Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Did Lauren Laverne Just Defend Bankers?


shell

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
1
HOLA442

Taxation is not theft, unless you are one of the raving libertarian types. Indeed, the whole 'Government is useless/taxation is theft' argument suits the purposes of the crony capitalists very well, since it declares the only plausible source of restraint on their activity to be useless.

Tamara has a point though. All forms of statism are a big (central) bankers wet dream, because all statisms have the power to distribute money upwards to the 1%. These bankers only care about one thing, foisting debt on the state, and nothing more. Financing wars and revolutions are particularly advantageous. What the statism does is to provide the mechanisim for extraction by force of any money required via the mechanism of income tax, which is a levy on human labour. Trotsky lived in New York for a brief time before the Russian revolution and returned to Russia with a promise of $20 million from Kuhn Loeb (New York) to finance the revolution. This is documented fact.

The founders of the United States considered this levy on labour to be illegal. They considered payment for labour to be a barter transaction and that only gains on capital should be taxed, not labour. They operated for about 120 years very successfully without any income tax. Today there are many nations in the world that do not have a tax on labour (income tax). I've worked in several of these.

Whilst today this is considered a radical libertarian idea, anyone who has worked in a country that does not have income tax would immediately see the advantages, and the fact it is not necessary, and intrusive.

It's no simple coincidence that the Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Income Tax Acts were created at the same time, on Christmas Eve, 1913.

It's also no simple coincidence that the 'Age of Total War' has coincided with the 'Age of Central Banking'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443

Having Lauren Laverne being on that show always struck me as tokenism. In my opinion she doesn't seem to have the intellect of the other three but is female, relatively good to look at and from the north, which can help dilute the three southern* middle aged, middle class white men. When she's interviewing people it seems a bit too rehearsed whereas the other three seem more spontaneous, when Lauren says something I often wonder whether that's her genuine opinion or whether she's been fed it by the show's producers/writers to make the show seem balanced.

*Jimmy Carr is Irish but wouldn't look out of place in Tumbridge Wells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
3
HOLA444

Quite right Tamara! Smash the state!

Back on topic, I wrote a review of the very episode of 10 o'clock live that you're discussing on my blog.

I thought it was actually quite refreshing to hear Lauren Laverne make the point about market reaction to bankers bonuses. She's quite funny on Twitter too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information