The Real Enemies of Democracy

I made some of these comments on another thread, before the Substantial-Fool destroyed it. 

Contrary to what the ultra-far right on this board think (The rednecks like DumbMike), I am actually relatively centre in my ideology. I would consider myself an independent because I have actually never voted in any country. For me, the left is too far left, and the right only represents shareholders.

There is hypocrisy when it comes to money by the left and right. 

Left-wing billionaires like Bill Gates pay little to no tax, so economically they are actually far-right. Left-wing with everything, except paying tax and allowing free-market capitalism and competition. Gates also bribes politicians through lobbyists so he could kill IT companies from being competitors to Microsoft.

Lobbyists don't care about ideology, they just want their cut for shafting Democracy by acting as a backdoor to the system. 

Competition = Democracy (freedom of choice). A fair balance society based on merit. 
Competition = a growing middle-class majority. 

Monopolies and Oligopolies = authoritarianism. (Or communism).
Monopolies and Oligopolies = A shrinking middle-class.

Big Tech could be the future Putin's of the world, as bribed governments become weaker and weaker. Less competition means politicians become more like Lobbyists that administrators. 

Over time fewer people own most of the money due to declining competition causing the middle-class to shrink. (This is pushing the average person further left, or further right which will destroy Democracy, which is dependent on balance and a majority middle class- and therefore closer to the centre). 

I am actually more concerned with economics than ideology. 
Ideology is subjective, but allowing billionaires to pay little to no tax is not ideology, it is the result of bribing politicians and the handwork of bootlicking lobbyists. It makes no sense for the middle class to carry the burden of being the highest % taxpayers. 

Also, allowing competitors to acquire each other and create monopolies and oligopolies is undermining Democracy, and making the middle class shrink.  

A middle-class conservative agenda would allow everyone to get the benefit of lower tax rates, not just shareholders.
Sure, less tax is less socialist, but everyone needs to profit from this policy, not just multi-millionaires and billionaires. 
If the richest people paid the same % of their earnings in tax as the middle class, everyone's tax could be less. So that would push more people towards the centre, or even more right. 

Right-wing politicians talk about low taxes as the key to capitalism, but they ensure that most people get no benefit from the policy. 
Since the UK conservative party has been in power, I pay around 3% lower tax. Unless someone is earning millions, this is not much. The ultra-rich are allowed to keep their money outside the country to avoid what little tax they do have to pay. 

I still believe the politicians and billionaires bribing them are the real enemies.
The left and right are played off against each other, while the richest people (left and right) and the bootlicking lobbyist and politicians are the ones that benefit. The same people that want no legislation and low taxes in the name of capitalism, are the same ones creating monopolies and price-fixing oligopolies and destroying competition through aggressive acquisitions so they can maximise profit.
A monopoly can make up to 90% profit on its revenue, whereas it would only make about 30% profit if there were lots of competitors (freedom of choice). The richest people understand that the way to get richer is to kill Democratic competition to maximise profit. 

If it was a fair % of tax, it would push more people towards the centre. If governments ensured there was more competition by blocking acquisitions it would grow the middle class. (The radical left and right would become weaker). 

I feel the West may have peaked and what we are seeing in America may start to spread around the other Western countries where there is a complete lack of trust in politicians and the system. Why is there no middle-class conservative agenda that is less tax for everyone, by ensuring that everyone pays a fixed % of tax (except perhaps the poorest in society)? 

How can we end up in a situation where 3% of the population own 97% of the wealth, and these same people pay like 1% tax on corporate profits. (Sometimes less). They also have deferred tax on personal income tax which is a total sham.  

SB

I am not differing from you in any of the aspects  listed by you - what does surprise me is that you do not really realize what the present situation is in the USA  under the Biden Administration and is totally mixed up about what happened in the economy under Trump.

Lower taxation should not be a dream - it should benefit everybody as was the case under Trump - while the economy grew and the economy of the USA was flourishing,   Unemployment reached the lowest level in the time after WW2 and  Government tried desperately not to fund Federal Government  current expenditure without borrowing of money,  In the main in the period  of the Bush administration the national debt of the USA increased from $500 billion under Clinton to $9,5 trillion under Bush nd grew by a further $10 trillion under Obama.   Other than  the Covid support  funding through loans ($3 trillion) the funding of current expenditure through loans were limited to about $1 trillion - meaning that loan funding of current expenditure was limited.   .   Since Biden took over the USA went on a spending spree and  the US debit grew in record time from $23,5 trillion to $29,5 trillion.

Loans must be repaid and the expenditure of Government with loan money adds to inflation and that is because money spend like that decreases the value of the dollar.    Most of he expenditure is based on things like  socialist  pipe dreams and foreign aid - of no value to the US people.   Hyper-inflation obviously effect everybody and it is basically felt more by the poor and the middle class than it effects the wealthy,    Be it s it may - inflation contributes to economic recession - and the Democrats now says that it would be a good thing to happen.    Wonder why that is regarded as a good thing, but I think  it is a measure to wipe out th middle class in the USA - the socialist Democrats hate the middle class - since they represent independence from central government control of everything.   

The US politicians has a long history of being more in enriching themselves  than in taking care of the interest of the people they actually Govern.    That is why their should be term limits iro of the  House and Senate membership as well.   The fact is that politics should never become  a career in itself and backhanders to politicians should be criminalized.   The list of corrupt US politicians is long and include both Democrats and some Republicans as well.

I think the present Government has a long history of proven corrupt politicians being in charge.   I do not support the Democrats and certain Republican politicians in that regard.   What Obama did in the USA was on par with what Zuma did in SA.   Use the FBI and Justice Department to ensure that corruption is not judicially dealt with is a serious attack on Democracy.

I am not a rightwing reactionary at all - I have always been a centrist in all respect - what I hate is corruption by politicians  and that is having a free run in Democratic and Republican Party politicians.   One of those are Cheney and there are at least 8 Republican Party Senators  who is involved in kick back skullduggery - while the Democrats are having all a free time at present - their whole leadership structure is neck deep in corruption.  

So what has he present Administration caused through a move to the left and embracing Socialism - encouraged by the ultra-rich because they can control the present politicians  through bribery and corruption - is killing the USA,   The loans of the USA at present is largely from China and what does that say about control of the USA by the people and for the people?

The big present issue for instance is abortion.  Abortion is totally corrupt spending of Government money through bribery and corruption - so much so that it is mentioned as one of  the reasons for the Supreme Court judgement.  Unlike what the Democrats allege to the contrary the Supreme Court did not ban abortion - what they decided on the issue  was that it should be handled by the elected representatives of the people and not by unelected  bureaucrats as the case was at present.   That was the essence of the decision - but the Democrats hated it because it touch a core of major corruption on the USA they thrive in.

My views are not formed by quoting from media propaganda controlled by the ultra-rich, but from he factual situation as it is at present.   .        .      .   .                                      

How do you know about taxation by the ultra-rich.    The top richest 10% of the population of the USA contributes 90%  of  all the taxes collected by the US Government.   Corporate taxation is influenced by expenditure like employment and other costs as well.      If those factors are not taken into account there will be NO investments to enhance the US economy.     Taxation based purely on political expediency is counter-productive and hampers the economy of countries.  There should always be a counter-balance in that regard or investments will vanish into thin air and the economy going into recession.   

Where I agree with you is the use of politicians through backhanders and bribery to get their programs going like the case of G ates and vaccine usage in the USA   There is zero medical justification for vaccinating children - yet the Biden administration insists on doing just that.   In the USA the internet platforms has a major impact on politics yet they are allowed to censor views and  has no accountability as to bribery and libel charges.  That should change - they should not be above the law like the richest Americans seems to be..

Duplication 

You only see corruption from one side because you can only think emotionally. 
The Lobbyists are laughing all the way to the bank when they see you take sides - when both sides are shafting you. 

I am more impartial and logical. 

For example, Nancy Pelosi was in charge of a review on breaking up Google and Facebook to create more competition (E.g. reversing mergers of Google/YouTube and Facebook/Instagram).

However, Pelosi's husband is a shareholder, with about 99% of his shares being Google. Something like half a billion dollars of shares. This is the bread and butter for the Pelosi household, so there is no way that they would break these companies up. It is ridiculous that someone in this situation is responsible for the anti-trust competitive review.  

A few days before Nancy Pelosi made the announcement that the Anti-Trust case was going to be binned, her husband used the declining value of the shares due to the uncertainty to buy lots more shares. 
Once it was announced publicly that the anti-trust case was binned, the share value ros e again. 
The Pelosi's celebrated their sudden increased wealth from insider trading to shaft society. 

Ultimately, I say fire Pelosi or any other person from the government with millions in shares to prevent a conflict of interest. The government should be run by the middle class, not the rich. They need to represent the majority interests as best they can, regardless of ideology. 

From one side.   I think I mentioned that there are corrupt Republicans who are corrupt as well as well.   So what did I do wrong - I mentioned Cheney - but I suggest you read up of her father's role in Haliburton and she is directly linked to defense force  kickbacks as well,   

The case of the weapons of mass destruction was a lie aimed at getting a war going against Iraq.   It was a lie from the word go - and was presented  by Mueller (remember him)  under oath in the Senate.   There is a lot of politicians (Blair included) whose bamk balances benefot massively from that war.   

By the way there was another very real scandal.  A South African owned a firm by the name of Uranium 1  who owned the mining rights on an estimated   20%  of the USA uranium reserve.  The guy moved to Canada and became and still is a close friend of Obama.   Everything fine so far  - but then Uranium I which  registration was moved from Johannesburg to Canada - when the  owner decided to sell the Uranium 1 shares to a Russian State Owned company.  In view of their holdings in the USA they had to get approval from the US Government.   Surprisingly the approval was given by Obama and Clinton than Secretary of State.   About 6 months later there was a "donation" of $143 million paid into the Clinton Foundation  by the Russian firm involved from where  it was distributed  to  "welfare" recipients.    Muller ( remember him) was appointed to investigate the scandal allegations and found "nothing"   I was not surprised by that at all - he wanted to protect the "welfare" recipients.

There is documentary proof of the above and also of the corrupt Democrats I mentioned - but it is hushed up by the USA KGB - previously known as the FBI. 

I know about the Pelosi stroy = but there are many ,ore examples on her case.   However recently before  Biden announced billion in grant-funding for electric cars Oelosi's husband bout $10 million dollar shares in companies developing those vehicles.

The general game is called insider trading and there is a host of corrupt US Politicians involved - both Democratci and Republicans.   However, lets go back to 2014,    The Republican Party  supported by some Democrats managed to get a Bill through the house and Senate to determine  insider trading as a criminal offence.   A very comprehensive Bill was to be submitted to Obama for signature.  He arranged a huge function to receive the Bill where he told the press that as President he is delighted that a Bill  on Insider Trading was passed by the legislature.   However, never signed the Bill and his lawyers gutted it to a near to total extent and sent it back to the House and the Senate.    To override the President Senate had to get 60 votes and they could not get it because the Democrats who originally supported the Bill chickened out and there is still no insider trading legisl ation in the USA.   .        

But Musk has just paid the largest tax bill in history….the tax code doesn’t favor the wealthy. It favors the 50% of people who pay no taxes at all.

Nonsense.
A fixed % of tax is fair, regardless of what someone earns. 

However, it does show that the Democrats are at least making rich people pay tax. 
In the Trump era, he paid nothing. 

Musk, who was earlier this year accused of paying zero federal taxes in 2018 despite sitting on an estimated $243bn (£185bn), said he would pay the unusually high tax bill this year after the sale of millions of Tesla shares. (He is jumping ship on his own company). 

Anyone who believes rich people should pay no taxes is also on the take. Rich people that work with lobbyists to bribe politicians are the civilised mob. All potential Putin's that want to end competition, and therefore Democracy. This is why America is in the state that it is, where many people (from all ideologies) are talking about war against their own government. 

Can you quote sources saying that 50% of America pays no taxes? 

There is no democracy anywhere in the western world and the lefties were the useless fucktards that did it! Here's another chance for you to take your paws and pat your filthy hairy backs! 

Here you go ….the number not paying income tax is now well north of 50% partly due to free Covid money:

‘ The share of Americans who pay no federal income taxes has been hovering around 44% for most of the last decade, according to the Tax Policy Center.

The top 20% of taxpayers paid 78% of federal income taxes in 2020, according to the Tax Policy Center, up from 68% in 2019. The top 1% of taxpayers paid 28% of taxes in 2020, up from 25% in 2019.’

America has a progressive tax rate on income, but like the UK no tax on wealth. So if Bezos took no income in a year and sold no capital at a gain, he would owe no income tax. 

But like Musk, eventually when he sold his stocks he would pay capital gains.

The system is actually much more progressive than the UK with much larger  property taxes in the States . My flat in London was worth the same as my then house in Chicago but I paid 10 times the property taxes in the US.

VAT is another way the UK is less progressive. In the UK you approach 20%, in my state it’s 6%….meaning the poorer are taxed at the same higher rate as the rich in the UK.

There are aspects like ‘carried interest’ that are debatable. But in the end the top 5% of US tax payers pay 60% of all taxes and the bottom 50% pay nothing.

I don’t think that’s particularly fair to productive people, but the system works. Just ask if you’re confused, I’m happy to help.

Due to Covid Stimulus, and unemployment etc.
That is not the norm and you know it... You have also only cited 1 type of tax.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/18/61percent-of-americans-paid-no-federal-income-taxes-in-2020-tax-policy-center-says.html

The main reasons for the spike — high unemployment, large stimulus checks and generous tax credit programs — will largely expire after 2022.

Federal income taxes do not include payroll taxes. The Tax Policy Center estimates that only 20% of households paid neither federal income taxes nor payroll taxes. And “nearly everyone” paid some other form of taxes, including state and local sales taxes, excise taxes, property taxes and state income taxes, according to the report.

It was 46% pre Covid….60% after Covid. I was being conservative. sales taxes are always paid by everybody and paid at State level, so properly not included in Federal taxes.

Hell when somebody buys a painting in England you have to pay (Use) sales tax in Illinois

And of course if you bought a coke, you paid some taxes. What a pathetic argument.

You were hopelessly misinformed, believing the same sort of rubbish Clever believes, now you’re just clutching at straws.

So your big source is ProPublica a left wing rag.  They say this:

Taken together, it demolishes the cornerstone myth of the American tax system: that everyone pays their fair share and the richest Americans pay the most. The IRS records show that the wealthiest can — perfectly legally — pay income taxes that are only a tiny fraction of the hundreds of millions, if not billions, their fortunes grow each year.

….

It demolishes nothing. Many owner/CEOs choose not to take a salary because it skews the whole compensation system for others.

So they live on dividends and selling stock. But they try to consolidate stock sales for several years, because it effects the market for the stock.

Musk sells nothing for years and then sells enough to fund him for 10 years. Does he show low income in the other 9 years…yes. Is it significant…no.

There are ways income can be deferred in the US, or negated by making charitable contributions. That’s the way US became the world’s most charitable country.

This rag is actually suggesting a wealth tax…a tax on gains which are not realized. A totally old idea, rejected generation after generation.

Hell in the US if you sell a house at a profit you pay capital gains and you can’t take capital losses. In the UK if it’s your main home you don’t pay capital gains and if it’s not your main home and it’s sold at a loss, you get tax relief.

The whole idea of easy US taxes propagated by the Left never takes into account the full range of taxes. Do yourself a favor stop reading rubbish like ProPublica.

1 in 3 Americans say violence against government can be ...

What do we think about violent protest against the government?

A third of Americans say violence against the government is ...

Significant Incidents of Political Violence Against Americans

More Americans Say Violence Against Government Can Be ...

An increasing amount of people in America do not trust their bribed government. I have never seen America like this. The riots at the Capitol are the tip of the iceberg.

It is not just Republicans, but Democrats who are losing faith in their government lapdogs to the Billionaire shareholders. 

America has peaked as a society, and unless significant changes happen they are on a downward slope. (unfortunately). I have always admired America until the last few years. 

No SB

As per normal you misinterpret things.  In the USA the worst riots in the period since WW2 happened in 2020  when -

*    rioters  murdered 45 people  = 13 of them police officers using firearms  and Molotov  cocktails;

*     Over a thousand police officers were seriously injured;

*     Thousands of businesses were looted and burned down causing losses running into billions of  Dollars.

Rioters were flown or bussed from city to city and stayed in hotels when needed to riot in cities.   They were allowed to keep the loot.   So who paid for that?  Records indicated that the costs were covered by the DNC and  Soros.   

During the riots obviously encouraged by the Biden Administration and other politicians about 1 500 rioters were arrested - despite efforts by Democratic Governors to prevent the Police from stopping riots.    After  the riots ended a few people were charged with looting and fined - whereupon a Democratic Party subsidiary headed by Harris paid the fines.    The rest were set free  without charges by the Justice Department.   There has been no charges of murder laid against anybody.    In the case of the Kenosha  incident Bi den attacked the accused of being racist - while the three criminals with long lists of outstanding criminal charges were all Antifa-organized supporters were White.   A  number of  House members in fact encouraged riots - but what is worse is that Schumer openly incited people to act against Judges threatening them.   Subsequently the Justice Department  refused to act against protestors at Supreme Court Justices homes - which is in itself illegal  - and resulted in a Californian being sent to Richmond to murder Judge Kavanaugh. 

Your opinion poll findings is immaterial when it comes to political violence  encouragement by politicians  of the Democratic Party.   There were no proof that Trump or anybody else incite people to riot on January 6, 2021.    Whatever, came out thus far it was clear that stories are fabricated - like the insurrection BS - and the Democrats and their sidekick Cheney is trying to create some sort of myth about criminal charges.    The Justice Department may try to create charges - but like in the James case in New York would end up with nothing in Courts.   You wrote a while back that a judge ruled that Trump will have to pay $10 000 dollars a day for not submitting documents to James - but that was over-ruled subsequently and all charges dropped because there was no evidence to sustain the charges.

Now back to the story about Trump not paying taxes while he was President.  He did not pay taxes on his Presidential salary because he donated the whole  salary to welfare organizations.  He also transferred  income that could be linked to people staying at his  Washington Hotel for official Government business  to the Treasury Department.   

By the way most taxes are paid by the major companies  and as Mozart explained some billionaires sell shares from time to time to cover  their living expenses - eg Musk.    However, there was a real case where the Democrats in the elections promised to raise taxes on the wealthy and then succumbed to reality and Biden  did even reduce taxation on the billionaires since he became President.  

Another aspect being the talk of the town is what billionaires like Gates and Bezos have to pay to their ex-wives  as part of divorce  settlements.  These are normally under wraps and secret but in the cases of the two mentioned in view of absence of signed agreements before marriage probably entails half of the property they own.   In some cases  the end result is the two may sell shares to cover the  settlement agreement - but that is not realized because it reduces the shareholdings of the billionaires and their impact on company decision-making.   No real reasons  are given for divorce - but in Bill Gates' case his wife started divorce proceedings two years before  it actually happened and gave her lawyers the reason as Gate's involvement with Epstein.   So  then the payment of taxes would be shared by the divorcees - so nothing new on that score either.   

In the end there is a clear difference - companies where billionaires own major shareholdings pay taxes on their  company or other  incomes  - if billionaires do not get paid a salary by the companies concerned there is nothing to tax in that regard.   

By the way all the four richest billionaires supports and fund the Democrats in election campaigns and not the Republicans  - that is perhaps why the Republicans  distrust them.   

    .

It is simple, kill competition to get maximum profit for shareholders, and shaft everyone else.

Monopolies  = Authoritarianism = Putin
Perfect competition (Ideal market state for capitalism) = Democracy.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/perfectcompetition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition  

Complex tax schemes with backdoors instead of flat rates = Bribing politicians. 
Billionaires not paying themselves salaries = legal tax fraud from bribing politicians. 

If the US government had blocked Facebook (Putin) from doing a hostile takeover of Instagram (think Ukraine), this would mean Facebook only had about 50% of its current revenue. 
It would also mean a much lower profit on the revenue (for shareholders) for Facebook.

More competition = less profit for shareholders. 
More competition = a growing middle-class majority, and fewer poor people.

Monopolies  = less jobs 
Monopolies = more outsourcing to low-income countries and taking away jobs from your own country- which also means less tax for the US government. 

We could debate the merits, but the facts are:
1. Middle class is shrinking in the US
2. Putin's (monopolists) are getting richer
3. The US is more unstable now than it has ever been. Change needs to happen to prevent a Civil war. 

The simple answer is to break up all monopolies to create competition and therefore make the country (and world) more Democratic.
The richest will be less rich, but the middle class will be richer.
How much money do the richest need? 

Mark Zuckerberg is a lump of shit that stole Facebook from its original inventors. 
Then he threw out his "best friend" who owned 50% of Facebook. The list goes on...
His best attribute is that he is not limited by morals. 

SB

Whereas I agree with you about the issue of  monopolies the threat to the middle class comes from Socialist Government policy under Biden and Democratic Party Governors throughout the country.   They seemed to be all Socialists - but Biden is definitely controlled by somebody else and it is not always clear who it is.   He cannot even answer questions from journalists if he does not have the questions in advance and answers written out to him.   He made comments - but in fact are often countered by the WH.   Biden is a fake President and a puppet.

The problem runs deep in the Democratic Party.    Small businesses are destroyed by the Democratic Party in places like California where people leave in their tens of thousands - many even emigrating to Mexico,  because  life is so bad in California  The departures are often enough from the Middle class people and   California lost House seats as a result.   One prominent departure was Musk who moved his operations to Texas.   Be it as it may - Socialists have taken over state and local Democratic Party offices and the policies applied by the Biden Administration is destroying the Middle Class.    Policies of the Democratic Party is largely responsible for inflation  which in itself is also killing the middle class.   Crime is also a factor and the present criminal-favored policy of the Democrats adds to the problems of  the Middle class,

I am afraid the Democratic Party must again become a center-left party it used to be  with responsible policies - but that seems at present to be impossible.  There is no strong leadership that could reverse the present drift to Socialism within that Party.

The only way to get the country back on track and democratic is for the present regime to be sent packing and the Democratic Party redefining their policies.   Would that be possible?   I think it may happen if Senator Manchin become their candidate in the 2024 election - but the media hate him as much as they hate Trump.

I agree with you Zuckerman is a cunning BSter.  He donated $500 million to fund the elections of 2020.    That in itself is crooked.   You should read up what that money was used for - it had nothing to do with honesty at all. 

  .         .       

"The simple answer is to break up all monopolies to create competition and therefore make the country (and world) more Democratic."

Is this both your long and short-term strategy?

Well, breaking up monopolies and price-fixing oligopolies was a strategy invented by the ancient Greeks over 2000 years ago, and something that has been applied "intermittently" by governments.

Well, at least governments that are NOT being bribed by the richest people to shaft Democratic values. 

More monopolies mean more profit for shareholders and less money for everyone else. Very Democratic...
America could be about to collapse due to corruption and the greed of politicians, who are meant to represent everyone. 

There are natural monopolies Google is a natural monopoly….who wants to go to the second best search engine, when it costs you nothing to go to the best. Tinker with this and the whole system will become less efficient…allow the government to play a role and they’d screw it up.

Best leave them trying to fix the inflation they created.

And believe me America has never been more wealthy, more in the lead militarily and more innovative. Having been involved in global businesses, except for a few exceptions like Nestle, European businesses are in the rear view mirror.

It’s nice that you worry about us Shark, but you would do better worrying about sclerotic Europe.

Actually, less than half of Google's earnings are from Google Search. (Which it invented). 

The Display network (website banners/pop-ups) were acquisitions, as were YouTube, as was mobile Android etc, etc.

Google did one thing well (Search)- and everything else is acquisitions. 
So if the government was doing its job, Google would be less than half its size. 

Zuckerberg stole Facebook, and everything else was hostile acquisitions. He is a symptom of corruption of the bribed politicians. 

Germany seems like a much better model that is fair for everyone, not just the shareholders and bribed politicians. It is capitalist, but it has a government that looks after its people. 

There were no Trust issues with Google acquiring these companies….YouTube for example.  When acquisitions take place in the US the Justice department or FTC examines the monopoly case. It’s exhaustive…I spent days testifying on acquisitions we made.

They have their economists…companies have the same. Ultimately if no agreement or remedy is reached you go to court or the company abandons the  acquisition. 

They are not interested in whether the company makes more money, rather in whether consumer choice becomes more limited and therefore more expensive.

Hostile acquisitions are faced with the same test.

Germany exports are more than 45% of GDP, the US less than 15%. Germany benefits it’s citizens by limiting those jobs in other countries…in the car industry for example.

So it’s hard to look at Germany in isolation.

The major economic policies Germany has pursued, relying on Russian oil, closing down nuclear plants and underfunding NATO, all look foolhardy.

Mozart

Why are the Democratic leaders now saying a  recession is near, but ia  not necessarily  a bad thing and will have good consequences in the long run?   Biden and his advisors seem to have the same idea and I think that a recession -

*   reduce inflation since the working class and poor people  will not have the money to pay for their needs leading to adequate supply of goods; 

*    would undermine further the middle class and smaller businesses; and

*    would cause further job losses that would cause serious problems in future.

Your comments on the above would be sincerely appreciated. .   .            

ButtPlug, so you like Google being able to track you across the internet? (E.g. Google Display Network- which includes the Ruckersforum.com). 

Google knows you like Rugby and lots more... As do they know about your interests in aliens and Buttplugs...
And that if you view both these types of websites on the same day, you are more likely to buy more Rizla and toilet paper- even though you did not even know of this relational behaviour...

You are always complaining about this... So, you seem to be taking a Mary Contrary position to your own critique...

When Google was allowed to purchase the Display Network, they promised to not join the data with Search in order to get approval from the anti-trust board.
However, a few years later they did just that... Google Analytics was also an acquisition... a key part of tracking your internet behaviour from site to site. 

Building an audience is the 1st step, learning to monetise is the next. Step 1 is far more important, otherwise perhaps we would all have our own advertising systems. 

Look at TikTok - they are currently whipping Facebook's arse in both growth of their audience, and now also monetisation with their ad platform. 
American lobbyists are now working to ban TikTok to kill competition. Ok sure, given TikTok is from China CCP - there is a decent argument to do so. However, it also benefits US companies by killing competitors. 

While we are on the topic of name-dropping, I know the best Google advertising person in the world.
He worked at the company that invented Pay Per Click Ads (PPC). Google poached him from this company, and he developed the Google Search Advertising system. So even Google did not know how to monetize Google Search without outside help... 

If PPC had not been invented by this other company, Google probably would not exist today. 
They were a one-trick pony that used backlinks (website links) to rank web pages. 
Google tried to sell their own company because they realised that once everyone knew this, it would be easy to spam backlinks and destroy their ranking system. 
However, as fate would have it, PPC was invented (by another company, that was killed).
This gave Google the money it needed to invest billions in making acquisitions like Google Analytics (formerly called Urchin) allowed website engagement to take over from backlinks as the primary ranking signal. 

The Display advertising system was an acquisition by Google. (Banner Pop-ups)
This same system is used for the YouTube advertising system (e.g. Interest targeting, Demographic targeting). The main difference being is only video advert formats, unlike Display which is images and video. 

A blockchain solution with a personal open-source login to the world web would allow people to control which information they shared, and they could even sell their own information to control what personalisation they received. It would allow ad targeting while preventing a few companies around the world from hoarding personal data. (e.g. TikTok)

The bidding optimisation is another topic that is using AI-based phycology and behaviour that only the machine understands... Far beyond topical targeting. (e.g. If you go to a combination of 50 unrelated websites, this indicates behaviour XYZ, or psychological trait ABC). More acquisitions... (e.g. Deep Mind, formerly a UK company)

There seems to be problems with Instagram - which Musk wanted to take over - but stalled it because of the fact that the site has support of only 51%  of the people supporting it - the rest were duplicate or non-contributing members.   Seems to be fraudulent to me to boost the companies advertisement income.   Is the same not the case with Google and Facebook as well.

Seems to me the problem with both is that they ban news not favorable to their own ideas and also that they cannot be sued for libel.    As such the two companies are above the law applicable to evey other media platforms.   Fact is theya re sued by countries like Iran and China to spread disinformation anyway.   

The two companies  has a larger impact on politics in the USA than the leftist media have and use that influence to gain further advantages for their bribed politicians who protect their interests,    Fact is those two companies represent the most serious threat to democracy in the USA.       Although I agree that they have done wonders in the development of the internet, I believe they should confine themselves  to their technical  contributions and should be forced not to try and be kingmakers in the country.     

VisKop

I'm all about decentralization. I despise being tracked and my information being used for purposes that I never agreed to nor fully understand.

Where we differ is that I prefer for new companies and technologies to organically compete against the current market leaders in an environment that is dictated by the consumer and NOT the government. 

If blockchain technology is able to offer a better and more trustworthy service than Google, then consumers will respond and Google will have to adapt or lose market share. I think it blockchain will win and that victory looks both like new players in the tech market and current players adopting blockchains.

I don't trust people in government to make logical calls as relates to business and I trust them even less when new legislation increases their power as opposed to shrinking it. I place my trust in free markets with the least amount of government distortion. 

Governments are historically and provably reluctant to return powers once they usurped them. However, free markets invariably lead to human upliftment.

"I'm all about decentralization. I despise being tracked and my information being used for purposes that I never agreed to nor fully understand"

I 200% support this stateme nt.....

Enjoy the weekend guys.... off for a ice cold one.....