Thursday, October 30, 2008

Peanut Butter, Jelly, and Enemy Exterminations

Before you vote, consider this story:

You and I live on a desert island. You produce peanut butter and I produce jelly. We both enjoy eating our products, but we would really enjoy eating peanut butter and jelly. So, to increase total happiness, I take some of your peanut butter, mix it with my jelly, and have therefore increased the total happiness of society. Your loss of peanut butter has been vastly mitigated by my enjoying peanut butter and jelly. Your wealth has been spread. This is simple mathematics.

Now we are joined by a third person. In order to ensure full employment on the island, I give the third person a uniform and a badge (and a percentage of your peanut butter) to take your peanut butter whenever I choose. Because I have the positive right to your peanut butter (due to increased societal happiness), neither my officer nor I need to ask for your permission -- nor in any way do we need be grateful for your contribution. It is our entitlement and it is your obligation.

We are now joined by a fourth person. I turn my jelly business over to him -- and to sustain the island, my officer collects peanut butter and jelly and brings it to me.

A fifth person arrives and develops a method of making more jelly in less time. However, this is very dangerous for three reasons: First, the island itself has a right to not have its resources exploited. Secondly, what would people on other islands think of us if we were to consume so much jelly? And most importantly, a second jelly producer would harm the ability of the existing jelly producer to a fair wage. And so, my officer approaches the second producer and explains that, in order to guarantee the safety of his jelly, he needs an island license to conduct his business. And since the newcomer cannot prove that his jelly will always be safe to eat, he is denied a license.

A sixth person arrives from another island with a barrel of jelly. My officer turns him back to sea with his jelly. The possibility of dumping this jelly on our island would harm our only jelly producer, and must not be permitted. While I welcome free trade, it must also be fair trade. And this is most definitely not fair.

Thirty-four people then wash ashore, increasing the island's population to forty. The island's food producers attempt to hire them in exchange for a cup of food per day. However, this is worker exploitation, and my sense of economic justice demands that each worker instead be paid three cups of food per day. The producers then have the audacity to hire only half of the new residents at this fair wage, leaving the other half unemployed. To address this issue, I (and my uniformed officer) impose an additional fair tax on the richest 5% of the island's population, which happen to be the greedy and exploitative peanut-butter and jelly "producers" who in fact do nothing but reap unearned windfall profits on the backs of working people.

Sixty more people show up, and now there are 100 inhabitants on the island. These sixty are very poor, ill, and have not eaten in weeks. So, in order to protect them, I order the unionization of the island's 17 employees, which results in a labor contract mandating payment of six cups of food per day, 45 paid holidays, strictly-enforced job definitions, a no-layoff clause, and a just arbitration process to settle any grievances that might arise.

And I raise the top tax rate to 75% in order to pay for my expanded People's Police, comprised of the latest wave of migration.

For inexplicable reasons, the capitalists then reduce production. They are, quite clearly, traitors. And having been exposed as Enemies of The Island, they are set off on a raft to reeducation facilities -- wherever such facilities might happen to be.

At this point, the people are quite upset. They want a solution. They realize that our half-measures have not sufficed. So, in order to satisfy the cries of the people, The Island nationalizes and assumes direct control of all production of peanut butter and jelly. Half of the island's population now joyously works, and the other half performs police services. In the peanut fields, they gleefully sing, "Let's boast to the world about this year's bumper peanut harvest!"

An election is held, and 100% of the people elect me President for Life of the new Democratic People's Island Republic.

The other islands are so impressed with our success that they cheer the arrival of the DPIR's People's Police to liberate them as well.

As the chains of oppression are broken on each island, the DPIRPP listens to the working class as they identify members of the exploitative class: They, and their families, are shown the only justice that is fitting for such parasites.

As proof of our success, there is never again any dissent, anywhere. All infections have been eradicated.


The above tale is a fiction of what can happen to several hundred people. It is not what I would personally want to see. Instead, I yearn for this to happen to millions, if not hundreds of millions, of people.

Imagine: Our entire planet, in unity, striving for this permanent and irreversible state of justice. The leaders shall guide with their wisdom, the workers shall endlessly toil for all, and our enemies -- millions and millions of enemies -- shall be silenced forever. And yes, I do mean silenced by death -- for total extermination is the only permanent silence.

To interfere with the will of the people is to label oneself as an enemy of humanity. And there can be no mercy for enemies of humanity.

Please remember this when deciding who to vote for.

Unfortunately, we lack a candidate who can be so candid with us. Instead, we must strive for second-best. Listen to them carefully, and see whose vernacular comes closest to mimicking the above story.

That is who you should want as your leader.

God DAMN Amerikkka!

Cross-posted at The People's Cube

Monday, October 27, 2008

President Obama and Negative Rights

Barack Obama concisely sums it up:

It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change.


Imagine you are on a desert island with only one other person, and you are hungry. His negative right would constrain you from taking his food. But your positive right would compel him to give you his food.

Multiply that by millions and millions of people, and you can see how negative rights leads to exploitation of the worker, and how positive rights leads to the liberation of the worker.

And that is one of the biggest problems with Amerikkka's KKKonstitution. That is, the warped concept of "negative liberties" constrains the government. It says that the government has no right to help its people. That the people lack the positive right to demand what they need.

So, the new constitution must be reformulated with positive liberties. That is, the right of the people to get what they need. To demand food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, education, a media free of fascist thought, a world without Zionism, etc.

In short, a proper constitution would be an living and breathing orgy of emotional eruptions that would satisfy the peoples' cries for social and economic justice.

Remember: If something, anything, is demanded, then someone else ought to be compelled to provide it. It is your positive right that makes this happen.

God Damn Amerikkka! God Damn the Amerikkkan KKKonstitution!

Friday, October 24, 2008

Book Review: "Barack Obama: Son of Promise, Child of Hope"

As usual, my busy schedule does not allow me the luxury of reading books. But I can nevertheless assure you that this is THE book that you want your child to read.

I don't recall anything notable about children's books about, say, John Kerry or Al Gore, but I can assure you that "Son of Promise, Child of Hope" is worth it!

The book is so penetrating, so compassionate, and so poetic that I am willing to accept that there might be a God who has been guiding Barack Obama along his monumental journey into our hearts. For even as the book acknowledges, God has in fact spoken with Barack. And as we know, if a child's book says it, then it must be true.

For his journey is our journey, one of overcoming oppression, overcoming racism, and overcoming the slave-chains of the corporate war-whore Zionists and their capitalist lackeys.

In a few weeks, all of us will be the happy subjects of God, as He reveals himself through the body of President Barack Obama. President today, President tomorrow, and hopefully President for Life. (No, not that kind of life, you murderous Christianists.)

God for Life.

I am ready to obey.

Teachers: Please please please persuade your school to spend its budget on several copies of this book for each child, so that he/she (or any combination of transgendered children) can have multiple copies for home, the playground, or wherever their National Service detail happens to be.

I have already filed a lawsuit with my university to replace its library with a new "Barack Obama Library" to contain nothing but this book.

Soon, the Hitler-Chimp will be replaced by God.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Obama Endorsements

Don't take my word for electing President Obama; here is a partial list of other progressive people and nations that support the candidacy of Barack.

Starting with, of course, the one nearest to my heart, the Communist Party USA:

"If Obama’s candidacy represented nothing more than the spark for this profound initiative to unite the working class and defeat the pernicious influence of racism, it would be a transformative candidacy that would advance progressive politics for the long term."

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea
"Pyongyang favors Obama because he has vowed to meet leaders of rogue states, such as the North Korean leader, without conditions if elected."
Columbian Liberation Group, FARC
"Obama will not support "Plan Colombia" nor will he sign the TLC (Colombian Free Trade agreement."
Fidel Castro:
"Obama without doubt is, from the social and human point, the most advanced candidate running for the U.S. presidency."
“We like Mr. Obama, and we hope that he will win the elections."
Louis Farrakhan
"This young man is the hope of the entire world that America will change and be made better."
The Iranian Parliament
"We are leaning more in favor of Barack Obama because he is more flexible and rational."
Father Michael Pfleger

Libyan Leader Mu'ammar Al-Qadhafi

...and the heartwarming and inspirational Pastor Jeremiah Wright.

People! Ask yourselves: If Barack Obama is getting their support, how could his victory possibly be a bad thing?


