. Because the people who utilize the service industry the most are the middle class. I love eating out, getting a delicious plate of food with a friend or two. But I am just passing the service industry paycheck I get to another worker and letting the bosses take a cut. If there was a database of individuals and their skills (free schools and post-crash sites starting to do this) I could just go to the cooks house and trade a service directly for a delicious plate of food. In this fashion there would be no graft given to the bosses. Most other service industry workers are the same way we perform a service others could easily do and we use our disposable income to do the same. Bartenders and waiters/waitresses are the best tippers out there. The service industry keeps itself afloat, because they are not paid a living wage. So two jobs, and your disposable income is the chance to play the role of the wealthy for a short period of time by consuming a service. To express fiat power over another human, to command and to have obeyed. A small taste of sovereignty of the other, a small taste of control, but it costs money. Ironically the people who daily (re)produce the bourgeois ideology of self-help that made homelessness a crime and labor a dirty word will be the same people slandered with it later. The edges of the service industry is where this is clearly evident, but this vicious cycle will spread until it engulfs the entire economy if the rules of our game don't change.

But why would the middle class shrink and the answer is two things, which we should be thinking of as one thing: Transportation and Energy. I even capitalized that shit. Cars. The personal automobile. An entire country constructed around the institution of the personal automobile: the highways, taxes for maintenance, subsidized steel, subisidized auto-industry. A history written by the personal automobile: The suburbs, white flight, property, status, fashion. A future of blood in the name of the personal automobile: Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia. In order to defend its tactical positioning the United States must ensure access to energy. Whoever has the energy can divvy it up for political allegiance. I'm not saying its a simple handshake thing, but Japan isn't thinking about invading the mainland for oil anymore. Its the energy stupid. And if a country spends such a vastly disproportionate amount of money on military spending like the United States does then they can afford to "control" the oil fields. As long as massive amounts of money are funneled to the military industrial complex then the oil fields can be occupied. As long as the oil fields can be occupied then the United States can maintain global pre-eminence. This is how our security is constructed. The security of our overconsumption. The bliss of never having to build a civilization that can fly. Even if such security is not an illusion, it is predicated upon the insecurity of others.

Labor is not the correct translation for how the products we consume are made. Our clothes, our shoes, our electronics, our everything. They are made by slaves. I will not say that there are certain places where children are and putting children to work is bad. The united States was putting children to work years ago, who are we to chastise when it is our own fault. We chastise, because in that way we can deny our responsibility albeit ever so slight. We know that we buy shit those slave children make, you and I know we share responsibility. But if we can do a two minutes hate every once in awhile. Kathie lee, nike, etc. Then we can ignore our complicity, we ignore the fact that it was not a few bad apples and we ignore the fact that there might be a solution. We ignore the fact it is not just children. There are more slaves today than at any other point in history. Let me give you the meta picture: There are two ways to develop an economy today. Number one is to protect your industry, because they may be new and can't compete yet on the world market. This runs the risk of making an inferior product and inferior industrial infrastructure in the long run, because of lack of competition. But in developing nations the only indigenous entity with the money/credit to build industry is the state. If a country wishes to maintain control of their own natural resources or control of their own product they have very few options. Most of the time this import substitution industrialization does end up creating products that can't compete in the world market. The other option (to develop while maintaining sovereignty) instead of industrialization is to produce a cash crop or natural resource. This can create jobs and infrastructure for an extended period of time, but there are downfalls. First of all if a country is selling off its natural resources they are being used to create a different product. The amount of money and jobs that would be created by an industry that created an end product would be substantially more, but would have the same pitfalls mentioned before. Nothing is infinite, eventually the natural resources will dwindle and what will a developing economy rely on then? Where will all the laid off workers go? These are just internal problems. The main problem with a cash crop or natural resource is that it is all you have. If you don't sell this fucking copper, your country will go bankrupt and they'll overthrow you! But there is one country that buys most of just about everything. The United States. So who do you think decides the price of copper?

*ring Ring*
United States: Hello?
Country A: Hey Sam whats up? oh boy it is your lucky day, have I got a shit ton of copper for you!
United States: O rly? You selling it for what 10 bucks a ton?
Country A: Haha! ya right, you old sly fox. Same as last year 15 a ton.
United States: ouch. See the thing is I just got off the phone with Country B and she just said that she had copper for 12 a ton.
Country A: Country b!? those assholes? You know you can't get better quality than my copper Sam.
United States: I mean that is an awful lot of mon-Click- oh one second I have another call. Hello?
Country C: Sam Listen, you drive a hard bargain but I'll do 9.
United States: One second -click- That is Country C on the other line telling me he'll sell them to me for 8 bucks a ton, if you don't make a better offer I'm hanging up...

and on and on.

