«12. . .240241242243244245246. . .270271»
My tax rate is now below 2%. My goal is to reduce it to zero.
Xyanth, Imren, New Nordrlond, and Zelft
Most "media fact checkers" told us the Chinese Virus came from a wet market in Wuhan, China. For the last frakin' year, anyone that suggested it escaped from the lab in Wuhan was slapped down, called a liar, labeled a conspiracy theorist, etc. Now we are finding out the original patient zero(s) were sick lab workers who went to the hospital and a were out with the rest of the city population.
Media fact checkers are merely the realization of George Orwell's 1984.
The proof is in the numbers. There are counties in swing states with 97%+ registration rates of their over 18 population. And in those counties, 96% of those registered voted.
You said you are not American, so the significance of these numbers may be lost on you. The fact is that doesn't happen in this nation. We have never had those kind of voter registration numbers. That kind of turnout doesn't happen here.
There are other anomalies as well.
—That magic transfer of votes that happened right around 4:00 a.m. eastern time. A transfer that occurred in numerous states simulataneously.
—Ballots arriving in unsecured containers, or arriving in containers that were not ballot boxes.
—Vote counting being conducted with no poll watchers present.
—Millions of ballots for Biden only. No votes on any of the races or issues farther down the ballots in nine key states.
—Unattended ballot collection boxes.
—Thousands of ballots submitted in the names of dead or incapacitated persons. We are talking people voting who have been in a coma for over a year.
—Thousands more absentee ballots counted than were printed.
Did we wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Or did someone take your donut away?
Compare what Trump did to what Biden is doing, look at the results. Then tell me how it doesn't make any difference. I am soooooooooooo not getting this.
I noticed that. I'm thinking something from Atlas Shrugged.
=
Good.
Xyanth and Zelft
New banner is up. With that new banner comes a new poll. Was Orwell a poet or a prophet?
Governments are using "1984" as an instruction manual, instead of the warning it was meant to be.
Xyanth, New Nordrlond, and Zelft
Any Austrian Economists here?
Just real world economists. See Henry Hazlitt's book "Economics In One Lesson."
Ah yeah, just the title of the book represents Capitalism.
That book is the fast food of all economic books because it's less than 250 pages long, it is pleasant to read and written with a very clean, analytical, polished and simple english. It's a book to maximize the learning curve of our brains in the shortest and surest way. Producing the most efficient outcome of knowing what's necessary with the least amount of mental labour require.
I think it should be sold in Happy Meals, if not a kids version can still fit in. i think it suits well with the fried potatoes. So it smells like Capitalism too! Yummy!
I prefer Gesellian economics though. It explains why California, while it's one of the most productive and richest states, that same productivity is eaten up away from Land-Rent cost enriching a few people.
''let us consider a hypothetical case: let’s say a landlord has 2 plots of land of equal area, which he rents out for agriculture. Plot 1 happens to be more fertile than Plot 2 and yields two times as much with the same amount of work and same amount of fertilizer. Or expressed differently, cost per unit is ½ on Plot 1 relative to Plot 2. So let’s say Plot 1 produces 100 sacks of potato and Plot 2 produces 50 for the same cost of 100$ in labor and fertilizer. That means production cost per sack for Plot one is 1$ and for Plot 2 is 2$. It seems logical that Farmer on Plot 1 should be able to sell his produce twice as cheap as the farmer on Plot 2, right? Wrong. It just so happens that the Landlord is quite aware of the difference in the fertility and is charging twice the rent for the plot that is twice as fertile. This holds true for all Resource Gathering Operations (RGO): the more productive the land, the higher the rent. It is similar with Industrial Centers (IC) and Centers of Commerce (CoC), though deciding factors are roads, human resources and proximity to a CENTER. The CENTER could be a nation’s capital, a shipping port, a major railroad hub, a scientific/artistic Mecca...etc. What above paragraph means for population in general, is that wares reach market place carrying the same production-cost tag. That tag is dictated by the worst plot of land, in the most remote location. A coal mine just outside of Moscow saves quite a bundle on transportation costs as compared to one in a remote town in the Ural Mountains. Whatever it saves, however, is claimed by Landlord as rent. But it’s not an insidious plot, by an evil Landlord association. It is the laws of Supply and Demand at work here, as people are willing to pay higher rent for more productive lands and/or lands closer to the CENTER. Whatever the difference is between a more accessible and productive location and the most inaccessible and unproductive one, is always absorbed by land-rent. Even further, any increase in productivity due to technological advancement is also always eaten up by land-rent. Land-Rent equalizes wares’ cost of production to the cost of production of same wares in the most remote and least productive location (P8)''
But Gesell's solution is this one:
