- 1. Campaigning of any sort is not allowed for elected members.
- 2. Elected members are not members of political parties nor members of special interest groups nor executives of large organizations nor major shareholders of such.
they'll do it behind closed doors, in smoke filled rooms, through whispers.
- 3. Elected members are not "representatives" but rather people who are free to vote their conscience.
85% of u.s population gets only 15% of wealth/income. top 5-7% gets 72%.
in contrast, in middle ages, peasants were entitled to 33% of the produce from the fields, and entire economy was tied to land. lords, biggest dukes, could only get 33% of the produce off of the land. rest 33%, belonged to church.
people in america are taking HALF of what middle ages' peasants took from what wealth and amenities were available at that time and age to their society.
and there are homeless on the streets, people feeding off of garbage dumpsters, people working in two jobs for minimum wage to survive.
and in contrast, lets look at the WORST that communism have provided to ussr :
noone in the streets. noone hungry. noone without a roof over their head.
people would engage in arts, literature, and poetry when they went home from their jobs. because they had the ample time, and remaining energy to do it.. in contrast, the well-to-do participants of the economic system in america are not finding the time to use their dearly-bought fishing boats, kayaks, this and that, even if they belong to the measly 10% middle class that exists in america now. they are working their asses off, to pay debts or for job security.
anybody who lived under any of the 'communism' regimes can confirm that ? what are they going to confirm ? the fact that they want to go back to those regimes, in which they did not have to fear being out on the streets tomorrow ? like how most of the population of former eastern germany, now regrets the unification they had with west germany ? sure. they can confirm that. they confirm it on documentaries, tv broadcasts, a plenty. ranging from german tvs to bbc. apparently, you havent had anything confirmed by them, else you wouldnt talk like this.
ignorance is bliss. only through ignorance one can justify a system which gives you LESS than middle ages, but makes you work MORE than them, and make you think it as 'better'.
Saying that 12 people owned the economy 100 years ago is just silly. The market is a wildly complex and dynamic creature made up of the interactions of all who particpate, basically the entire citizenry.
your proposition and assessment is too light hearted and devoid of reality. even it contrast what contemporaries of those times have been saying.
it was not a 'wildly complex and dynamic creature' as you so galvanize. it was basically owned by 12 people. people driveling in mud at the bottom, has not made a middle class.
The wealth gap was pretty stable
seeing that you have no knowledge of history. otherwise there wouldnt be an offensive and stupid statement like this regarding those times. the people who you are telling to have 'a stable wealth gap' was driveling in mud, and it was worse than the current 85% poor at this point in time.
you come up as a BELIEVER in your speech. i dont discuss with believers. there is no end. you see things to your perspective and twist picture to your own desire - just like you have beautifully portrayed a horrible poverty as 'a stable wealth gap' (as if it was something good).
ill mark you as foe, in order to have a red dot when i see your posts, so i can refrain from discussing with you again - no hard feelings ; i have done too many discussions with 'believer' type people, be them religious, be they from the holy church of market economics. and i dont see any point in doing that anymore.
BR.
audieu.
Make life more complicated to peddle more shit to us so that we can work more to pay them off, instead of simplifying it and saving everyone's time and resources by better mass transportation.
i hear people are going to their jobs in paris by boarding the fast trains from bordeaux ffs. in usa, you can just get to your job from your house in the same time length.
i didnt say i was hypothesizing. i described what happened in turkey in the last 15 years. and it had no exaggerations or metaphors in it. not only that, but it didnt happen outside my social circle, my own direct life experience either - a lot of it was experienced first hand, through relatives or friends or classmates. all of these were being openly discussed and criticized in national newspapers until 5 years ago. 5 years ago the current islamist party then in power started to come down on any media outlet that was discussing these openly, and foreclose on their assets through dubious tax investigations, then selling them to prominent islamist figures from their own community through 0 interest, very long term loans from government's lending bank.
currently prime minister of turkey regularly calls the remaining media holdings' execs to meetings and tells them what he does not want to be discussed in media. and everyone obeys.
wow yes ! that really frightened me from posting my thoughts ! oh god - what if a random zygote in some random country on the freaking internet calls me a moron !?!?! what would i do then !!!
......
you just cant get enough of me. thats your problem. ill keep posting here, however i will, speaking my mind, even if you go red with rage. enjoy reading my posts in which i speak my mind with you having no means to prevent it. and let me go back to ignoring your trolling.