Its called a race to the bottom. So what ends up happening you ask? Countries run out of resources, their currency defaults, there is a revolution, there is a slump in commodity prices and: enter the IMF. The IMF believes the only way to economic growth is through foreign direct investment (FDI). Essentially they want to make the country in to a stock and sell it on wall street. In order to do so a few conditions have to be satisfied: privatization of nationalized industry; massive loans with interest rates and payment schedules everybody knows can't be met; and the transfer of sovereignty to economist-priests. But why would they do that then? Two reasons: 1. Its the boss who signs the document, if shit goes down he'll just ship off to the caymans. 2. The only other choice is to disqualify themselves from the world economy.

One resource that does not suffer from all these predicaments is humanity. Humans are being shit out by the billion. Developing nations just as any nation have ample human resources. In the same way the proletarianization of the american immigrant took place global capitalism spreads with CIA death squads instead of pinkertons. Humans are not given a living wage, in order to survive their children must work. Everything is so fragile the second an income producer becomes sick or injured their security collapses. Why don't they quit? you ask. Why don't YOU quit? The same reason I don't quit I think: because I don't know any other way to live. This is how I've figured out how to manage so far. In same way a simple narrative of a farm family that had two sons. Meaning the farm was split in half. Maybe one of them sold his to share croppers, maybe one of them let it go to waste, maybe one of them sold it to a big landowner, maybe one of them sold it to the other to have enough land to actually farm and left for the city to seek wage work. Why did he go to the city? because that is where the narratives say is opportunity, in the same way they lied to american immigrants it was not opportunity it was fresh meat for the grinder. New humans to subordinate to some great inhuman machinery of wealth manufacture.



Last time I checked 85% of the world lived below what the United States calls the poverty line, which is somewhere around 18.5 I think.



But this is only pseudo-economics. I did not even touch upon the state of the police state. And even more topical I didn't even mention that eventually we're going to run out of oil. We need to build a civilization that can fly.

World Government

There are certain points in time when individuals seem to come together. In 1848 there was a revolution in Greece to unify and in the same year the Communinst Manifesto was published. Later on Germany would unify under Bizmarck, their language being their strong connection. Around this time Giuseppe was unifying Italy. There are periods of organization and periods of splintering in world history. Today we are in a splintering period with the exception of one entity. Throughout the world we see “ethnic conflict” individuals who identify with their race as their most important characteristic. Just like in Italy and Germany where language was one of the most important characteristics. We also see religious violence is widespread. We must come together if we are to survive the coming shock from peak oil and the destruction of the enviornment.
The European Union is the only exception to this overall movement towards splintering. The EU which started as a coal and steel agreement between Europeans countries to avoid protectionist clashes that often have spilled over in to trade wars and then actual warfare.This became the European Community and with the establishment of the Euro it is now the European Union. The European Union does not have a standing army and therefore will never be a sovereign supra-national body. The overall purpose of the EU was to provide a system of economic cooperation between neighbors which would keep good relations and improve the economy. One of the other results is to provide a counterbalance to the US Dollar. Which the Euro was wildly successful at achieving and the US dollar is now in a tail spin, because of the debt, imperial overstrech, and tax cuts. Without a standing army the EU will never be the world government.
