DaoDeMings Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 18 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said: Unfortunately, I think it's darker than that. I've looked down into the abyss, and there is no genuine "seeking" among these people you mention. Most of them don't really know "hard times," not in any historically meaningful way. They're willfully ignorant, and they like to hurt people. There have been enough studies of ordinary Germans and Vichy French citizens from the Second World War era to know that if given half a chance, people will steal from their neighbors and murder them. Just like that. There is only one protection: the law. This is why attacks on the law are actually by far the most dangerous feature of far right political developments. We need to see lawlessness as the lethal threat it is. I'm not sure I agree with your analysis of human behaviour, but it's interesting. Regarding the law, what if the law is wrong? What about laws that are enacted by the far right? Or laws that already exist to uphold the privilege of the wealthy or the elite? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 39 minutes ago, DaoDeMings said: https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/ This is slightly out of date and of course doesn't directly apply, as Bezos is American, but it illustrates that there is an extortionate amount of money out there. And most of it is sitting around doing nothing. I did some Googling as you kindly suggested and it seems that there is in fact quite a lot of money to be had by taxing the extortionately wealthy. Not that this magically solves all of our problems, but it's certainly a means of improving things and kickstarting programs that can lead to long-term prosperity, such as investing in education. Or is that too extreme an idea these days? The only taxes we have available are income tax and transactional taxes like capital gains. Neither of which will work on the "super rich" because they don't have salaries and they don't sell their assets. So yes on paper there is wealth there but you need global changes in taxation to tax wealth. Something I've repeatedly said is needed on threads in this forum. Still doesn't change the fact there is no way to tax the super rich here to fund anywhere near the scale of the 2019 Corbyn manifesto. Which is the point I've made. This is why extremes like that are rejected enough masses by the electorate. Why Tories as in for near destruction because they allowed an extremist in Truss to wreck the economy for 50 days and damage the reputation of the country. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaoDeMings Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 22 minutes ago, CVByrne said: The only taxes we have available are income tax and transactional taxes like capital gains. Neither of which will work on the "super rich" because they don't have salaries and they don't sell their assets. So yes on paper there is wealth there but you need global changes in taxation to tax wealth. Something I've repeatedly said is needed on threads in this forum. Still doesn't change the fact there is no way to tax the super rich here to fund anywhere near the scale of the 2019 Corbyn manifesto. Which is the point I've made. This is why extremes like that are rejected enough masses by the electorate. Why Tories as in for near destruction because they allowed an extremist in Truss to wreck the economy for 50 days and damage the reputation of the country. So how does necessary change happen? Are we not at the point now where we need to begin challenging fundamental imbalances that are sending us down a road to ruin? I welcome more stability under Starmer but nothing will fundamentally change, and issues such as climate change will just get kicked down the road for someone else to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted June 9 VT Supporter Share Posted June 9 31 minutes ago, DaoDeMings said: I'm not sure I agree with your analysis of human behaviour, but it's interesting. Regarding the law, what if the law is wrong? What about laws that are enacted by the far right? Or laws that already exist to uphold the privilege of the wealthy or the elite? Law vs morality was probably the most fascinating thing I studied at university and leans heavily into this area. It's why having 3 true branches or democracy is so important, to try and limit one branch overstepping. However, even this is far from perfect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobsons Choice Posted June 9 VT Supporter Share Posted June 9 Failure to remember the lessons our ancestors fought for, means we are doomed to repeat them, unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted June 9 Moderator Share Posted June 9 2 hours ago, chrisp65 said: I’m not sure that stacks up at all. If a far right party believed in xenophobic racist policies, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, annexation of land and the diminution of rights for minorities and got voted in to power, they would no longer be far right? Nah. Might get a chance to find out in France in a few weeks if the soon to be centrist Le Pen wins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted June 9 VT Supporter Share Posted June 9 (edited) 2 hours ago, DaoDeMings said: What about Well, when I write law, I do mean law, as I'm sure you do, too, right? Law that undermines natural law, in the way you're naturally worried about, as far as I'm concerned, probably isn't law, so "laws" of the far right—if it truly is the far right—might be superficially deemed "law," but that doesn't make them the real thing. In the American South, Martin Luther King Jr demonstrated all this, for example, in attacking Jim Crow laws. Jim Crow was "law" in name only and simply a vestige of profound racial injustice. It wasn't law. It was racism. Laws that criminalise human migration or "Otherise" the vulnerable aren't laws, as far as I'm concerned. They're fear and abuse. Even if there are police enforcing racism, for example, that doesn't make it law. I think most people actually do know this, too, even the police. The power of the law isn't some nominal label or trivial procedure. Laws usually represent community consensus with added checks and balances. Law is the very best of humanity. It's my belief that English folk got it more or less right 800 years ago with Magna Carta. The bits on "ancient liberties" and due process are some of the most beautiful and—to my mind—God-given (or humane, if you prefer no gods) phrases committed to recorded human history. But writing Magna Carta didn't make everyone magically obey it, nor finish the work of justice, as your question suggests. On a lighter note, I think the amazing English actually anticipated Donald Trump with Magna Carta. He's our 21st century King John -- he really just is. Edited June 9 by Marka Ragnos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted June 9 VT Supporter Share Posted June 9 King John got a bad rap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted June 10 VT Supporter Share Posted June 10 7 hours ago, mjmooney said: King John got a bad rap. His advisor was a snake though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuwabatake Sanjuro Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 12 hours ago, sidcow said: Nah. It's a bit like Andrew Tate. You could probably draw a direct line between his fanbois and the young hard right. Yeah I was looking at the twitter page of a young Irish Freedom Party(a party fully aligned with British fascists) candidate who unfortunately got elected councillor in Dublin and he is a big fan of the Tates. It is going to be a major problem with how many young men have been radicalised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 (edited) 14 hours ago, DaoDeMings said: So how does