Archive for the ‘Marxism’ Category

First off, this piece from Salon, that says exactly what it says:

Baltimore’s violent protesters are right: Smashing police cars is a legitimate political strategy
It’s crucial to see non-violence as a tactic, not a philosophy. If it fails to win people over it’s a futile tactic
Benji Hart

As a nation, we fail to comprehend Black political strategy in much the same way we fail to recognize the value of Black life.

We see ghettos and crime and absent parents where we should see communities actively struggling against mental health crises and premeditated economic exploitation. And when we see police cars being smashed and corporate property being destroyed, we should see reasonable responses to generations of extreme state violence, and logical decisions about what kind of actions yield the desired political results.

I’m overwhelmed by the pervasive slandering of protesters in Baltimore this weekend for not remaining peaceful. The bad-apple rhetoric would have us believe that most Baltimore protesters are demonstrating the right way—as is their constitutional right—and only a few are disrupting the peace, giving the movement a bad name.

This spin should be disregarded, first because of the virtual media blackout of any of the action happening on the ground, particularly over the weekend.  Equally, it makes no sense to cite the Constitution in any demonstration for Black civil rights (that document was not written about us, remember?)

Benji’s pretty deep into social justice-socialist revolutionary communist rhetoric here, and it’s only with those red-colored glasses that he finds a world so warped.

To give him credit, he does actually acknowledge the violence in Baltimore as not just “a few bad apples” or “outside agitators”, but rather acknowledges that it is a big part of his community.

Of course, he’s in support of that.

I do not advocate non-violence


The political goals of rioters in Baltimore are not unclear—just as they were not unclear when poor, Black people rioted in Ferguson last fall. When the free market, real estate, the elected government, the legal system have all shown you they are not going to protect you—in fact, that they are the sources of the greatest violence you face—then political action becomes about stopping the machine that is trying to kill you, even if only for a moment, getting the boot off your neck, even if it only allows you a second of air. This is exactly what blocking off streets, disrupting white consumerism, and destroying state property are designed to do.

This is really hardcore social justice socialist revolutionary marxist communist rhetoric.

The political goals are to throw a violent, destructive tantrum.

The free market has a difficult time existing in the cities of the hard left.  Eric Garner, the “black man killed by a police choke hold” in NYC, was killed by positional asphyxia, and was arrested for selling cigarettes.  The socialist nanny state determined to save people from their own habits decided to massively tax cigarettes for the stupid masses’ own good, and when Eric Garner wanted to sell cigarettes for the going price on a free market, the socialist state put him down.

The free market was not one of “the sources of the greatest violence” faced by anyone.

The buildings and homes and businesses in Baltimore or any other riot-plagued city were providing jobs, incomes, and a steady life for people.

That real estate that Benji thinks is one of “the sources of the greatest violence” was something that provided for people.  It was a tiny glint of hope in a neighborhood that didn’t have stability.  It was the free market trying desperately to sneak in and give people there something reliable, stable, and hopeful.

And Benji the communist terrorist wannabe would burn it down because he thinks CVS is the enemy.

The elected government?  Oh, the elected government in Baltimore starts and ends with the hard left.  Mayor Stephanie Rawlins-Blake empathizes with the rioters with her own brand of leftism, so much so that she called the police off so the rioters could destroy people’s homes and businesses.  And of course she’s in favor of giving people who wish to destroy space to do so.

The elected government in Baltimore is, as the quote goes, funded by people who work for a living and elected by people who vote for a living.  There’s no one to blame but the community and their community organizers.

The legal system?  If one were to trust it in Baltimore, it hasn’t been given time to go through the process to determine if there was wrongdoing by the police, which in a system of rule of law requires presuming everyone’s innocent until proven guilty (and they may well be).  But among the things missed in the last week were that Freddie Gray (the man whose spine was severed while in police custody) had an extensive criminal history.  There may well have been much more to his arrest than “looking at the cops wrong” as his lawyers have claimed.  Everyone knows that lawyers for defendants are always trustworthy.