Thank you, commenter Chimpeach, for pointing out even more endorsements:

Syrian President Bashar Assad

"...Syria wants Senator Obama to win the presidential election to help Syrian President Bashar Assad bring back prosperity to Syria..."
Marxist Thinker and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega
Ortega said he has "faith in God and in the North American people, and above all in the youth, that the moment of great change in the U.S. will come and it will act differently, with justice and equality toward all nations"
Update II:

The New Black Panther Party

Update III:

"O God, humiliate Bush and his party, O Lord of the Worlds, degrade and defy him," Abu Yahya al-Libi said at the end of sermon marking the Muslim feast of Eid al-Fitr, in a video posted on the Internet.
Update IV:

Now my brain is convulsing: The American Nazi Party

"We have a black man, who loves his own kind, belongs to a Black-Nationalist religion, is married to a black women--when usually negroes who have ‘made it’ immediately land a white spouse as a kind of prize--that’s the kind of negro that I can respect."

Thank you for the tip, Mr. Shlemazl...

Mugging Hoax

Supposedly, a 20-year old McCain volunteer was beaten by a "6-foot 4-inch black man" who then carved the letter "B" on her face. The claim is that he saw her McCain bumper sticker and then attacked.

I call bullshit!

A) It is obvious that the injuries are fake and/or self-inflicted.

B) The accusation is racist.

C) Such an event is physically impossible. Warm Sun People do not attack Cold Ice People. (You can read more about Sun People and Ice People here.)

Need more evidence? Well, here you go: The forensics experts speak out!

I am FAR more frightened of Sarah Palin than any fictitious racist claim about "black men".

Besides, she had it coming.

God DAMN Amerikkka!

Reason To Vote For O-BA-MA!!

Apparently, this video has been around for a few months, though I just happened to come across it.

It alone provides all the reasons you need for voting for Barack Obama.

And to think that all the while, my main source of inspiration was this:

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Elasticity of Supply

Did that subject line, "Elasticity of Supply", and the adjacent equation intimidate you?

It should have! Remember, you are reading the words of a hypereducated multiple-degreed full tenured professor. A person who can demolish any of your "lay" arguments (and your reputation!) with just an iota of my enormous reservoir of brainpower, expertise, and jargon.

So, I invite you to unquestioningly accept this lesson in "elasticity of supply" and use it to reinforce your decision to elect Barack Obama as President.

I will now explain how President Obama's plan to raise taxes is as sound as any law of physics.

Let's use Starbucks as an example of a capitalist entity that is swimming in profits on the backs of labor. Yes, the obvious moral solution is to shutter Starbucks and allow the people to drag the owners into the gutter for merciless beatings.

But we will save moral arguments for another time, and concentrate for now on science.

And the science, as President Obama knows, is to tax Starbucks to spread the wealth. So, let's say that a cup of coffee costs $5, and President Obama decrees (after legislation is passed in The People's Assembly) that a tax on this item should be $4.

What happens next?

A right-wing propagandist would say, "That would raise the price of a cup to $9. And since no one would pay $9 for coffee, Starbucks would go out of business, no one would get any coffee, and no taxes would be raised anyway."

If only!

If only it were that easy to kill Starbucks!

But even the fascist propaganda has a kernel of truth: "No taxes would be paid anyway."

But "no taxes" is the antithesis of a just nation.


Nations are judged by how much the rich pay in taxes. (At least until The Revolution is complete.)

Here is what would really happen when a $4 tax is applied to a $5 cup of coffee: Simply put, the price will remain at $5 -- of which $4 will be returned to the people. And this is because of the elasticity of supply. In common language (for uneducated common people), the "elasticity of supply" refers to how much less (or more) of an item capitalists would be willing to sell if its price declined (or increased). That is, the change in supply divided by the change in price.

In this case, the "Before Obama" profit was $5, and the "After Obama" profit will be $1. So, we need to determine how many fewer cups of coffee Starbucks will be willing to sell if they only received $1 per cup instead of $5 per cup. And the answer is: There would be absolutely no change! How do we know this?

Because the supply elasticity is always zero!

Capitalists and their corporate marketing departments are insensitive to everything, and so will continue to force us to buy things we do not want.

Let's look at the mathematical proof:

A $5 tax is only one penny higher than a $4.99 tax. And does anyone really believe that a difference of one lousy penny would make any difference to anyone? Don't be stupid! Of course not!

And a $4.99 tax is equal to a $4.98 tax. How do we know this? Because we just proved that Starbucks executives will not change their policies based on a difference of just once cent.

