Who's Interested In Conscious Politics?

[Forestluv]

11 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

@Anderz

A bigger danger to society is people not generating their own wealth/power and then playing the victim about people who have.  This is Stage Green's stale narrative and everlasting trap.

I didn’t say it was the only concern nor did I advocate for any particular form of wealth distribution. You assumed and added those in. By doing so, the context is distorted.

In a certain context, I would agree with your point as partially true. However, you missed the context here and what I am pointing at.

[Forestluv]

4 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

To me a lot of this sounds like poor me excuse-making and mental-masturbation.  What we need to do is teach people how to create wealth in their lives.  People who don't want to work hard are infecting the larger populace.

Of course self empowerment is is a factor. Yet that is not what I am pointing at. The perspective quoted above is an element within a broader context, yet adding that element here obfuscates the point, which would then reduce the point’s relative weight in a broader integrative context. If one does not clearly see and understand the continuums of two limited perspectives, they will not be able to integrate the two into a more holistic perspective.

In particular, consider this part:  “If 1% of the population possessed 90% of the county’s wealth/resources/power, there is not opportunity to access as much of that wealth/resources as one desires.”

I intentionally created a context to highlight a particular point to a particular perspective. Within this context I gave, the comment quoted above is quite silly. One would need to take it out of context for the above comment to be reasonable.

I am not saying that wealth/resource/power distribution 100% determines one’s opportunity toward accumulating wealth/resource/power in every scenario. To re-contextualize the point into such a simple binary view is a distortion. Personal empowerment is also an element, yet not what I’m pointing out. I’m intentionally reducing the impact of personal empowerment to highlight the element of wealth distribution to those who cannot see it. Without seeing each element, one cannot see both elements within a larger context.

And I don’t think referring to certain humans as an “infestation” is helpful. It has a de-humanizing impact. 

 

[theking00]

do i have to care about politics?

[Village]

On 6/9/2019 at 5:15 AM, Leo Gura said:

@Zizzero I don't find libertarianism even worth discussing. It is not a serious position.

Hi Leo, here's a video by actualized.org about open mindedness, I recommend you watch it.

[Leo Gura]

@Village I've listened to the arguments of more libertarian fools than you would care to know. It's like having a discussion with a man-child. There's no historical understanding there of how government works. Just ravings about how evil government is.

These positions are often held by young juvenile white males. It's a rebellious phase they grow through. Unfortunately some get stuck on it for life.

Libertarianism is a cancer of the mind.

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Village I've listened to the arguments of more libertarian fools than you would care to know. It's like having a discussion with a man-child. There's no historical understanding there of how government works. Just ravings about how evil government is.

These positions are often held by young juvenile white males. It's a rebellious phase they grow through. Unfortunately some get stuck on it for life.

Libertarianism is a cancer of the mind.

And its myopic.  They are not conscious of the whole picture.  They ain't conscious of Oneness.

[Revolutionary Think]

@Joseph Maynor Agreed. If I were his strategist I'd probably do well. The problem with Yang is he's not willing to be confrontational but, I am and not confrontational in a way that you want to belittle and bully people but, in a way that you fight for what's right and makes sense, you call out fallacies etc. 

   

[Revolutionary Think]

@Leo Gura your typical libertarian archetype 

 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Revolutionary Think

[Enizeo]

I wholeheartedly agree with the spirit of the entire series! 

The main objection I have is this: If a country would just start implementing all the part 4 policies today (let's just take them as an example), would all the corruption not just emigrate to other, not-yet-conscious countries? That would basically ruin both the conscious country and hurt the slightly less conscious remaining ones. 

[Leo Gura]

38 minutes ago, Enizeo said:

would all the corruption not just emigrate to other, not-yet-conscious countries?

No it would not because people like to live in uncorrupted countries with great infrastructure.

People in the US like to move to the most progressive states like California, Washington, New York. Why is it that no one dreams of moving to Alabama?

Banning slavery did not move slaveowners overseas.

[Enizeo]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Banning slavery did not move slaveowners overseas.

Good point. But favourable tax laws (which basically are pro-slavery constructs) move lot's of cooperations and bank accounts to different countries and super low wages pull a lot of production.

I guess it is how you mentioned in some earlier part: We have to be scientific about it. If the alternative is to live in a society driven by money and selfishness, then there is really no alternative.

Implement and watch carefully.

[Elisabeth]

2 hours ago, Enizeo said:

I wholeheartedly agree with the spirit of the entire series! 