As Alinksy said, all the angels must be on one side and all the demons on the other – can’t give the legal system a chance if it were to do the right thing.

And meanwhile, The Fourth Estate claims to have dug up info suggesting that Freddie Gray had a spinal injury treated the week before his arrest.

If this is true, then it is possible that Gray’s spinal injury resulting from his encounter with the Baltimore Police was not the result of rough-handling or abuse, but rather a freak accident that occurred when Gray should have been at home resting, not selling drugs.

So it could be murder in police custody (it does happen), or it could be an accident, an accident that’s got people like Benji sweating in their Che shirts dreaming of burning down convenience stores.  There’s not even a chance for the legal process to be concluded.  (And of course the legal process is only so slow because of the left dominating the law business both in Baltimore and Maryland government and courts.)

There is no “machine trying to kill you”.  The only “machine” is the hard left Democratic one that exists to perpetuate itself.  It dominates Baltimore, it dominates the discussion in Baltimore, and like the communists blaming the kulaks or people who wear glasses, it’s never the hard left system that people like Benji have instituted that’s the problem, it’s always that someone somewhere has resisted them.

“White consumerism” like the CVS that had a black manager and all black employees (at least in the video above) that Benji hates so much was the only thing helping those communities.  It did not have a boot on their neck.  It’s also only “white consumerism” to a marxist like Benji.

“Corporate property” is property of those who are stockholders in the corporation.  It’s also intrinsically valuable to the employees of the corporation and people in the community, who were crying at the loss of a major store in their community.  “Corporate property” is not white, and is not the enemy, unless you’re a hardcore marxist leftist.  Of course, judging by his writing, Benji is a social justice hardcore revolutionary marxist communist leftist.

Militance is about direct action which defends our communities from violence. It is about responses which meet the political goals of our communities in the moment, and deal with the repercussions as they come. It is about saying no, firmly drawing and holding boundaries, demanding the return of stolen resources. And from Queer Liberation and Black Power to centuries-old movements for Native sovereignty and anti-colonialism, it is how virtually all of our oppressed movements were sparked, and has arguably gained us the only real political victories we’ve had under the rule of empire.

With this kind of crazy true-believer communist, raised in an environment free of actual dangers, with no understanding of what came before or what will come after, there’s not really much you can do.  I did look up the author and find that the only Benji Hart that Google knows is a British actor, so maybe Salon just adopted a new marxist.

Kevin D. Williamson breaks down the riots of Baltimore further, pointing out that Baltimore is an entirely leftist, entirely progressive, entirely Democrat problem:

Yes, Baltimore seems to have some police problems. But let us be clear about whose fecklessness and dishonesty we are talking about here: No Republican, and certainly no conservative, has left so much as a thumbprint on the public institutions of Baltimore in a generation. Baltimore’s police department is, like Detroit’s economy and Atlanta’s schools, the product of the progressive wing of the Democratic party enabled in no small part by black identity politics. This is entirely a left-wing project, and a Democratic-party project.

When will the Left be held to account for the brutality in Baltimore — brutality for which it bears a measure of responsibility on both sides? There aren’t any Republicans out there cheering on the looters, and there aren’t any Republicans exercising real political power over the police or other municipal institutions in Baltimore. Community-organizer — a wretched term — Adam Jackson declared that in Baltimore “the Democrats and the Republicans have both failed.” Really? Which Republicans? Ulysses S. Grant? Unless I’m reading the charts wrong, the Baltimore city council is 100 percent Democratic.

That’s how the rebellion against “corporate property” and “white consumerism” and the “free” market and “real estate” comes about.  When the communists couldn’t find anyone to blame for the bad wheat harvests, it was the kulaks.  Once the kulaks were gone, it was outside influences or people who weren’t sufficiently revolutionary.  The application of leftist policy demands more leftist policy.