- you said u.s. hasnt been capitalist for over a century.
that implies, u.s. was capitalist, a century ago. based on the proposition.
and so we look at what was there 100 years ago (actually 120), and see that entire country being owned by 12 people. not even 'monopolies'. these people directly own these aspects of economy, in person.
and none of what you speak of - ie the intricate concepts like 'barriers to entry', 'demand', 'supply' etc does not mean shit, since these people OWN the economic activity. they can kill you in the market in any way they want, or buy you out, or squeeze you out. and come up as the hero for doing that - and which was what they did, in actuality.
and no, noone 'voted with their vallet'. that is the ultimate end of capitalism - eventually one group gets bigger than everyone else and owns everything. there is no choice in anything. NO - there is no 'make believe' in this - there is no 'invisible hand' somehow 'making intelligent choices' through citizenry and whatnot. that citizenry made their choice in 19th century, and you ended up with rockefeller et al. identically, the same citizenry is making their choices, and elected w. bush 2 times. along with those who brought acta, sopa, pipa, popa, schmogga et al.
therefore, all you are giving me is assumptions and make believe, saying 'this will happen if that happens'. what im giving to you, is what HAPPENED.
12 people owned entire economy of u.s. when it was, supposedly 'capitalist' as you have proposed in your statement.
and yes, the illusion of a participatory economy and choice, is better than there being no illusion. at least, for the masses in your country. for me, they are both the same.
but, that does not justify the stupidity of proposing to go back to 12 people owning the economy, based on the HOPE and BELIEF that 'things will just work out, "because"'.
ha. wow of poverty. and, how are you going to prevent them from being 'appeased' by the big buck ? vacations, services, gifts that cannot be monetarily accounted ?
and how are you going to prevent psychological disorders of commanding entire countries' power and system and being in poverty will cause ?
you are basically mandating them to be gurus, or saints. find such people. its hard.
stop giving that shit over and over to us. u.s. has not been 'capitalist' over a century. and what was it before ? capitalist ? so, 12 people, who you can identify by name, owning almost entirety of the economic activity in a country, is better ? vanderbilt to rockefeller. one dominates newspapers/media, other railroads, the other steel ------ so 12 fucking people basically OWN everything. so, when there was REAL capitalism, your country ended up being owned by 10-12 people.
and you are trying to sell us THAT, based on the shitty assumption of the present situation being bad ?
excuse me buddy, but take your 'real capitalism', and shove it up your ass. at least, now entire country is owned through proxy corporations, shareholderships in big funds, therefore giving the ILLUSION of being a participatory, pluralist economy. back 100 years ago, the 12 owners were directly owning and running everything. really. shove it up in your ass.
because, the i.t. sector, and its generation - therefore owners, execs - are so young yet. and they think that the 'magic' that surrounds the i.t. - and makes entire i.t., internet, golden companies inhabiting it - untouchable, will last forever. this is why brin and page and similar go to congress to give testimonies, and just talk in front of the bought congressmen and back, when called. they think their intelligence, insight, perspective, will be actually taken into account . and things will be seen, understood, and acted accordingly. then they return without buying congessmen. (they should have bought them before going there in the first place).
they dont have any idea that money calls the shots, and if you havent bought congresscritters, what you say - regardless of how wise and revolutionary - will not be heard.
The GREAT britain, now a BITCH to u.s. corporations. you think this is an uncalled for and aggressive post ? because the keywords were capitalized ?............ does that change the street-speak summary of this situation ?
of course, that is an optimistic statistic. since, the bulk of the wealth at the top is undetectable in offshore banks, swiss banks, various fund schemes etc. if you count this unaccounted for wealth in, it really goes towards 1% owning near 90% or more. (the total wealth in swiss banks is assumed to be 7 times or so the value of everything - goods, services, land, everything - in the world, so go figure.).
now, see, the 1% people on the top, want to keep taking such 70-90% of everything. and the whole story behind laws like this, is that. that is a bigger share of the economy than biggest dukes had in medieval times.
so life, is 90% more expensive because this 1% segment gets 90% out of the economy and everyone has to work to generate that extra 90%, and give it to them through the system. imagine how life would be, if everything was 90% cheaper... or 90% more abundant...
so, instead of thinking this like 'some law bought by lobby interests', think it as like 'feudal lords trying to keep their hold on peasantry' -> for this is exactly what it is.
doing this, would break various mental conditionings that were built into your brain through the education and media systems and through conditioning of society at large. and, you would be free to seek any alternatives. the least benefit would be that you would be able to analyze the situation objectively, instead of instinctively skipping by the fact that someone in this society is taking 90% of every effort you spare, away from you through the economy - not even taxes. taxes are calculated after that 90% is taken away from you.
( for the naive out there - NO, if you are running your own business, this does not change - you are still spending on a lot of costs to run your business or your life, and ANY cost you spend out of your pocket - or opportunity costs - has that 90% drain on them - for, you cant exist outside economy while being in it, even if you work for yourself )
and i had a kenyan client who told me that when they went to atms to withdraw, they carried shotguns with it. go figure what goes about in corporate practices.
google wouldnt. but, people employed in google russia, definitely would. bribe or die ? anyone would choose bribe. that does not mean that google ireland is approving it. they end up approving it if they dont take action on it.
Despite the jokes others have made in response, capitalism works because in a free society, transactions are only made when the result is beneficial to both parties
this is a make-believe, childish understanding of social dynamics. its extremely ignorant of history of this planet and its society too. like a believer of a religion, putting TRUST in something, despite it always happened otherwise.
the evil of capitalism is not in its transactions or the basic premise of trade. it is in the fact that there is no limit to wealth in capitalism, and wealth breeds wealth, and wealth is ultimately power. there is no way to remedy that in capitalism.
capitalist economic systems, EVEN if they are employed/practiced in fascist, dictatorial or imperial political systems, always allow the biggest wealth holder to decide how things end up in both economy and politics - no exceptions. fuggers have practically governed holy roman empire for around 150 years, and charles v was their bitch (and he was commanding half of europe), even in the deepest pit of war, nazi germany was still handing out production and design contracts to private corporations instead of mobilizing entire country and commanding their assets directly, and in dictatorships of mussolini, peron et al, the rich always had the power to have things done their way. even roman emperors were obliged to the wealthy - and actually they were the most prominent among that wealth class in the first place - patricians. (except military chaoses that occasionally appeared)
so, even if you have a strictly hierarchical and dictatorial regime in politics, wealth STILL exerts power.
now, imagine what happens if you remove the strictly hierarchical, hereditary dictatorial/imperial political system from a capitalist economy - now, there is nothing to check the power of wealth - wealth directly becomes de facto political power.
the perfect picture, you are seeing in america. remember that :
wealth is power. and if you allow wealth to concentrate in any segment, you allow power to concentrate in that segment. and in capitalism, this becomes the 1% minority.
record labels are making a LIVING based on how well THEIR art is received, you say ?
are you a fucking moron ? excuse me, but really, are you a fucking idiot ?
record labels do NOTHING other than keeping bands perpetually in debt to them, and give just cents over dozens of dollars of album sales, forcing them to go on tours worldwide not to make money, but to be able to pay the 'loans' they got from the record label in the initial contracts.
you dont know shit about this, yet you are making grandstand statements like 'When you're making a living based on how well your art is received, then let's talk'.
LETS talk then. lets talk about how record labels are not paying musicians, keeping them in perpetual debt, dodging taxes and royalties, and gulping 90% of the revenue generated by content sales.
or alternatively, you can just shut the fuck up, and educate yourself before you make another grandstanding statement for next time. i think that's the better option.
so unless someone much better than myself, and much braver than myself, will step up (along with millions of other better, braver people) out of the woodwork to fix the broken system
such people attempted to come out of the woodwork recently. you ridiculed them, despised them, called them names, called them out about shit, and then beat them down with police batons. it was called 'ows'.
im sure at the moment you read the word 'ows', a good many of you immediately lapsed to very reactionary and negative mindsets. let me tell you : it doesnt matter what you feel about what particular aspect of a revolution/change movement - NO revolution/change on the planet is going to be in the way you exactly want it. there will always be things you dont like, there will always be things you do like. the important thing is overall change to be for the better.
Slashdot Mirror
- 1. Campaigning of any sort is not allowed for elected members.
- 2. Elected members are not members of political parties nor members of special interest groups nor executives of large organizations nor major shareholders of such.
they'll do it behind closed doors, in smoke filled rooms, through whispers.
- 3. Elected members are not "representatives" but rather people who are free to vote their conscience.
i cant even begin to count how this would flop.
better than anything 'communism' provided ?