necessary change happen? Are we not at the point now where we need to begin challenging fundamental imbalances that are sending us down a road to ruin? I welcome more stability under Starmer but nothing will fundamentally change, and issues such as climate change will just get kicked down the road for someone else to deal with. We have to, if we do not reform this imbalance we will only see a further rise in disaffected population. This will give rise to more extremist views as more and more people in particularly the young are disadvantaged. We managed globally to get agreements on Corporate tax where companies were avoiding tax with a global minimum of 15% now. Companies can't avoid making profits so this approach ensures they're taxed. When it comes to super wealthy people. I've stated before they do not have income and they do not sell assets to be taxed. They just amass wealth and get lines of credit secured against the wealth. It's where Private Banks give them what amounts to loans and they pay off the interest on those only. Their assets grow in value and this is just a tax free way of living. Wealth is very complicated to value and find let alone tax. It requires Europe and America to work together on such a thing. 1% annual Wealth tax on the top 1% of the US would bring in 174bln extra per year which is about 6% of the total US Tax revenue. We need to move to a system where wealth is declared and your taxes and you can offset one Vs the other. So if your wealth tax is higher than your income tax you pay the difference. This way people are not double taxed in the middle band for having income and wealth. It makes it fair that people are paying. The only way is to update an outdated tax system via global Reform. Edited June 10 by CVByrne 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 The centre has held in Europe. The far right made big strides in Germany and France but in the European Parliament the EPP gained seats. When taken with the centre left, Green and Liberal block you are looking at over 400 MEPs out of 720. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 13 hours ago, bickster said: Might get a chance to find out in France in a few weeks if the soon to be centrist Le Pen wins You seem to still fail to grasp the simple basics of how elections work as it doesn't suit your narrative. Le Pen's party won't win a majority of seats. They only managed 30% of the vote in European elections which are always used as a protest vote. 2 years ago they got 18.68% of the vote. They won't win a majority in the vote and they won't win a majority in a two round runoff because they won't pick up the second ballot votes the way the more moderate parties do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 (edited) 3 hours ago, Kuwabatake Sanjuro said: Yeah I was looking at the twitter page of a young Irish Freedom Party(a party fully aligned with British fascists) candidate who unfortunately got elected councillor in Dublin and he is a big fan of the Tates. It is going to be a major problem with how many young men have been radicalised. The big story of the Irish election is the fact that the centre parties have held. Good elections for Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, the Labour Party making a comeback, the Social Democrats doing well, the Greens not doing as badly as expected. Part of the problem perhaps is that media in some countries seem to amplify this idea that the far right is doing better than it is (yes UK, I am looking at you!) Edited June 10 by Captain_Townsend 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 26 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said: The big story of the Irish election is the fact that the centre parties have held. Good elections for Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, the Labour Party making a comeback, the Social Democrats doing well, the Greens not doing as badly as expected. Part of the problem perhaps is that media in some countries seem to amplify this idea that the far right is doing better than it is (yes UK, I am looking at you!) The issue is what is far left and right is hard to understand. In Ireland the vote was Sinn Fein supporters moving to vote for the Freedom Party. It's hard to pin down what is what other than "anti establishment and populist". Votes going from what would be left of the estimated parties to right of them. I think in the US a lot of Democratic party voters in rust belt became big Trump supporters. It's hard to pin down and categorise people correctly into their voting group let's say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 While East Germany and parts of France seems to aking for 1939 in France and DDR in East Germany, at the same time as living in the most prosperous time period of both their countries is just frigthening. The AfD was essentially undressed as Putin-shills only a month ago where several high ranking members were found to be sending info to Russia, yet they still got this many votes. People are stupid, even more so now that they get trapped by social media algorithms. I think the EU needs to have a good look at Facebook and X in particular who seem cesspools full of propaganda in every direction. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted June 10 Moderator Share Posted June 10 1 hour ago, CVByrne said: You seem to still fail to grasp the simple basics of how elections work as it doesn't suit your narrative. Le Pen's party won't win a majority of seats. They only managed 30% of the vote in European elections which are always used as a protest vote. 2 years ago they got 18.68% of the vote. They won't win a majority in the vote and they won't win a majority in a two round runoff because they won't pick up the second ballot votes the way the more moderate parties do. Yeah its like you don't even understand the first word in a sentence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 Exactly how super wealthy would you need to be to move your land and properties to another tax jurisdiction? No point in chasing the bank account, it’s much harder to shift Hampshire or Kensington on a spreadsheet or in a jet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 1 hour ago, magnkarl said: While East Germany and parts of France seems to aking for 1939 in France and DDR in East Germany, at the same time as living in the most prosperous time period of both their countries is just frigthening. The AfD was essentially undressed as Putin-shills only a month ago where several high ranking members were found to be sending info to Russia, yet they still got this many votes. People are stupid, even more so now that they get trapped by social media algorithms. I think the EU needs to have a good look at Facebook and X in particular who seem cesspools full of propaganda in every direction. AfD got 15.9% of the votes. I think people are not actually looking at the numbers just focusing on the hype from media. You also need to factor in people protest vote more in European elections than they do in real National elections so the real vote share is lower than 15% of people who fully support them. It seems a reasonable number of a population to back and extreme party like that. It's still fringe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 56 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Exactly how super wealthy would you need to be to move your land and properties to another tax jurisdiction? No point in chasing the bank account, it’s much harder to shift Hampshire or Kensington on a spreadsheet or in a jet. Land and property is just one form of wealth store. You can just put everything into gold for example or oil futures or whatever. Also it's difficult to accurately value assets like big properties etc. So not easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts