The Great Reset

[henry quirk]

there's what you think was said...

Harmonising tax rates between income and capital gains, closing a few loopholes and ending some offshore tax hopping schemes isn't the essence of socialism.

...and what was actually said...

Wealth has become abundant, thanks to capitalism, but it now needs to be more broadly redistributed, as socialists have long called for

[henry quirk]

Is it possible sociopaths and evil folks, in positions of power and authority, might eye the world, and everyone on it, as as theirs?

Is it unreasonable to assume these sociopaths and evil folks, crafty as they must be to assume those positions of power and authority, manipulate culture with the intent of demeaning and reducin' the individual into a cog?

If -- dare I say it -- a cabal of powerful sociopaths and evil folk had a mind to rule the world and render individuals into property, would the world look any different that it does right now?

[Immanuel Can]

So you are saying that there is indeed a quote written by capitalist billionaires that expresses a desire for "universal Socialism", but that you aren't in the mood to back this unrealistic claim up?

Are you mentally ill? Or are you just incapable of reading? I gave you the quote. What's wrong with you?

Never mind. You're clearly hopeless.

I didn't realise you thought you'd already provdied it.

Were you asleep?

It's a bit fluffy,

It's their language, not mine.

Read the rest of what they say. That will fill out the "fluff."

Stop being so "fluffy" yourself.

[FlashDangerpants]

Wealth has become abundant, thanks to capitalism, but it now needs to be more broadly redistributed, as socialists have long called for

Dude, you just did a whole thing about a secret world controlling cabal. That's what Hitler complained about. However being concerned about a thing that Hitler was also concerned about does not make you a nazi unless you specify that they are jews. Being concerned about unequal distribution of wealth among and between nations is not socialism just because socialists are also concerned about it. Unless they specify seizing the means of production and transferring them to the workers.

[FlashDangerpants]

So you are saying that there is indeed a quote written by capitalist billionaires that expresses a desire for "universal Socialism", but that you aren't in the mood to back this unrealistic claim up?

Are you mentally ill? Or are you just incapable of reading? I gave you the quote. What's wrong with you?

Never mind. You're clearly hopeless.

I didn't realise you thought you'd already provdied it. That quote just says "Wealth has become abundant, thanks to capitalism, but it now needs to be more broadly redistributed, as socialists have long called for. In particular, there is an urgent need to recouple the wealth of financial markets with the real economy." It's a bit fluffy, but it certainly doesn't justify accusing them of universal socialism. I thought you said you didn't need to do any interpreting or reading between the lines....

Harmonising tax rates between income and capital gains, closing a few loopholes and ending some offshore tax hopping schemes isn't the essence of socialism.

You realise that the end game here was to get to the bit where you have to explain what the bit about "And they want every person on the planet chipped, tracked and managed...by them." At this rate I can't see us even getting to your properly mad bullshit.

[henry quirk]

Wealth has become abundant, thanks to capitalism, but it now needs to be more broadly redistributed, as socialists have long called for

Dude, you just did a whole thing about a secret world controlling cabal. That's what Hitler complained about. However being concerned about a thing that Hitler was also concerned about does not make you a nazi unless you specify that they are jews. Being concerned about unequal distribution of wealth among and between nations is not socialism just because socialists are also concerned about it. Unless they specify seizing the means of production and transferring them to the workers.

that's all very diverting, I'm sure, but...

there's what you think was said...

Harmonising tax rates between income and capital gains, closing a few loopholes and ending some offshore tax hopping schemes isn't the essence of socialism.

...and what was actually said...

Wealth has become abundant, thanks to capitalism, but it now needs to be more broadly redistributed, as socialists have long called for

[henry quirk]

Is it possible sociopaths and evil folks, in positions of power and authority, might eye the world, and everyone on it, as as theirs?

Is it unreasonable to assume these sociopaths and evil folks, crafty as they must be to assume those positions of power and authority, manipulate culture with the intent of demeaning and reducin' the individual into a cog?

If -- dare I say it -- a cabal of powerful sociopaths and evil folk had a mind to rule the world and render individuals into property, would the world look any different that it does right now?

[Immanuel Can]

You realise that the end game here was to get to the bit where you have to explain what the bit about "And they want every person on the planet chipped, tracked and managed...by them."

IC: Read what they write. They're not shy about saying it.
FD: No.
IC: You really need to read it -- I know you will refuse to believe me, whatever I say. But they say it themselves.
FD: No.
IC: Don't you want to know the truth?
FD: No.
IC: Don't you read?
FD: No.

"Properly mad bullshit" is a good phrase for it -- or crazed megalomania. But it's their "properly mad bullshit." It's they who are talking it up. Go see. Don't trust me...find out for yourself. Go read it.

Never mind. You won't. For some reason, you're not interested in the truth. And nobody can make you.

[henry quirk]

You realise that the end game here was to get to the bit where you have to explain what the bit about "And they want every person on the planet chipped, tracked and managed...by them."

IC: Read what they write. They're not shy about saying it.
FD: No.
IC: You really need to read it -- I know you will refuse to believe me, whatever I say. But they say it themselves.
FD: No.
IC: Don't you want to know the truth?
FD: No.
IC: Don't you read?
FD: No.

"Properly mad bullshit" is a good phrase for it -- or crazed megalomania. But it's their "properly mad bullshit." It's they who are talking it up. Go see. Don't trust me...find out for yourself. Go read it.

Never mind. You won't. For some reason, you're not interested in the truth. And nobody can make you.

It's like a pedo tellin' a parent I'm gonna diddle your kid and the parent sayin' no, I don't believe you...no one is that low and foul. The molester is tellin' dad, up front, what his plans are, and dad won't do diddly 'cept mebbe give the pedo the keys to his house and an invitation to drop by anytime.

[Immanuel Can]

It's like a pedo tellin' a parent I'm gonna diddle your kid and the parent sayin' no, I don't believe you...no one is that low and foul. The molester is tellin' dad, up front, what his plans are, and dad won't do diddly 'cept mebbe give the pedo the keys to his house and an invitation to drop by anytime.

Right on. Either he's determined to be a patsy apologist for the WEC, or he's just trolling. Either way, his persistent refusal to read anything they've written tells you all you need to know about where he's coming from.

[Age]

The guy is unhinged.
Zero education. A drug addict. An alcoholic. Antisemite.
Mother drowned with her John in a boat on the Puget Sound. Brought up by a violent father.
Why would you expect his book to be any good?

Some of the BEST books, messages, or lessons in Life can come from those who have had the HARDEST of upbringings, and even with the LEAST education.

In Fact the BEST TEACHERS in Life, about life and living, come from those with absolutely NO 'education' AT ALL.

Which has ALREADY BEEN PROVED True.

[Age]

Do you have Spotify Henry?

I'm not even sure what that is.

a totally free market, completely choice driven move by consumers to quit purchasing stuff outright and to move to more flexible services.

Based on what I've read so far: none of it seems chosen; all of it seems forced and enforced. Ain't nuthin' in it smells of freedom much less free-market or -enterprise.

WHY do so many of 'you', people, think or BELIEVE that when something 'new', to you, becomes law, is then seen as being 'enforced' upon you, and taking away your 'freedom', but things previously that have been law, are NOT seen as being 'enforced' upon you, let alone are ever even considered as taking your 'freedoms' away, although those things EQUALLY mean that you are actually NOT 'FREE' and REALLY ARE just a 'slave'?

we will have cars that can reliabably drive themselves.

No, you will. I can drive myself just fine.

They will be expensive to own, and it will be a waste to own one if it is unecessarily parked > 95% of the time as cars which cannot drive themselves around typically are.

In-city, parkin' is a problem; in-country, where I am, ain't no problem at all.

But cars which can dive themselves around can drive to wherever the next person with the right app is waiting to get a ride.

Hey, if you wanna rent or lease, or rely on a robot, do so: I own and -- as I say -- I drive myself.

You can still purchase a car if you want to, but the market isn't likely to go in that direction because few will consider it a wise allocation of their income.

Unless rural life goes belly up and everyone moves into a metropolis, that ain't happenin'.

There's no slavery involved.

I disagree: it's all very civilized, sure, but it's no different than Mr. Rilla's set up in veg's freedom thread. A cage is a cage no matter how well-appointed; a pet is a pet no matter how well-treated.

And 'you', "henry quirk", are also a 'pet' in a 'cage'. 'you', however, to be blunt, are too stupid to see 'this', and the cage that 'you' are in for what it is.

[Age]

Read what they say.

They want an end to private ownership, redistribution, and no private property...you literally get to "own nothing," (Their words.) and "rent" (their words again) from the government. This, they call "stakeholder capitalism." Except that it's got no element of capitalism in it, except what the elites themselves get to practice. They also get to keep their property, of course. Everyone else becomes totally government dependent. And this, they call "social justice" and "equity."

Does any of your interpretation depend...

I'm quoting them. See above. Those are their terms.

So my interpretation depends on me having actually read what they say. That puts me way ahead of you, apparently. So you've got some reading to do.

Your INTERPRETATIONS, which are LEADING you COMPLETELY ASTRAY here, I have ALREADY POINTED OUT and SHOWN.

According to "immanuel can's" own "logic", and INTERPRETATION, 'these people', who have an idea and/or plan for "others", allegedly "themselves" have SAID that; "They should NOT be trusted". Which, as can be CLEARLY SEEN here, is an EXTREMELY FAR FETCHED 'conception'.

If you are quoting 'them', then WHERE, EXACTLY? Or, is thee ACTUAL Truth this is YOUR INTERPRETATION.

Now, "immanuel can" are you ABSOLUTELY SURE that it is "them" that is saying 'this'? Are you quoting 'them', or, is it MORE CORRECT, to POINT OUT and SHOW that it is 'you' who is ACTUALLY SAYING that, "These people should NOT be trusted", and NOT 'them' AT ALL?

Is this INTERPRETATION coming from you and NOT what you ACTUALLY READ AT ALL, and NOT a quote of 'theirs' AT ALL EITHER?

'you', people, in the days when this was being written, REALLY did have a 'knack' of DISTORTING and TWISTING 'things' around SO MUCH that what thee ACTUAL Truth IS becomes HIDDEN and, NEARLY, UNSEEN.
Top[/u][/b]

[Age]

You're talking about things about which you, by your own admission, have no personal knowledge. Does any of your cavilling depend on you having read a book?

Clearly not.

I know what stakeholder capitalism means, and it isn't socialism.
https://www.investopedia.com/stakeholde ... sm-4774323

You can consult the dictiionary, of course; but you don't know how THEY are using the term. They're not using that definition. They use it to mean, "taking the fruits of capitalism, and redistributing them Socialistically." Go look at their website, and you'll see.

Of course, this is a thing that they, themselves, have already declined to do with their own vast fortunes. (Let me know when your first cheque them arrives.) They are going to keep their own fortunes...or they could, at this very moment, be dispensing them to the public good. But they are going to hold onto what they have, thank you very much, and redistribute your money instead.

However, you should find out for yourself, instead of aimlessly arguing. It's not charming to discuss a matter with somebody who has determined to remain completely uninformed regarding it. So I invite you to read one of their books, or at least go to their own website and read what they, in their propagandistic jargon, openly admit about themselves. You will find it's none other than I have said.

You wrote and said;

There's no way these lunatics should be trusted...no way. And that's based on what they say about themselves.

So, do you STILL WANT TO CLAIM that they have "openly admit about themselves" and "it's none other than what you have said"?

[Age]

Why?

This...

"The Fourth Industrial Revolution, finally, will change not only what we do but also who we are. It will affect our identity and all the issues associated with it: our sense of privacy, our notions of ownership, our consumption patterns, the time we devote to work and leisure, and how we develop our careers, cultivate our skills, meet people, and nurture relationships. It is already changing our health and leading to a “quantified” self, and sooner than we think it may lead to human augmentation. The list is endless because it is bound only by our imagination... Ubiquitous, mobile supercomputing. Intelligent robots. Self-driving cars. Neuro-technological brain enhancements. Genetic editing. The evidence of dramatic change is all around us and it’s happening at exponential speed."

...sounds like the leash to me. As I say: all of it seems forced and enforced. Ain't nuthin' in it smells of freedom much less free-market or -enterprise.

CDs and vinyl records

Slavery is good cuz you can listen to music just the way you want it.

That makes no sense. Having more choices than before is not the same as salvery.

The house dog, fat & happy, gets his choice of scraps from his master's plate; the wolf, lean & ragged, eats what he can hunt for himself or he goes hungry: one is free, the other is not.

Enjoy them scraps, guy.

Yes, the wolf is FREE. The dog is NOT able to CHOOSE.