It’s never that it’s wrong, of they’ve gone too far – it’s that there’s someone out there somewhere who isn’t part of them, and there’s someone out there somewhere that’s ruining their “perfect” system that never turns out that way.  Everyone else is at fault, everything that goes wrong is someone else’s fault, and if they’re in control of their own future it’s a lie because of cultural history and socioeconomic historic inequalities they’ll never be free of and someone else is really at fault.  There’s always someone else to blame – often out of mad jealousy that the others have something the leftist wants and they want and need it because of their own failures – failures they’ll never see because all they can do is find a fictional cause to their problems in someone else’s lack of problems.  Blame and destroy, and implode.

A is hungry.  B has food.  A is hungry because B has food.  A needs to take B’s food and destroy B, because if B didn’t have food, A and B would be equal, and B will always take food that A should have.  B must be destroyed.  Once B is destroyed and A is hungry again, it must be because of B again and because elements within A now think like B.  A(B) must be destroyed by A.

This is all the left doing itself in.  Problem is that they want to destroy everyone and everything else that’s successful out of mad envy and hatred at their own failure before they go away.

Minor addendum: It’s possible Benji Hart is just an elaborate troll by Salon to see what kind of responses they get from printing stuff the CPUSA would find off-putting.  But it’s difficult to tell.

Also, with the massive political storm and riots, it’s going to be difficult for authorities to go through the process of determining what happened as politics will be saturating the situation.  With Eric Holder’s racist cop-killing DOJ descending on Ferguson, MO, like a biblical plague, they still couldn’t find wrongdoing on the part of Wilson.  I’m much more suspect of Baltimore (as it’s run by Democrats and progressives) than I am of the Ferguson PD, but it’s only going to make things more difficult now, because assuming the Baltimore PD did kill Gray, who’s going to be the Democrat used as a scapegoat and what will they do to try to keep themselves from going down?


From the New Yorker:

For decades, business owners have resisted higher minimum wages by arguing that they destroy jobs, particularly for young people. At some theoretical level, high minimum wages will distort job creation, but the best empirical evidence from the past decade is aligned with common sense: a minimum wage drawn somewhat above the poverty line helps those who work full time to live decently, without having a significant impact on other job seekers or on total employment.

Except it’s wrong, ignores the loss of jobs that are never created and the subsiziding impact of welfare and low-income benefits that also siphon funds away from job creation and into government redistribution.

I’ll let Orphe Divounguy explain it again:

(For example, a study of pairs of neighboring counties with differing minimum pay found that higher wages had no adverse effect on restaurant jobs.)

Of course, he doesn’t cite the study, the amount of difference in pay, or an analysis of what jobs were lost, not created, or where these counties were.

Even so, a federal minimum wage of ten dollars or more will not solve inequality. It will not stop runaway executive pay or alter the winner-take-all forces at work in the global economy.

And here we see the true intentions.  The objective is to make equality of outcomes.  The ideology is a belief that executive pay is “runaway” and that the economy is a “winner-take-all” scenario, rather than one of mutual cooperation for benefit.  Apparently the New Yorker’s Steve Coll doesn’t understand where pencils come from.

Coll continues:

Yet it will bring millions of Americans closer to the levels of economic security and disposable income that they knew before the housing bubble burst.

No, it won’t.  It will artificially increase wages, which will then result in employers increasing their expenses to customers.  There will be a transfer of wealth from the many to the few.  There will be a visible result of a handful of people with minimum wage jobs making more money, but it will result in a less visible loss of wages by everyone who uses those services, by employers whose payrolls will be adjusted in favor of old employees versus new ones – meaning jobs that would be created will not be created, and it will result in overall economic loss.

Coll starts his piece by talking about increases in wages for baggage handlers at SeaTac airport, where the minimum wage was bumped from $10/hour to $15/hour by a ballot initiative.  Businesses spent money pushing against it, and Coll celebrates that leftists emerged triumphant, that the “grassroots left, which seemed scattered and demoralized after the Occupy movement fizzled, has revived itself this year—with help from union money and professional canvassers—by rallying voters around the argument that anyone who works full time ought not to be at risk of poverty”.

Union money was sent in by union people who can now look forward to extracting union dues from those $15/hour workers at a higher amount than when they were $10/hour workers.  Professional canvassers are leftist marxist agitators and professional shit-stirring revolutionary groups who serve no function but to create conflict that they exploit for their own personal profit.  The businesses involved opposed it as best they could, but the leftists in Seattle & Tacoma voted for it.

What that means is that the expenses against the airport have gone up, and they’ll have to come up with something to balance it out.  That may mean layoffs, it may mean no new hires, but most likely it will mean increased rates and fees to customers.  The customer is hurt at the expense of the visible aid to the fictional oppressed proletariat.

…life on fifteen thousand a year is barely plausible anymore, even in the low-cost rural areas of the Deep South and the Midwest. National Republican leaders are out of touch with the electorate on this as on much else, and they are too wary of Tea Party dissent to challenge their party’s current orthodoxies of fiscal austerity and free-market purity.

Life on $15,000 per year is not something that someone manages alone.  First off, there are massive government handouts to those of that low income group; second, as Orphe explained, a lot of times, those workers are entry-level workers just getting started – like teenagers.

The Tea Party is composed of people who understand how economics work – that you can’t just arbitrarily say “we’ll make your employer pay you more” without that money coming from somewhere.  Again, Margaret Thatcher’s famous quote comes to mind:

thatcher socialism

Coll finishes with this bleeding heart plea:

The case for a strong minimum wage has always been, in part, civic and moral. Minimum wages do not create new “entitlement” programs or otherwise enjoin the country’s sterile debates about the value of government. They are designed to insure that the dignity of work includes true economic independence for all who embrace it.

The case for strong minimum wage laws has been couched in some people’s idea of what other people are entitled to.  If you pay the neighbor kid $5 to mow your lawn, it’s not moral for the neighborhood to tell you that you MUST pay him $20.  The result will be that the neighbor kid goes without the $5 and you mow your own lawn.  There’s nothing moral about dictating to people how much a worker has to sell his labor for or how much an employer has to pay for that employee’s labor – because it destroys entry-level jobs and harms the community.

The tut-tutting busybody who wants to put the government’s gun to someone’s head and make them do what they feel should be done is not moral.

Minimum wage laws inflict an entitlement by force.  The dignity of work comes from what people put into it – and earning a paycheck, not having the government hold a gun to your employer’s head – leaving you either paid more than you’re worth or unemployed entirely.

There is no “true economic independence” for a $10/hour job, a $15/hour job.  Idle rich and trust fund babies have “true economic independence” – and even they can lose it if economies change.  Economic independence comes from having one’s own skills that are marketable in different job environments.

If Coll and clowns who publish his Marxist drivel want to provide “dignity” and “true economic independence”, why not mandate a $100/hour minimum wage?  If people made $8000 every two weeks, they’d be doing pretty well.  Why not a $1000/hour minimum wage?  Or a $10,000/hour minimum wage?  You could work for a day and pay off student loans and buy a new car all in one.

If he’s got intellect greater than that of a grapefruit, he’d respond with “but businesses can’t afford to pay $10,000/hour.”  And just the same, they can’t afford to pay any other artificial minimum wage without modifying their business model.  Some businesses could handle $10,000/hour minimum wages, but it would harm them severely and result in cutting many employees, hiring no more employees, and passing costs off to customers.  Some businesses can handle a bump to $15/hour minimum wages, but it will harm them as well, it will harm future employment, and the business will pass costs off to their customers.

He wonders why the Midwest and South have a lower cost of living – and that is due in no small part to not having to deal with wage inflation – those costs are passed on to businesses, which pass them back on to us.

Update: Some leftist union organizers have decided to stage strikes for higher fast food wages across the country.  When they get the government to force their employers to pay them $15/hour, they’ll find that those businesses can’t stay open because no one wants to pay $17 for a Whopper or $13 for a Big Mac.  They won’t be able to afford the Taco Grande meals they make.