Similarly, a $4.98 tax is equal to a $4.97 tax. A $4.97 tax is equal to a $4.96 tax. And continuing, we see that a one-cent tax is equal to no tax at all.

Therefore, a $5 tax has the same effect on supply as no tax at all. The elasticity of supply is zero, and Starbucks will not alter their behavior regardless of how much the taxes are.

So, tax levels have no relation whatsoever to corporate behavior, and President Obama would be justified in taxing the entire $5 of a $5 cup of coffee


Of course, that was just a sample exercise. In practice, this 100% taxation model should not be applied to Starbucks -- but should be applied to Starbucks, physicians, pharmaceutical companies, automobile manufacturers, home builders, etc., etc., etc.

For extra credit, think about the effects of a tax that exceeds 100%. That is, a $6 tax on a $5 purchase. Where would that money come from? Hint: They're called CAPITALists for a reason.

You can now go ahead and feel smart for having read my words, even if you lack the cognition to understand them.

Not a problem, though; you will always be taken care of when you leave the decisions to people who are smarter than you.


This post is dedicated to the memory of my junior-year microeconomics professor, who in defending the minimum wage, correctly observed that "no supermarket will fire their baggers if their wages increase by a few cents." The present-day ubiquity of supermarket baggers is a testimony to this man's penetrating insights. Rest in peace, comrade; I will carry the torch for you.

Friday, October 17, 2008

A Children's Fable

I think I will write a children's story book. And when I do, it will include this story:

Once upon a time, there was an ant and a grasshopper. The ant was a wealthy capitalist who owned a chain of "big box" stores, and spent all summer counting his money, while the grasshopper labored very hard making money for the ant.

In short, the ant exploited the grasshopper.

All summer long, the ant would smoke cigars, drink martinis, and see prostitutes. The grasshopper would simply work as a slave for the ant and turn over his meager pay to A.N.S.W.E.R., The Rachel Corrie Memorial Fund, and the Barack Obama campaign.

Then the winter came. It was a cold and dark winter, and the grasshopper had nothing to eat. The bitter temperatures were caused by global warming, as the ant-made pollutants created heat pockets that actually lowered temperatures.

The grasshopper was hungry, for he had no money left. And so, he approached the ant: "Ant, my dear dear ant, please find it in your heart to spare just a tiny morsel of food so that I and my family might survive to see one more day."

The ant thought about this humble request. After several days of contemplation, the ant went to the grasshopper's house and approached the grasshopper's family. And then, without any hesitation, the ant raped the grasshopper's daughter so violently that she would have preferred death instead. However, the ant realized what the consequences of his actions might be, and so went from abortion clinic to abortion clinic, tossing gasoline bombs, dismembering doctors, and raping nurses. All in the name of Jesus, he would say. It is what the bible told him to do.

And so, without abortions, the grasshopper population multiplied far beyond its scientifically-calculated sustainable optimality. And all these new grasshoppers were hungry.

By the spring, half the grasshopper population died from either starvation or from the ant's insistence on sending grasshoppers to far-off lands to launch wars against innocent Islamic grasshoppers.

However, that summer, the grasshopper got himself a different job -- at The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. His job was "Assistant Deputy Analyst" in the HOPE program, which mandates that ants pay the mortgages of those home-owning grasshoppers who have more pressing needs than to pay fort heir own homes. The grasshopper's responsibilities included "being able to analyze and prepare official HOPE documents while demonstrating proficiency in equivalent tasks and programs". In practice, this required the demands of attending many meetings and learning how to use "email".

Much of the HOPE time was spent making contributions to United for Peace and Justice and The Nation of Islam from the grasshopper's desk.

And once again, hunger arrived in the winter.

And the grasshopper approached the ant: "Hey ant, I'm gettin' in your face this year, know what I'm sayin? You owe me, unnerstan'? I got demands and you better respec' them."

The ant returned to his guarded estate, and a few days later, received a visit from someone unfamiliar. It was a grasshopper, but one whom he had never before met.

This new grasshopper said, "Ant...I am here to collect your money, which I will then give to the other grasshoppers, and will keep some for myself. If you do not agree, I will, at gunpoint, drag you to a prison cell where you will be anally violated while your life rots away in isolation."

The new grasshopper had a badge. It said "I.R.S."

And the ant turned over his plundered wealth to the I.R.S. grasshopper.