''Gesell uses word “nationalized” for his proposal (which I imagine unsettles a lot of people), but since land is always nationalized (remains part of the nation it is in), I prefer the term “de-privatize”. So all land should be de-privatized. Landowners will be given government securities in exchange for their REUL contracts. Securities are given in a way to compensate the income, not the price. For example, if a particular piece of land yields 1000$ annually, then it can be replaced with: 50,000$ of securities @ 2% interest 25,000$ of securities @ 4% interest 10,000$ of securities @ 10% interest As you can see, it would be most beneficial to enact this reform when interest rates are high. The state would still collect rent and use it to pay the interest on the securities. (in theory netting 0$) If Free-Money reform is enacted along side with Free-Land reform, the interest rate will eventually fall to 0% so rent-money will be used for paying off securities. Even if not, some tax revenue could be put to the same use. Once all the securities are paid off, the land-rent will be distributed to women on the per-child basis. It is women who create (increased) demand for land by giving birth, and it is only fitting that it should be women who receive it. More pragmatically, if women are assured of their offspring’s survival, the gold-digging phenomenon will dwindle to virtual non-existence. Women will no longer be obsessed with a rich husband, forgoing all other attributes (in today’s world, a man could be an 82 year old leper with a glass eye and wooden leg, and still have beautiful blondes hanging on each arm if he has money). So the process of natural eugenics will have room to develop: women will choose to marry men for inherent physiological, mental and spiritual attributes, not inherited fortunes. The re-distribution scheme is not integral to this proposal, any method could be used as long as it distributes all the money back to population and it does so with mathematical fairness. It could be distributed to all adults for example, each adult’s share being total/number of adults.''
Saw this place advertising debate, and thought I'd hop in. I'm what the far-right calls a R.I.N.O. Favorite politicians; Ben Sasse, Mitt Romney, Joe Manchin and Krysten Simena(kind of). Like Joe Biden as a man, but do disagree with some of his policies.
Really? Even after reading this part?
What a flaming load of crap. If the government thinks they can trade me some worthless piece of paper for my land, they will have a war on their hands.
What's to like about Mitt? He is dishonest and disloyal. He through his president under a bus every chance he got.
Haha.
Welcome to financial capitalism, where people trade useless things for real work.
The land never belonged to you, you can't place the land on your pocket and carry it around.
The land belongs to the nation and it is granted to you, not the other way around. Otherwise your land would be exempt from any national law.
Yeah, one of the reasons why people liked Obama.
I think he was placed on purpose by the deep state to make people elect Obama by making the republicans look like corrupt rich snobs and thus to make Obama win.
President Biden handed Russian President Putin a list of cyber attack targets that are "off limits." (Does that mean it is open season on everything else?) I think that was a mistake even a rookie shouldn't make. What do you think? The new poll is up.
With what we know about how typical presidential regimes operate, this was probably not solely Biden's idea. There was likely a team of aides or advisers that came up with it, then sold Ron Klain (Biden's CoS) and/or Biden himself on the idea. Regardless, a bad idea all around. They thought they were being tough, but all they did was confirm for the Russians what the US government is afraid will be attacked.
Have you heard this idiot speak of the prompter? Unscripted?
He hasn't had his own idea in a long, long time. We are talking genuine puppet here.
Okay so as much as I love my nation, I haven't been able to keep up with it lately. Got a lot of stuff going on and unfortunately I have no time to keep Landlordia up to date. I'm gonna missed Landlordia, I really love it and this site, but unfortunately I have focuses calling upon me and many times have this nation have almost been erased.
I will let Landlordia stay up until the site takes it down this time around. It was great getting to talk with all you about political topics and being in this region. I wish all of you the best and not to sweat the small stuff so much.
Put it in vacation mode?
I agree, Biden's actions could be seen as weak, but let's face it; tensions were at an all time high, and the Russians had already mobilized on the Ukranian border just a few months earlier. If they're going to take any additional offense action against Ukraine or even Sweden, we simply don't have the troops in the Baltic region to aid the defenders. It sucks to have to take any kind of soft stand to a killer, but he has far more troops and far fewer scruples, and that's always a dangerous combination.
*threw
There isn't any "could be seen as weak" about it. That was a rookie mistake. It is right up there with those snow flakes thinking they can block a highway without getting run over.
What I hear you saying is roll over and play dead because we don't have the resources to do the right thing? I cannot help but wonder if you remember what happened when Europe tried to appease Hitler. My guess is that you learned nothing from the spirit of Neville Chamberlain.
Focus on the message, not the spelling.
He dead? What killed him?
No, we have the resources, just not in the Baltic region. And I'm not 'appeasing' Russia, at least not for the long term. Wait until more ships and troops can be diverted against Russia in the Baltic, wait until our cyberdefenders are strong enough to beat back Russia; basically, wait until we have the upper hand against Russia, and then force them to stop their human rights abuses and bring Putin to the bargaining table. I think the only 'appeasing' being done by the Biden administration is in the Middle East.
«12. . .240241242243244245246. . .270271»
Advertisement