The fast-food effort is backed by the Service Employees International Union and is also demanding that restaurants allow workers to unionize without the threat of retaliation.

It’s like I should just write “the usual suspects are at it again”.

Beating a dead horse – if they’re not worth the pay, they’re not worth the pay.  That’s not a measure of their value as a human being, just their respective value in their chosen job.   Demanding more wages because you’ve chosen to make an entry-level job a career is a problem with the individual’s ambition and drive and desire to sit on the bottom rung of the economic ladder, not a question of whether their employer is a greedy robber baron capitalist pig-dog.

First she said that children are property of the community.

Now she says you have the right to have all your needs fulfilled at all times.

You can feel like you earn more, to pretend to have meritocracy, but really, everyone needs all of their needs cared for at all times.  The doctor has no right to his labor – he has to labor for the community good.  The farmer has no right to his crops – he is there to provide for the eaters.  The builder has no right to the house he builds – he is there to provide for those who want houses.  The woman has no right to herself – she is there to provide for men who need her body.  The healthy man has no right to his parts – he is there to be disassembled and harvested by those who need his organs.

To each according to your ability, to each according to your need!  Eat the rich!

Via the People’s Cube:

communal children perry peoplescube

From Dana Loesch at Redstate:

Chicago’s Chief of Police, who previously blamed ”government-sponsored racism” and Sarah Palin for Chicago’s gun violence, declared that the law-ful exercise of the Second Amendment was a threat to public safety. From the Illinois State Rifle Association:

Chicago’s embattled police superintendent dug himself deeper into a pit of controversy today by claiming that lawful firearm owners are agents of political corruption.  Appearing on a Chicago Sunday morning talk show, superintendent Garry McCarthy expressed his conviction that firearm owners who lobby their elected representatives or who donate money to political campaigns are engaged in corruption that endangers public safety.  McCarthy went on to express his belief that judges and legislators should rely on public opinion polls when interpreting our Constitution.

After totally dismissing the citizen’s right to redress grievances, McCarthy trained his constitutional wisdom on the 2nd Amendment.  Despite recent court decisions to the contrary, McCarthy opined that the 2ndAmendment limits citizens to owning smooth-bore muskets.  McCarthy went on to say that he believes that the 2nd Amendment supports mandatory liability insurance for firearm owners and the mandatory application of GPS tracking devices to civilian owned firearms.

The People’s Cube has the best response to this:

Dear Comrades,

The head of the Chicagograd Regional Police Battalion, Comrade Chief Garry McCarthy, has declared that the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution only applied to the 18th century, and that all matters of civil rights hinge on workers’ and peasants’ need for safety guaranteed by State security apparatuses. Therefore, all attempts to use the US Constitution to oppose security operations by State Law Enforcement organs are a danger to the public and will be suppressed.

Comrade McCarthy, known for his heroic service which has led to Chicagograd having the reputation as one of the safest cities in the USSA, is an expert in constitutional interpretation. In recent remarks on a local broadcast from the American Media Collective, the Chief explained that the Constitution was only intended to cover the current issues of 18th century America, making is a reactionary and decadent document.

In our Progressive era, where all citizens are equal and endowed by their membership in the Proletariat with the unalienable rights to complete protection and the provision of all their needs by the State, the Constitution now represents a threat to public safety when it is evoked as limiting the proper mandatory services of the State for the protection and care of the Masses.

Down with bourgeois ‘rights’! Up with the Right to Security Through Universal Disarmament!

Prog on:

Clearly the People’s Revolutionary City Directorate Commisar Rahm Emanuel has chosen well in his police chief, who clearly understands that the bourgeois notion of individual self defense is not only obsolete, but counterrevolutionary and dangerous.  These kinds of reminders are good to have, in case the mothers of future generations of the glorious proletariat forget that their wombs are the property of the state and thus of all of their fellow workers.  The Chicagograd Regional Police Battalion commander’s ideas ensure that no mother of future workers will be able to resist the glorious will of the most powerful of the proletariat laborers when they wish to provide her with a future worker for the state, and that any resistance she has to such an action would be counterrevolutionary and dangerous.