The EU is not a contender. There are only two contenders for the title of world government: United Nations and Pax Americana.
The UN scenario is ridiculous. Member nations send their troops in to the UN and their money. The thought that the UN could become a world government itself is idiotic. The only way the UN could do this is if the EU used it as a mask and therefore finally had a standing army OR if the US used the UN as a mask to carry out its’ activities. The EU scenario is farfetched though, because the US donates the majority of money that the UN receives.
The only possible scenario is that the United States Empire/Pax Americana becomes the supranational body. The “ender’s game” book series by Orson Scott Card describes an earth unified under a world government simply called “The Hegemon”.
This is an interesting viewpoint to consider. I believe Scott purposely chose the word “Hegemon” to show that in this alternate future there is an “official” world government, while also showing that there has always been a world government.
The idea of Hegemonic power is nothing new. The world goes through different periods of power. Multipolar, Biopolar, and Unipolar are the three different types of world government organization. Britain is the most recent empire to come down. Brought down mostly by a single non-violent individual who crippled their economy and reputation. I put the fall of pax britannica in 1949 when they ran from India with their tail between their legs. Before that time Britain was the Unipolar world power, Britain was in fact the ‘world government’.
So to return back to our scenarios I think it becomes obvious the only possible way to establish a world government would be through Pax Americana. This is where many become deluded by religious texts rather than focus on political theory. When leaders in the US have talked about “new world order” they speak of ‘new world’..........order. They are using a euphemism for American Empire, American Hegemony, United States world government.
So we understand there is no scenario that is feasible for the UN or EU to become the world government. There is only one feasible scenario at this point and that is that Pax Americana the uni-polar hegemon could be the world government.
The next question is of course: Has the world government already been established?
My answer is yes. The US had already established itself as the hegemon in 1991, since then it’s influence has been spreading to all corners of the globe.
Which brings me to my conclusion: World government is good, if the people choose it. World government is bad if it is fascist and forced down people’s throats as it is today.
The individuals who focus on conspiracy theories involving world governments are victims of the irrational stimuli we know as “the bible”. They also distract from decrying our current world government as evil. All you idiots waiting for the UN to become the world government: WAKE UP! There is a world government RIGHT NOW, the ‘new world’ has taken over everything. All you idiots do is distract from real problems that are happening right now. Your anti-communist obsessions and your ridiculously childish delusions of grandeur and persecution. SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Why don’t you fucking idiots do some real research and writing, rather then quote barryfucking goldwater about the massive communist conspiracy.
In conclusion:We have all heard about your conspiracy theory and the time we spent reading about it would have been much more productive had we spent it masturbating.
You wanna hate world government, hate the one that is currently in place.
In ‘Valis’ Dick is confronted with a caricature of Nixon and McCarthy. The individual named Ferris F. Fremont rants and raves about a secret communist conspiracy. He has numbers of how many members are in the group and states at any second they are prepared to stage a coup. Well hey, people like democracy don’t they?So the obvious reaction is: ‘rally around the individual who seems to be protecting us from the threat’.The name of this group that Ferris manufactured the conspiracy theory about is ‘Aramchek’.
Dick’s response: If there is an Aramchek, Ferris is in on it.