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
85% of u.s population gets only 15% of wealth/income. top 5-7% gets 72%.
in contrast, in middle ages, peasants were entitled to 33% of the produce from the fields, and entire economy was tied to land. lords, biggest dukes, could only get 33% of the produce off of the land. rest 33%, belonged to church.
people in america are taking HALF of what middle ages' peasants took from what wealth and amenities were available at that time and age to their society.
and there are homeless on the streets, people feeding off of garbage dumpsters, people working in two jobs for minimum wage to survive.
and in contrast, lets look at the WORST that communism have provided to ussr :
noone in the streets. noone hungry. noone without a roof over their head.
people would engage in arts, literature, and poetry when they went home from their jobs. because they had the ample time, and remaining energy to do it.. in contrast, the well-to-do participants of the economic system in america are not finding the time to use their dearly-bought fishing boats, kayaks, this and that, even if they belong to the measly 10% middle class that exists in america now. they are working their asses off, to pay debts or for job security.
anybody who lived under any of the 'communism' regimes can confirm that ? what are they going to confirm ? the fact that they want to go back to those regimes, in which they did not have to fear being out on the streets tomorrow ? like how most of the population of former eastern germany, now regrets the unification they had with west germany ? sure. they can confirm that. they confirm it on documentaries, tv broadcasts, a plenty. ranging from german tvs to bbc. apparently, you havent had anything confirmed by them, else you wouldnt talk like this.
ignorance is bliss. only through ignorance one can justify a system which gives you LESS than middle ages, but makes you work MORE than them, and make you think it as 'better'.
Saying that 12 people owned the economy 100 years ago is just silly. The market is a wildly complex and dynamic creature made up of the interactions of all who particpate, basically the entire citizenry.
your proposition and assessment is too light hearted and devoid of reality. even it contrast what contemporaries of those times have been saying.
it was not a 'wildly complex and dynamic creature' as you so galvanize. it was basically owned by 12 people. people driveling in mud at the bottom, has not made a middle class.
The wealth gap was pretty stable
seeing that you have no knowledge of history. otherwise there wouldnt be an offensive and stupid statement like this regarding those times. the people who you are telling to have 'a stable wealth gap' was driveling in mud, and it was worse than the current 85% poor at this point in time.
http://www.ralphmag.org/FL/poverty-america.html
stable it was. and it was despicable.
you come up as a BELIEVER in your speech. i dont discuss with believers. there is no end. you see things to your perspective and twist picture to your own desire - just like you have beautifully portrayed a horrible poverty as 'a stable wealth gap' (as if it was something good).
ill mark you as foe, in order to have a red dot when i see your posts, so i can refrain from discussing with you again - no hard feelings ; i have done too many discussions with 'believer' type people, be them religious, be they from the holy church of market economics. and i dont see any point in doing that anymore.
BR. audieu.
Make life more complicated to peddle more shit to us so that we can work more to pay them off, instead of simplifying it and saving everyone's time and resources by better mass transportation.
i hear people are going to their jobs in paris by boarding the fast trains from bordeaux ffs. in usa, you can just get to your job from your house in the same time length.
http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition
still a very mild description of what goes on.
its because you people are so naive, unable to believe that such organized agendas can exists that these agendas actually do exist.
i didnt say i was hypothesizing. i described what happened in turkey in the last 15 years. and it had no exaggerations or metaphors in it. not only that, but it didnt happen outside my social circle, my own direct life experience either - a lot of it was experienced first hand, through relatives or friends or classmates. all of these were being openly discussed and criticized in national newspapers until 5 years ago. 5 years ago the current islamist party then in power started to come down on any media outlet that was discussing these openly, and foreclose on their assets through dubious tax investigations, then selling them to prominent islamist figures from their own community through 0 interest, very long term loans from government's lending bank.
currently prime minister of turkey regularly calls the remaining media holdings' execs to meetings and tells them what he does not want to be discussed in media. and everyone obeys.
Look, it's unity100 being a moron again!
wow yes ! that really frightened me from posting my thoughts ! oh god - what if a random zygote in some random country on the freaking internet calls me a moron !?!?! what would i do then !!!