Forevermore, for the rest of his life, the ant, with his bottomless pit of money, would give and give to the grasshoppers -- providing for their food, their health care, their housing, their homes, and everything else that the grasshoppers could ever want or need, as determined by their educated leaders.

Moral: Rich capitalist ants have an endless supply of wealth that was stolen from the working class. It can never be depleted and it will always be there for taking -- by any means. It is not theirs, it belongs to the people, and shall be controlled by the people's leaders.

Kids: Let's educate your parents, kill the capitalists, and live in a Socialist Paradise!

God DAMN Amerikkka!

Cross posted at The People's Cube

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Presidential Debate III

I was very proud of Barack Obama at last night's debate; he has been listening to me!

I played back this debate fourteen times already (with the McCain parts erased), and although I would like to post the entire transcript here, fourteen times over, I will only select the best of Barack:

And the financial rescue plan that Senator McCain and I supported is an important first step. And I pushed for some core principles: making sure that taxpayer can get their money back if they're putting money up.

Of course everyone will get their money back. That’s why they must contribute, whether or not they think it’s a good idea. If this was a bad idea, we would not make the taxpayers contribute.

Making sure that CEOs are not enriching themselves through this process.

Again, correct. When CEOs become rich, everyone else gets a smaller piece of the pie.

I want to end the tax breaks for companies that are shipping jobs overseas and provide a tax credit for every company that's creating a job right here in America.

This is only fair. Taxpayers need to pay more in order to ensure that Americans spend less time working in industries like aeronautics and pharmaceuticals -- and instead recover the jobs that are done abroad, like sewing buttons on clothing.

That's why we included in the financial package a proposal to get homeowners in a position where they can renegotiate their mortgages.

Trivial. Simply force people who are making mortgage payments to also make payments for those who are not making mortgage payments. They shall be sent two bills: One for their own homes, and one for the homes of those who cannot pay.

And 95 percent of working families, 95 percent of you out there, will get a tax cut.

And when we teach the remaining 5% what it is like to really pay taxes, it will have no effect whatsoever on prices that the remaining 95% pay.

And that requires us to make some important choices

I weep with joy at lines like this. To see the best, the brightest, and the most concerned make important choices for the people!

Then Exxon Mobil, which made $12 billion, record profits, over the last several quarters, they can afford to pay a little more so that ordinary families who are hurting out there -- they're trying to figure out how they're going to afford food, how they're going to save for their kids' college education, they need a break.

That’s right, you selfish bastards at Exxon Mobil. How about ponying up a little more, like maybe a dime a week, to provide the starving people, the near-corpses lying in the gutter, the most basic sustenance so that you can whip some more work out of them.

But there is no doubt that we've been living beyond our means and we're going to have to make some adjustments.

Oh yes! Yes, yes, yes, yes, YES!! Wayyyy beyond our means! Notwithstanding the Exxon Mobil inflicted famine referenced above, the rest of us are driving cars (we need more buses, peeps!), eating too much fast food (nationalized food co-ops, my dream…), and using too much energy (you don’t have to actually cook potatoes, you know).

…if we're going to focus on lifting wages that have declined over the last eight years and create jobs here in America, then Democrats, independents and Republicans, we're going to have to be able to work together.

I believe that universal conscription into an anti-capitalist youth corps will create plenty of jobs when they burn the banks, put wrecking balls to Walmart, and trash rich people’s homes. Full employment will be achieved to fix everything so that we can destroy it again.

Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago.

A professor and a friend of mine, I might add. Those qualifications should negate anything else about him, however fabricated.

ACORN is a community organization…

The evidence is in, not guilty!

…it is absolutely critical that we develop a high fuel efficient car that's built not in Japan and not in South Korea, but built here in the United States of America.

As aggressors against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, I fully agree that Japan and South “Korea” should be punished, severely. And to accomplish this, we should draft Americans from whatever other jobs they’re working on – and put them to work (with rich people’s tax dollars) to build a non-polluting car in GM and Ford factories. No matter how much GM, Ford, and the AWU object to receiving tax dollars, this is an important move that must be done.

And when it comes to South Korea, we've got a trade agreement up right now, they are sending hundreds of thousands of South Korean cars into the United States. That's all good. We can only get 4,000 to 5,000 into South Korea. That is not free trade.

Thank you, Barack, for pointing that out. And don’t forget: Italy sends us hundreds of thousands of gallons of olive oil, but we can’t get any of our olive oil into Italy. That is not fair trade, either.