The People’s Democratic Democrat Representative Joe Salazar of the mountainous region of the USSA known as the Free People’s Democratic Republic of Colorado has also made such a statement – he notes that some mothers of future workers may experience some reluctance to bear the state another glorious laborer, but that they will be given whistles and call boxes so that they may summon a party member to award them with the Medal Of Motherhood upon conception of their surprise laborer.

Glorious Motherhood!  Down with the War on Women!  Women’s rights means the power for women to bear strong workers for the state, and the strongest of workers are the ones who can catch and battle the strongest of women to a defeat in unarmed combat, mirroring the revolutionary workers’ struggle against reactionary capitalists.

“Unexpected” Economic Problems

Posted: January 30, 2013 by ShortTimer in Economics, Government, Humor, Marxism, Media

From WSJ, via Drudge:

U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Contracts in Fourth Quarter

U.S. economic momentum screeched to a halt in the final months of 2012, as lawmakers’ struggle to reach a deal on tax increases and budget cuts likely led businesses to pare inventories and the government to cut spending.

The nation’s gross domestic product shrank for the first time in 3 1/2 years during the fourth quarter, declining at an annual rate of 0.1% between October and December, the Commerce Department said Wednesday.

We’ve had four years under Obama of “unexpected” job losses.  Now we have an “unexpected” drop in GDP.

Remember how Old Soviet Jokes Become The New American Reality?  This is more like “Old Soviet Headlines Become New American News”.

Constantly, experts are being “surprised” by “unexpected” losses that go against every forecast they make.  Every forecast is bright and shining, a horizon of a wonderous land where the ocean stop rising and the sun is shining and everyone is employed and everything is fantastic.  And every time, it’s “unexpected” when plans made by socialist planners fail.

castro peoples cube horizon joke

There are so many people who see the poor direction taken by government.  The solutions that everyone supports are ignored in favor of socialist/social justice objectives.  And every time, the social engineering fails.

fiscal cliff cut spending poll

This is a surpise only to The Anointed (as Thomas Sowell calls them), who seriously rule and truly live by Adam Savage’s humorous quote:

Then again, I bet most people would rather have Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman running the government.  A discussion over the use of rocket boots versus a backpackable hang glider to save us from the fiscal cliff would actually be more productive than raising taxes on job creators and increasing handouts to those who aren’t working.

Update: HotAir has a good roundup of the news on this.

China In Desperate Need of Perri-Air

Posted: January 30, 2013 by ShortTimer in Environmentalism, Humor, Marxism, Spaceballs

Life imitates Spaceballs:

For the fourth time this year, a murky haze has descended over north China, leaving residents of Beijing choking on toxic smog. China’s air hasn’t been this bad since 1954, according to the state-run People’s Daily newspaper.

In a remarkable record of dirty air, 24 out of January’s first 29 days this year had air classified as hazardous. And the skies have still not cleared.

The air is so bad that wealthy Chinese entrepreneur, Chen Guangbiao, is selling fresh air in soft drinks cans, similar to bottled drinking water. Each can is sold for 5RMB or about 80 cents.

Via HotAir, a reminder that we’re about to be taxed after death.

Part of the upcoming “Forward, over the fiscal cliff!”-scenario we’re potentially looking at includes a big hike in estate taxes (or, as they’re perhaps more aptly called, death taxes). Currently, the estate tax is applied to inherited assets at 35 percent after a $5 million exemption; most Republicans and even a mix of Democrats are in favor of lessening or eliminating the death tax altogether, but if President Obama gets the tax deal he wants, estate taxes will go up to 45 percent after a $3.5 million exemption.