The US exacerbates underdevelopment for their own self-interest (International Political Economy or how globalization will fuck 85% of the world)

85% of the world lives below the poverty line.

The economic gap between rich and poor is growing.

The US's largest employer "Wal-Mart", owned by the Walton Family one of the richest families in the US, does not let employees organize and thus does not pay them for overtime, gouges the living wage people need, and allows many terminations without just cause.

The WTO and IMF continue their rampage through developing countries. Every developing country in history has used nationalization of industry and protectionism of infant industry to foster growth. This is sometimes called "Import Substitution Industrialization". This model of International Political economy does not have good long term benefits, it will end up creating industry that is not competitive internationally, but it can help build infrastructure in a less developed country. What the WTO or IMF do is offer billions (or trillions if you remember the IMF's loan to Russia back in the day that Trillions of dollars just well........disappeard!!! AND WAS FOUND LATER BEING LAUNDERED THROUGH THE BANK OF NEW YORK!!!!) to a nation's "leaders", these elites that run these countries that have much wider economic gaps than developed countries, and convince the middle class it is in their benefit to borrow large sums of money. So there is a ton of money all of a sudden in the government and it follows with massive foreign direct investment from as Friedman calls them "The electronic herd". This is good right? Won't this will help nations that are largely un-industrialized and not prepared to be competitive in the world market?
The problem is these underdeveloped countries CANNOT compete with the world market so they sink when "free trade" is instituted. OK lets concede for a few paragraphs that what the WTO and IMF push on people is truly free trade and lets discuss the effects.
A country that does not have competitive goods will fail in a free market economy, if a country is young with infant industry then they have no chance competing with the North Atlantic countries.
So how do they sell their products?
There is a term that is used that can refer to federalism or a monopolized free market: a race to the bottom. The argument here is that if the United States(worlds largest consumer[the customer you want to have really really badly]) asks for some bauxite or copper or rubber now lets say there are 5 developing countries that sell these three different raw materials. Country A offers Bauxite for (I apologize for making numbers up but I do not know current market value of these materials) lets say 20 dollars a unit. The US then goes to country B and says "We got country A over here offerin' us 20 dollars a unit." So country B says 19 dollars per unit. By the time we get to country E its 16 dollars a unit, so the US goes back to Country A tells them who Country E offers at 16 and they offer at 15. This is because all developing countries desperately want the US for instance to buy their materials, because we are such a massive consumer of said materials. So to lose the US as a partner would be catastrophic for your country(even worse than selling your raw materials for half of what they are worth).
So we are left with underdeveloped countries, which are underdeveloped, because of the "race to the bottom" North Atlantic countries create to benefit themselves. So the monopoly here is in the hands of the consumer between the US, Britain, Germany, France, and maybe a few smaller world powers like Brazil, Japan, and China.
WAIT THATS NOT A MONOPOLY YOU JUST LISTED MANY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES!
Remember the WTO? thats the organization these countries created a large forum in which all the countries of the organization automatically give new nations "Most Favored Nation" trading status(a status that means you are entitled to the minimum amount of protectionism as defined by whatever nation you trade with which has the least trade barriers).
So we cannot really call a monopoly of consumers that intend to create a race to the bottom as free trade. Its like we had a huge head start and now we force all developing nations instead of adoping the ISI model from above, and instead adopt the Export Led Industrialization(ELI) strategy. The ELI's biggest downfall is the race to the bottom which I explained above. So the United States of America through the WTO is essentially forcing countries to become based on a "cash crop" type system, to avoid a race to the bottom a country must find their own "niche" and only produce that one product or material. This way we end up forcing countries to mine all their own raw materials and natural resources AND GIVE IT TO US FOR LESS THAN MARKET VALUE!!!! Soon these underdeveloped countries will run out of raw resources and they will have no infrastructure of industry or agriculture to fall back on. These countries will only put a drag on the world economy hurting our children in the future.
Whats the alternative you say?
An international trade agreement based on human rights. Countries like Saudi Arabia that behead individuals in public squares will have trade barriers placed upon them. Countries like China that have had above ground nuclear tests after the test ban treaty will be punished through tariffs. We can also discourage foreign direct investment(FDI) through governmental taxes on certain regimes: If you wanna invest in Pinochet it will cost you more, if you want to invest in Milosevic you have to pay a higher tax, or if you want to support Saudi royals it will cost you extra. This would not be hard, in fact it would be much easier than it is now, but we as Americans would have to be prepared to pay a few extra pennies for our consumption, because the price of raw materials will return to its real market price after the consumer monopoly is deconstructed.
1. Countries that engage in Genocidal actions will have trade barriers making it more expensive for them to sell to the US and making it more expensive for people within our country to buy these products. .
2. Countries that engage in pre-emptive warfare(This is in a world where the US has not lost its mind because of the murders on 9/11, I see this kind of world in my generations future) will face protectionist barriers.
3. Countries that participate in the proliferation of WMD, any testing of WMD(this is in a world where the US signed the CTBT, again something that we may do sometime in the future), or the use of WMD will face trade sanctions.
4. Countries that engage in blatant violations in human rights. Organizations such as Red Cross, Amnesty international, and the UN will keep us informed about this actions.

The US could use its' status as the worlds largest consumer to the benefit of hard working underdeveloped countries and to the detriment of countries that scoff at human rights. For the benefit of all humanity.

These previous arguments remember are based on a concession of the point that WTO is free trade, but as I will elaborate further here this is far from the truth.