The main objection I have is this: If a country would just start implementing all the part 4 policies today (let's just take them as an example), would all the corruption not just emigrate to other, not-yet-conscious countries? That would basically ruin both the conscious country and hurt the slightly less conscious remaining ones. 

@Leo Gura I have a similar concern, specifically about taxation of the rich. You have it today in the word: owners will outsource the headquarters of their companies into tax havens. Or move there. So it's hard to tax someone who is already very healthy and powerful, and a single country can't do it. So... how would you go about this? (Does that mean a world government first?)

Maybe this is not so visible in the huge USA, but Czechia has no means at all to tax Google... well... tax the car companies producing here proportionally. (And that's exactly why we need EU - but I'm afraid even EU is small for that.)

Edited August 7, 2019 by Elisabeth

[Anderz]

@Elisabeth Good point about tax havens. The big corporations are multinational, and can escape tax that way. Not even U.S. politics can control this situation. It requires a global solution.

Amazon will pay $0 in federal taxes this year — and it’s partially thanks to Trump - https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/15/amazon-will-pay-0-in-federal-taxes-this-year.html

Google shifted $23 billion to tax haven Bermuda in 2017: filing - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-taxes-netherlands/google-shifted-23-billion-to-tax-haven-bermuda-in-2017-filing-idUSKCN1OX1G9

60 of America's biggest companies paid no federal income tax in 2018 - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2018-taxes-some-of-americas-biggest-companies-paid-little-to-no-federal-income-tax-last-year/

[Anderz]

Leo has already addressed the global issue in politics, from about 2 hours and 32 minutes into his last video: Conscious Politics - Part 4 - 100+ Specific Policy Proposals - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSV0ZhD_yvw&t=2h32m35s

Good explanation, I will listen to it again.

 

 

[Angelo John Gage]

@Elisabeth  I think the laws should be this:

No American company can outsource any labor for any reason whatsoever.

No company can hold any funds outside of the US for any reason whatsoever.

None of them will not pay taxes. 

However, personal wealth, sure. IF a CEO wants to put his money in a tax haven, fine, but his company cannot. Unless we want to go far as not allowing any citizen to hold money elsewhere.

[Anderz]

3 minutes ago, Angelo John Gage said:

No American company can outsource any labor for any reason whatsoever.

But can't the big multinational corporations such as Amazon and Google just move their operation to another country? Ireland for example.

I don't think that the U.S. government can force corporations to stay in America. And by removing loop holes and increasing the tax, many of the big corporations will move out of the U.S.

[Angelo John Gage]

@Anderz

and then their products could be heavily tariffed. so they would lose so much business when their products would become virtually unaffordable or unprofitable. kind of like a boycott for cucking America. 

[Anderz]

@Angelo John Gage The Chinese company Huawei said that they don't even need the U.S. market. The big corporations are multinational. They operate all over the world. And too much tariffs will hurt the U.S. citizens much more than the corporations.

[Bodigger]

15 minutes ago, Angelo John Gage said:

@Elisabeth  I think the laws should be this:

No American company can outsource any labor for any reason whatsoever.

No company can hold any funds outside of the US for any reason whatsoever.

None of them will not pay taxes. 

However, personal wealth, sure. IF a CEO wants to put his money in a tax haven, fine, but his company cannot. Unless we want to go far as not allowing any citizen to hold money elsewhere.

Wow, that will attract no businesses.

How about this.....

Don't tax the people for anything

Tax the hell out of everyone else

When will people wake up and understand that most people/businesses/corporations don't mind paying taxes.  They just want to pay what is fair and competitive to others in personal, type of business, and geographic area.  They would also want getting something from paying taxes such as protection from others as well.

[Leo Gura]

I don't see rich people moving overseas a problem.

Rich people want to live in America and benefit from American real estate, schools, and society. They do not want to live in a 3rd world country. They don't want their children living in a 3rd world rat hole.

Likewise, giant corporations want to be headquartered here. To do serious business here, they must be here.

BTW, under current law, if you are a US citizen and you move to another country, you still owe the IRS income tax. If you want to escape US income tax, you have to renounce your citizenship.

It's very easy to pass some laws that further tighten this. If a corporation over $1 billion wants to do business in the US, they must place a headquarters here.

The Chinese do not allow any America company to work in China without partnering with a local Chinese company first.

Silicon Valley is not going to pack their stuff and move overseas. They don't even want to move to Alabama, let alone overseas.