......
you just cant get enough of me. thats your problem. ill keep posting here, however i will, speaking my mind, even if you go red with rage. enjoy reading my posts in which i speak my mind with you having no means to prevent it. and let me go back to ignoring your trolling.
lets keep it concise :
- you said u.s. hasnt been capitalist for over a century.
that implies, u.s. was capitalist, a century ago. based on the proposition.
and so we look at what was there 100 years ago (actually 120), and see that entire country being owned by 12 people. not even 'monopolies'. these people directly own these aspects of economy, in person.
and none of what you speak of - ie the intricate concepts like 'barriers to entry', 'demand', 'supply' etc does not mean shit, since these people OWN the economic activity. they can kill you in the market in any way they want, or buy you out, or squeeze you out. and come up as the hero for doing that - and which was what they did, in actuality.
and no, noone 'voted with their vallet'. that is the ultimate end of capitalism - eventually one group gets bigger than everyone else and owns everything. there is no choice in anything. NO - there is no 'make believe' in this - there is no 'invisible hand' somehow 'making intelligent choices' through citizenry and whatnot. that citizenry made their choice in 19th century, and you ended up with rockefeller et al. identically, the same citizenry is making their choices, and elected w. bush 2 times. along with those who brought acta, sopa, pipa, popa, schmogga et al.
therefore, all you are giving me is assumptions and make believe, saying 'this will happen if that happens'. what im giving to you, is what HAPPENED.
12 people owned entire economy of u.s. when it was, supposedly 'capitalist' as you have proposed in your statement.
and yes, the illusion of a participatory economy and choice, is better than there being no illusion. at least, for the masses in your country. for me, they are both the same.
but, that does not justify the stupidity of proposing to go back to 12 people owning the economy, based on the HOPE and BELIEF that 'things will just work out, "because"'.
yes. well done ! you have showed everyone how big a moron i was.
now, we are expecting to show the same kind of aptitude when something undesirable is done by any microsoft outfit.
and look ! you are marked with a red dot in my interface.... i wonder why ...
ha. wow of poverty. and, how are you going to prevent them from being 'appeased' by the big buck ? vacations, services, gifts that cannot be monetarily accounted ?
and how are you going to prevent psychological disorders of commanding entire countries' power and system and being in poverty will cause ?
you are basically mandating them to be gurus, or saints. find such people. its hard.
stop giving that shit over and over to us. u.s. has not been 'capitalist' over a century. and what was it before ? capitalist ? so, 12 people, who you can identify by name, owning almost entirety of the economic activity in a country, is better ? vanderbilt to rockefeller. one dominates newspapers/media, other railroads, the other steel ------ so 12 fucking people basically OWN everything. so, when there was REAL capitalism, your country ended up being owned by 10-12 people.
and you are trying to sell us THAT, based on the shitty assumption of the present situation being bad ?
excuse me buddy, but take your 'real capitalism', and shove it up your ass. at least, now entire country is owned through proxy corporations, shareholderships in big funds, therefore giving the ILLUSION of being a participatory, pluralist economy. back 100 years ago, the 12 owners were directly owning and running everything. really. shove it up in your ass.
YOURS is a misconception.
how are you going to protect that world government from being run by the wealthy and corporate interests, just like current usa is being run ?
oh come on ....
because, the i.t. sector, and its generation - therefore owners, execs - are so young yet. and they think that the 'magic' that surrounds the i.t. - and makes entire i.t., internet, golden companies inhabiting it - untouchable, will last forever. this is why brin and page and similar go to congress to give testimonies, and just talk in front of the bought congressmen and back, when called. they think their intelligence, insight, perspective, will be actually taken into account . and things will be seen, understood, and acted accordingly. then they return without buying congessmen. (they should have bought them before going there in the first place).
they dont have any idea that money calls the shots, and if you havent bought congresscritters, what you say - regardless of how wise and revolutionary - will not be heard.
capitalism happened. power of money transcends borders.
The GREAT britain, now a BITCH to u.s. corporations. you think this is an uncalled for and aggressive post ? because the keywords were capitalized ? ............ does that change the street-speak summary of this situation ?
The top 5% of society is taking 72% of everything.
... or 90% more abundant ...
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
of course, that is an optimistic statistic. since, the bulk of the wealth at the top is undetectable in offshore banks, swiss banks, various fund schemes etc. if you count this unaccounted for wealth in, it really goes towards 1% owning near 90% or more. (the total wealth in swiss banks is assumed to be 7 times or so the value of everything - goods, services, land, everything - in the world, so go figure.).
now, see, the 1% people on the top, want to keep taking such 70-90% of everything. and the whole story behind laws like this, is that. that is a bigger share of the economy than biggest dukes had in medieval times.
so life, is 90% more expensive because this 1% segment gets 90% out of the economy and everyone has to work to generate that extra 90%, and give it to them through the system. imagine how life would be, if everything was 90% cheaper
so, instead of thinking this like 'some law bought by lobby interests', think it as like 'feudal lords trying to keep their hold on peasantry' -> for this is exactly what it is.
doing this, would break various mental conditionings that were built into your brain through the education and media systems and through conditioning of society at large. and, you would be free to seek any alternatives. the least benefit would be that you would be able to analyze the situation objectively, instead of instinctively skipping by the fact that someone in this society is taking 90% of every effort you spare, away from you through the economy - not even taxes. taxes are calculated after that 90% is taken away from you.