If you want to do the right thing with your employees and you want to provide them health insurance, we'll give you a 50 percent credit so that you will actually be able to afford it.

That’s half way to a 100% tax credit, which is on the path to a 100% government subsidy. Fact: When one group of taxpayers gives money to a second group taxpayers, then the second group can afford things (like healthcare) easier, and there is no effect on the first group – like the employees who paid the taxes to begin with. If you cannot understand that, then you truly are hopelessly uneducable.

All I want to do, if you've already got health care, is lower your costs.

Fact: Costs can always be lowered when a leader wills them to be lower.

And finally, this question:

The question is this: the U.S. spends more per capita than any other country on education. Yet, by every international measurement, in math and science competence, from kindergarten through the 12th grade, we trail most of the countries of the world. The implications of this are clearly obvious. Some even say it poses a threat to our national security. Do you feel that way and what do you intend to do about it?

And Barack’s answer:

…we are going to have to invest…

An investment! Clearly, spending more than any other country is not enough, and only an investment can remedy this.

…recruit a generation of new teachers…

More teachers! Quantity always equals quality, so more is more.

… an army of new teachers…

Armies of teachers! I hope the AFT does not object.

…give them higher pay…

Highest costs per capita in the world…pay them more! Wait…I’m in academia, so I need more, too! Pay me more! I am entitled to more!

… and I think it's important for us to make college affordable….

So true! So true! And here it comes…

And that's why I've proposed a $4,000 tuition credit, every student, every year, in exchange for some form of community service, whether it's military service, whether it's Peace Corps, whether it's working in a community.

Gaaaaaa!! Tuition credits! Community service! Conscription for the common good! I played that part back well over one hundred times. If the leader wills it, it shall be free!!!! Please, Barack! Let’s give every student $100,000 per semester to attend college! That will really drive tuition down.

.. If we do those things, then I believe that we can create a better school system.

And then we can do the same thing to everything else, from food to clothing to manufacturing to the arts to research to literature to the entire realm of anything and everything that anyone does anywhere, anytime, and anyplace.

I turn all decisions to you, my new leader -- for if you will it, it will happen.

God DAMN Amerikkka!

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Obama Will Put An End To This, Too

It is good to know that this will not be an issue under Barack...

"You Make It, We Take It"

"You Make It, We Take It"

The above slogan (which I advise Barack Obama to use) is catchy, truthful, heartfelt, and compassionate.

Of course, I am referring to Barack's pledge to ask the top-income 5% to return their stolen wealth to the bottom 95% -- who we, as benevolent guardians, must care for.

This rests on the basic economic theory that a society's health is best determined by how much rich people pay in taxes. In academic circles, we jest that "taxing is relaxing". (The humor in that phrase is derived from the fact that "tax" rhymes with "relax". To be sure there is nothing funny about the concept. And there is absolutely nothing to laugh at in hard economic times like these.)

Here is how we are all better off when the rich people contribute their so-called "earnings" back to the community: Say you are a filthy blood-sucking moneybags pig, like an owner of Walmart. And you make your money selling...what does Walmart sell anyway? Weapons to Zionists? Probably. So, let's say that a poor person comes into Walmart looking for a way to disembowel Palestinian babies...

Wait, this will not work! Zionists are rich, and are therefore not compelled to shop at Walmart.

So, let's instead say that a person of color is coerced by capitalist exploitation to buy their tofu at Walmart. Normally, tofu costs $10 per pound. (At least, that is what I pay at the food coop.) So, Walmart probably charges $100 per pound. This, clearly, is obscene. So, we (that is, the government) will apply a tax on Walmart. Let's say the tax is $25. Ha ha! Fuck you Walmart, you now have to add a $25 tax to the $100 price, and charge $125 a pound! See? The price was $100, but under Barack, it will be $125. But $25 of that is a tax, so Walmart loses!

At that point, Walmart will be forced to contribute that $25 tax to Barack and our new government, whereupon it will be used to further the greater good by establishing a national-service youth corps, purchasing windmills from government contractors, and investing in insured no-interest housing mortgages.

Nothing can go wrong with this plan. Ever.

Meanwhile, 95% of the population is protected because they are not being taxed. The tax is applied to Walmart instead, and there is no possible way this can translate into a negative for people shopping at Walmart. In fact, hurting Walmart is just one of many benefits of this tax plan.