The IMF which is another of the three organizations(are they NGO's(non-governmental organziatinons) or IGO's(inter-governmental organization? You tell me) that make up the World Bank.
The IMF provides loans on a massive scale to "stabilize currency" this is to help balance the world economy. These are very admirable ends, but the means are devious.
If you have seen the movie "The Corporation" you are familiar with the privatization of water in Honduras. The government because it was beholden to corporate interests by taking the large IMF loan was required to follow some of the stipulations in the loan.
Now think for a second how much a leader of this country cares that he borrowed a trillion dollars and has no idea how his country is going to pay it back. If worse comes to worse, he gets on a plane and meets up with his friends who he helped fuck his own country(large business leaders). So the elites in this country take their graft off the top of the loan and then disburse it to the various agencies and organizations that the Stipulations within the contract tell you to. Borrowing for these leaders means a few extra million in YOUR OWN POCKET. Borrowing for the citizens means indentured servitude to the economic elite which takes the form of the WTO consumer monopoly. As we have seen in the past the real pets of FDI are not people who truly represent the people like Lula or Chavez, they are people like Pinochet and the Shah, or Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan. These are the people who the US financiers give money to.
The most important obvious violation of political values is the loss of sovereignty. Ever hear those seperatists/confederates/militiamentypes/hate-taxes-more-than-death-of-family-member crowd talking about how the UN violates their sovereignty? Well whatever argument they have I can't even articulate, because the UN causes absolutely NO loss of sovereignty for the US we just ignore the UN when it asks us to do things that we don't want, same thing with the international criminal court.
In these situations though, the developing nation is forced to enact economic policies as they are laid out in the loan. So for instance Honduras had to privatize water AND MAKE RAIN WATER ILLEGAL!!! This is so a United States corporation could then sell them their water at a profit, this ended up costing a third of a day's work for these people JUST TO HAVE WATER FOR THEIR FAMILY IN THE 21ST CENTURY!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is a direct violation of sovereignty which was okayed by the political elite of said country. This is the situation which makes me recall the way Zach DeLaRocha always refers to these elites and corporations as vultures stealing change from already impoverished people. It is a disgusting inhumane act privatizing water in an underdeveloped country. CERTAIN GOODS NEED TO BE NATIONALIZED BECAUSE THEY ARE HARD TO EARN PROFITS WITH BUT PROVIDE A GOOD TO THE PUBLIC, WHY THE HELL ELSE WOULD WE PAY TAXES!!!!!!!!

For instance people call this operating "at a loss" I just wanted to apply this to one industry and one industry only, because no one ever does. (I'm kind of proud of this thought process haha, go ahead make fun of the guy who is skeptical about all the money we pay on the military) THe military industrial complex has been operating at a loss since 1776. We only tolerate this, because it keeps our country safe, WHY CAN'T WE DO THE SAME THING WITH HEALTH CARE???!!! Keep it around because there are MILLIONS without health care RIGHT NOW!!! Also we can stop privatizing prisons, this is disgusting that these stocks are wall street pets, the real money is not in caging and dehumanizing people for long periods of time the profit comes on the market, because all these people know the Prison Industrial Complex will only grow(because these individuals support the drug war and mandatory minimum/sentencing guildines, these policies will continue to drive incarceration rates higher and higher until there are more black men in prison than college.....wait....this is already true.......and there are 2 million prisoners now???) Especially at a time when an individual who still believes in Reagonomics and even a supports a more radical version comes in to power and the economy goes to shit like right now, the incarceration rate will climb faster under these conditions.

Poverty will always be with us, it will always be the second worst scourge of humanity behind war(if you evaluate war close enough you will find that war is genocide and genocide war, only people usually surrender in war, genocide remove the possibility of surrender for a certain population and thus war continues until an entire demographic/part of the gene pool lays dead). I am not advocating socialism, communism, Marxism, or income redistribution. I do know that widening the economic gap is bad for us and bad for our children as well as immoral. I do also know that lessening the economic gap is humane and ethical; and will have great long term benefits. So when you see a policy that prima facie supports the cause of widening the economic gap as a moral end in and of itself you will not be confused by the pundits and you will reject evil on face. Examples: The abolishment of the estate tax(a tax that was encouraged by Jefferson to stop the advent of an aristocratic society). The lowering or abolishment of capital gains tax. The lowering or abolishment of Dividend taxes. The lowering or abolishment of the upper classes tax percentage by substantial amounts while throwing the middle class a bone of a few decimal percentage points. Abolishment of higher education subsidies at state and federal levels. flat taxes or regressive taxation systems. Most efforts at privitzation only benefit one group and that is the 1% that owns 50% of the stocks, NEVER forget that there is a small minority with most of the money. No I don't want to take it and redistribute it I just don't want to see their majority share grow so large it paralyzes the other 95% of the population with poverty.

Ask yourself: Has our country done anything you can recall in the past 20 years FOR the working poor of this country?
All I see is the opposite and if you said "welfare" you're wrong, policies have centered around "welfare reform", which is hill-speak for abolishment.

1% OF THE UNITED STATES OWNS 50% OF THE STOCK.
And if you're that guy who says that type of shit, NO I am not a Marxist or an advocate of revolution, I just disagree with the United State's view that widening the economic gap is a moral good.

-Jimothy J. Jones

With this mic device I spit nonfiction
Who got tha power
This be my question
Tha mass or the few In this torn nation?
Tha priest tha book or tha congregation?
Tha politricks who rob and hold down your zone?
Or those who give tha thieves tha key to their homes?
Tha pig who's free to murder one Shucklak
Or survivors who make a move and murder one back?
-Rage Against the Machine "Mic Check"