( for the naive out there - NO, if you are running your own business, this does not change - you are still spending on a lot of costs to run your business or your life, and ANY cost you spend out of your pocket - or opportunity costs - has that 90% drain on them - for, you cant exist outside economy while being in it, even if you work for yourself )
and i had a kenyan client who told me that when they went to atms to withdraw, they carried shotguns with it. go figure what goes about in corporate practices.
google wouldnt. but, people employed in google russia, definitely would. bribe or die ? anyone would choose bribe. that does not mean that google ireland is approving it. they end up approving it if they dont take action on it.
Despite the jokes others have made in response, capitalism works because in a free society, transactions are only made when the result is beneficial to both parties
this is a make-believe, childish understanding of social dynamics. its extremely ignorant of history of this planet and its society too. like a believer of a religion, putting TRUST in something, despite it always happened otherwise.
the evil of capitalism is not in its transactions or the basic premise of trade. it is in the fact that there is no limit to wealth in capitalism, and wealth breeds wealth, and wealth is ultimately power. there is no way to remedy that in capitalism.
capitalist economic systems, EVEN if they are employed/practiced in fascist, dictatorial or imperial political systems, always allow the biggest wealth holder to decide how things end up in both economy and politics - no exceptions. fuggers have practically governed holy roman empire for around 150 years, and charles v was their bitch (and he was commanding half of europe), even in the deepest pit of war, nazi germany was still handing out production and design contracts to private corporations instead of mobilizing entire country and commanding their assets directly, and in dictatorships of mussolini, peron et al, the rich always had the power to have things done their way. even roman emperors were obliged to the wealthy - and actually they were the most prominent among that wealth class in the first place - patricians. (except military chaoses that occasionally appeared)
so, even if you have a strictly hierarchical and dictatorial regime in politics, wealth STILL exerts power.
now, imagine what happens if you remove the strictly hierarchical, hereditary dictatorial/imperial political system from a capitalist economy - now, there is nothing to check the power of wealth - wealth directly becomes de facto political power.
the perfect picture, you are seeing in america. remember that :
wealth is power. and if you allow wealth to concentrate in any segment, you allow power to concentrate in that segment. and in capitalism, this becomes the 1% minority.
record labels are making a LIVING based on how well THEIR art is received, you say ?
are you a fucking moron ? excuse me, but really, are you a fucking idiot ?
record labels do NOTHING other than keeping bands perpetually in debt to them, and give just cents over dozens of dollars of album sales, forcing them to go on tours worldwide not to make money, but to be able to pay the 'loans' they got from the record label in the initial contracts.
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/07/13/1737224
THEY DONT EVEN PAY ARTISTS !
http://gizmodo.com/5417318/my-6247-royalty-statement-how-major-labels-cook-the-books-with-digital-downloads
http://www.demonbaby.com/blog/2007/10/when-pigs-fly-death-of-oink-birth-of.html
you dont know shit about this, yet you are making grandstand statements like 'When you're making a living based on how well your art is received, then let's talk'.
LETS talk then. lets talk about how record labels are not paying musicians, keeping them in perpetual debt, dodging taxes and royalties, and gulping 90% of the revenue generated by content sales.
or alternatively, you can just shut the fuck up, and educate yourself before you make another grandstanding statement for next time. i think that's the better option.
how about directly ignoring the system ?
so unless someone much better than myself, and much braver than myself, will step up (along with millions of other better, braver people) out of the woodwork to fix the broken system
such people attempted to come out of the woodwork recently. you ridiculed them, despised them, called them names, called them out about shit, and then beat them down with police batons. it was called 'ows'.
im sure at the moment you read the word 'ows', a good many of you immediately lapsed to very reactionary and negative mindsets. let me tell you : it doesnt matter what you feel about what particular aspect of a revolution/change movement - NO revolution/change on the planet is going to be in the way you exactly want it. there will always be things you dont like, there will always be things you do like. the important thing is overall change to be for the better.
google's india offices have tried to sell them domain name and web hosting. so ?