English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

[u s senate committee in 1950s said big business was more powerful than the us govt - eisenhower warning against military-industrial complex - ?kennedy killed for opposing defense budget, fed reserve - robber baron opposition to anti-trust laws - league of nations formed to try to stop arms dealers fomenting wars]

what if there is legal theft? [monopolies, manufactured scarcity, manufactured oversupply of labour, insider trading, capital gains, inheritance, gambling] - money without work is theft [overpay] causing work without money [underpay], causing [righteous] anger, causing violence [war and crime], which must escalate endlessly, leading to nuclear winter [soon, unless we wake]

avarice is a very popular error [ie, false happiness strategy] - legal can mean merely that people are still ignorant of an evil - there had to hav been a time before people understood that a law against murder would be good

overpay = 99% underpay + war + crime, but ppl stll thnk wealth is good

2006-10-08 02:28:38 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Economics

2 answers

The people with the money make the rules, so the rich will always get richer. It would be nice if they considered the poor, as they say they do, but really they don't. When a politician says he wants to help "the little people" all he means is he wants the little people to vote for him. Once he wins his election, he proceeds to ignore them again.

It's sad really.

2006-10-08 02:40:05 · answer #1 · answered by ratboy 7 · 0 0

Yes, there can.

The super-rich and super-powerful have always been in control of law and government. When William of Normandy conquered England, he set up a network of rich and powerful dukes to do just that. They and their descendents stayed in power and wealth until capitalism instead of land became the major source of wealth. Then the new business class became the super-rich, and they and their friends filled the House of Commons as members of the Tory Party, and so they changed the rules to downgrade the House of Lords (where the dukes sat) and transfer power to the Commons (where the new rich sat).

Welcome to the material world, my friend.

2006-10-12 03:14:38 · answer #2 · answered by MBK 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers