It was always an unsustainable demand, but not for those reasons. High incomes necessitate high levels of destruction. Your problem is that you're defining the capitalist economy in terms of the already accrued wealth (dead labour) rather than the right to extract from new wealth set into motion (living labour.) In this sense the frenzied work rhythms of contemporary society have no regard for preserving past, ages old wealth (which would of course be a good thing.)
Attraction
- Thread starter Clinamenic
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aoc is the medium chaos demons anonymous embodied capital fund the irs hardcore exhibitionist therapy healthy and intimate relationships intergovernmental policy jamaican voodoo gang from predator 2 lukaform nothing is ineffable if you try hard enough only five people here can read phallic architecture post-toxic masculinity progressive capitalism tax the rich that spring we lived on bowls of risotto the ambiguous formal education of lukes sister the origins of dissensus thinking your way out of your head unrealized capital gains vaginal architecture
It was always an unsustainable demand, but not for those reasons. High incomes necessitate high levels of destruction. Your problem is that you're defining the capitalist economy in terms of the already accrued wealth (dead labour) rather than the right to extract from new wealth set into motion (living labour.) In this sense the frenzied work rhythms of contemporary society have no regard for preserving past, ages old wealth (which would of course be a good thing.)
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
I can certainly start thinking like a tax evader, yes, because as a systems man I need to have such an ability. It just strikes me as naive otherwise. These people likely have savant tax specialists who can recite statutory literature and do maths off the tops of their heads that I couldn't do with a calculator.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Destruction in the interest of protecting one's assets? I would agree, especially if these people expect their children to surpass them in net worth.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
I refuse to chant "tax the rich" without any real understanding of tax evasion.
lmao yes because profiting from wars is about destroying childrens sandcastles. If it were only that simple!
Yes, but also protection of the US imperialist system.
luka
Well-known member
thats inane
Also destruction of old housing, old buildings in the occurrence of earthquakes, floods, natural disasters, and fires like that at Grenfell. Which are in fact all not so 'natural disasters'
Think about it! It's more profitable to construct shoddy apartments than to create something durable. Even we see this with the construction of phones, computers etc. The principle of less is more is never adhered to.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Let's say the goal is to raise tax rates on the top wealth brackets, in all forms of tax, which I'm not categorically opposed to. "Wealth" being broader than "income" as I understand those terms here, i.e. wealth can be considered to include unrealized capital gains, but then again I don't know the legal definition of wealth - but lets just say it spans everything, including unrealized capital gains, i.e. profit that has not been taken from successful investments.
It would seem right off the bat there are glaring, crystalized issues like those in campaign finance (I personally believe that individuals and/or corporations and/or organizations should not be allowed to make uncapped donations without being transparent about it. I think the free speech arguments here are largely made in bad faith), as well as the IRS funding, as well as the intergovernmental policies about off-shore accounts, and probably other massive issues as well.
How would one go about untying this stuff without being able to think like a tax evader? Like a lobbyist? Like a politician who doesn't want chickens coming home to roost during their term?
It would seem right off the bat there are glaring, crystalized issues like those in campaign finance (I personally believe that individuals and/or corporations and/or organizations should not be allowed to make uncapped donations without being transparent about it. I think the free speech arguments here are largely made in bad faith), as well as the IRS funding, as well as the intergovernmental policies about off-shore accounts, and probably other massive issues as well.
How would one go about untying this stuff without being able to think like a tax evader? Like a lobbyist? Like a politician who doesn't want chickens coming home to roost during their term?
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Yeah this is something I'd like to understand way more, as I'm inclined to believe there are a good deal of empty studio apartments in manhattan that serve not as housing, but as embodied capital, as a tax evasion technique. Grain of salt though, as I couldn't cite any numbers here, which I do think is worth a lot.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Fuck that, I'd rather sort it out.
woops
is not like other people
this is a fact isn't it? same in london. investment properties
And then the workers are forced to invest in the social security company which is in fact chronic insecurity. Tax is a red herring. the state does what it likes with the pot of taxe it has, so yes, you were funding the invasion of Iraq, and yes, in a very technical sense you were supporting tridant.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
I'd rather optimize the fabric of human existence. More people with more free time, less people with more money than they know what to do with.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
I think finance has a role to play, but not the sort of orgiastic and juvenile finance we've seen so far.
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Most progressives seem incapable of thinking capitalistically, which some may see as a virtue, but I see as a liability, as poor pragmatism.
luka
Well-known member
dont be a child