In the event of neither a Bush-era extension nor President Obama’s plan, however, going over the cliff means that the estate tax shoots back up to the pre-Bush level of 55 percent after a $1 million exemption — and that has disastrous implications for our economy (which is just great, because we clearly don’t have enough disastrous economic implications looming over our heads already).

HotAir has a good video by Milton Friedman that breaks it down a bit more.

For those not quite clear on what that 55% of 1 million really entails, revisit this:

There’s A Homeplace Under Fire Tonight In The Heartland

Remember the first three planks of the Communist Manifesto:

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
And it’s not just communists, there are also the opportunists putting up barriers to competition by are pulling the ladder up behind them to further cement themselves as Ruling Class oligarchs:

As the fiscal debate focuses on whether to raise the federal income tax rates for the top 2 percent of Americans, other possible tax increases have taken a backseat in the debate.

But a group of billionaires led by Warren Buffett and George Soros to change that — by raising rates for the much-maligned estate tax.

The wealthy taxpayers  — organized by Responsible Wealth, which advocates for “progressive tax policies” — have signed a pledge calling for a “responsible estate tax proposal” as part of any fiscal cliff deal. In addition to Buffett and Soros, signatories of the pledge include other left-leaning billionaires, including Bill Gates Sr., Richard Rockefeller and Abigail Disney, as well as politicians like former President Jimmy Carter.

Let’s say you’re a super-wealthy conglomerate hedge fund megacorporation owner whose only real threats are from more agile upstarts.  What better way to destroy them than by using the tax code?

Family farm owner dies?  Drown his family in taxes so they have to sell the farm.  Small business owner dies?  Drown his family in taxes so they have to sell the business.

Responsible Wealth is calling for only the first $4 million of a couple’s income to not be subject to a tax. After that, it would be taxed at 45 percent, which would gradually rise on the largest incomes.

Yeah, only.  So if you’re land-rich and cash-poor, like many farmers and ranchers, you’re up shit creek.  If you have a few thousand acres of land you bought for cheap decades ago, the government will go in and appraise it again, adjust it for inflation, adjust it for whatever Agenda 21 zoning crap is going on, and adjust it for residences and improvements, and when they come up a few million higher than it was before you die, well… your kids are now stuck with that bill.  Or, you can sell… and who’s going to be the big agricultural conglomerate there to snatch up your land, bulldoze your farmhouse and barn, and plant some genetic uber corn where you buried your old bird dog Duke?  Oh, that’ll be Warren “TAX YOU TILL YOU F***ING DIE BECAUSE I GOT MINE B****ES!!!” Buffet.

The death tax itself is a destructive, regressive, horrible tax instituted by communists and their sympathizers.  Again, it’s in the bloody manifesto.  The death tax argument usually goes “well, they benefited in life, so they should pay back”.  What that ignores is that they paid taxes their whole lives.  Those who are veterans signed a line that said “up to and including my life”; and yet some bureaucrat communist oligarch tells them they need to “give back to society?”

“It’s shameful to leave revenue on the table from those who can afford to pay,” said Rockefeller, the great-grandson of industrialist John D. Rockefeller, said in a conference call organized by Responsible Wealth Tuesday.

So because they have something to take, it’s shameful not to take it from them by force?  This isn’t “revenue”, it’s confiscation from the citizen by force.

John Bogle, founder and former CEO of The Vanguard Group, added: “If we’ve been privileged in life and weren’t paying our fair share of taxes, somebody else is going to have to pay them. It will inevitably be those who are less able to do so.”

Bogle, like Soros, Buffet, and the rest, can always opt to pay more taxes.  They can always cut a check for more.

“Every step, large or small, to come after that deficit is good,” Bogle said. “Who bears the burden? … Our position is that those who have most resources to bear the burden ought to step up to the plate.”

His position is that we need to liquidate the kulaks.  He’s the oligarch, they’re the damned tight-fisted landed peasants.  Kill the have-some want-more farmer.

liquidate the kulaks