When the rich pay, everyone wins.

Win, win, win, win, win.

Cross posted at The People's Cube

Monday, October 13, 2008

Economic Stimulus: Not Enough

The United States needs a new economic stimulus plan that pumps billions of dollars into infrastructure projects and budget relief for cash-strapped state and local governments, Democratic lawmakers said on Sunday.

This is why I, as a Capital "S" Socialist, support the Democratic party as the nearest substitute for a full-fledged people's utopia. The Democrats understand that the purpose of collecting billions of dollars of taxes is to provide "relief" for governments.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last week said a $150 billion economic stimulus plan was needed to help counteract a faltering economy shaken by a paralyzed banking system and steep stock market falls.

Speaker Pelosi, as a scientific socialist, sure knows her science! As the educated among you know, the purpose of a "stimulus plan" is to unparalyze banks and increase stock prices -- as intermediate steps in the evolution of capitalism's inevitable demise.

Here's how it works: When people pay taxes instead of saving money in banks, the banks shrivel and die. Hence, death replaces paralysis. Furthermore, stock prices (which represent mass opinion of future profitability) would then increase for obvious reasons. You do not agree that the reasons are obvious? Then you are an uneducable Hitler-pig who burns crosses McCain rallies.

The Congress earlier this year passed a $152 billion stimulus package that provided tax rebates of up to $600 per adult to support consumer spending at a time of rising energy and food costs. Most of that money has already been spent, and many economists say financial turmoil will squeeze the economy into recession in the fourth quarter.

"Many economists, indeed!" Here, for example is a sharp analysis from one of my favorite economists:

"Not only is Wall Street frozen, but Main Street is in real trouble. A stimulus aimed at Main Street makes sense," New York Sen. Charles Schumer told CNN.

And he continues with a particularly apt gastrointestinal metaphor, which in fact reminds me of my last night's dinner:

He said the plan should "get into the guts of the economy" by boosting spending on infrastructure such as roads, sewer and water projects.

Of course. And I'm glad that Congress realizes that a mere $152,000,000,000 was not enough taxation to fix our economy. Many economists say that $700,000,000,000 would be better. And many of my professional colleagues say that $2,000,000,000,000 would be closer to the ideal. Of course, these well-intentioned academics and people's representatives are on the right path...but...but...if spending $152,000,000,000 or spending $700,000,000,000, or $2,000,000,000,000 is such a good idea (as it most definitely is), then why not simply take over the entire economy instead?

If public works projects are so helpful (as they absolutely are), then why not simply convert every human activity into a public works project?

Left to their own devices, people are far too inexperienced to manage anything as sophisticated as an economy. That's why experts are required to do the managing, the directing, and the thinking. It's for your own good.


Cross-posted at The People's Cube

Friday, October 03, 2008

How Wall Street got rich through GREED

Everyone agrees that our financial crisis was caused by greed. Naturally, this is a correct assessment because it was formed by consensus.

But how, you ask, did greed make the Wall Street bankers so rich?

Simple. Greed drives businesses to sell things to customers who cannot afford to pay for them.

Let's look at an example:

Say you want to buy a house, and can only afford $100,000. A rich capitalist might discover this, and the following conversation would ensue:

You: I want to buy a $100,000 house because I can only afford to spend $100,000.

Capitalist: Nonsense, you can afford a $300,000 house, easily, and I can lend you enough money to make it happen.

You: There's no way I can afford a $300,000 house; I'll never have enough money to pay back that loan!

Capitalist: That's a swell haircut you have there.

You: Thank you! Of course I can afford a $300,000 house! Yes I can! Yes we can!

At this point, the capitalist lends you $300,000 -- knowing full well that the loan will never be paid off. You struggle to make payments, but you...just...can't. The greedy capitalist loaned you $300,000 and you only paid back $100,000! Need I elaborate further on how this has made capitalists rich? (And how this further oppresses the Palestinian people?)

It's my understanding that automobiles are sold the same way. Greedy auto salesmen often sell $30,000 cars to people who can only pay $10,000.

Fortunately, the government, which by its very definition cannot ever be greedy, is only asking for a mere $700,000,000,000 contribution to make us all investors in these loans.

I weep at the fairness of this.

God Damn George Bush; he created this mess.

God Damn the U.S. of KKK!

Palestine Blogs - The Gazette Subscribe in Bloglines