“I envision tens of millions of people in an Apple or a Google country,” where the high-tech giants would govern and residents would have no vote. “If people are allowed to opt in or out, you can have a successful dictatorship,” the goateed Friedman says, wiggling his toes in pink Vibram slippers. [Italics are mine–D. E.] . .
“If people are allowed to opt in or out, you can have a successful dictatorship,” the goateed Friedman says, wiggling his toes in pink Vibram slippers. [Italics are mine–D. E.] . .
AgentR11 wrote:Quote from the article because context matters.
His point, is that people vote by selecting the dictator they want, or by leaving if said dictator sucks at his job.
Not something I would do, but I can't call it nefarious either.
PrestonSturges wrote:Also the culture of these dingbats is to defer maintenance and pay themselves a bonus instead - see how that works on the ocean.
Sixstrings wrote:I dunno.. what the heck is a "Google town?" What, would it be like Logan's Run and nobody's over thirty? Sounds creepy to me, like a cult. And a sanitized society at that.. forced smiles and corporate speak all over. No variety. No reality. Just the cult of Corporation.
As for nefarious or not.. really they're just talking about a large gated community. Those already exist, like Disney World's Celebration. What's beyond me though is why someone would want to pay big bucks to buy a spot in a "dictatorship," why would anyone actively want to give away any say in how things are run.
stephankrasner wrote:I believe that the CEO's and villains in the silicon valley know that they and other corporate entities have taken too much. They can see the writing of a revolution against the rich forming either in an active mob or in the form of government telling them "party's over we're going back to a 90% tax rate".
They are simply trying to take the wealth they have gained and keep it for themselves rather than invest it back into the community or take a role as community leaders at home.
In the long run sea castles are ridiculous, but in the short term, a floating castle could make a nice retreat to wait out turmoil on land. Like all forms of doomsteading, It can't last forever...
AgentR11 wrote:A 90% income tax rate will not "GET" the rich. They already have their wealth, they could go to zero income, for a very long time, and note no significant difference in their lifestyles. If you drop a 90% tax rate on corporations, you'll destroy middle class jobs like never before as the businesses that can try to liquidate and offshore assets as much as they can.
AgentR11 wrote:If you want to stick it to the rich, the income tax has to go; replace it with a personal property tax (on both domestic and foreign assets), a VAT, and a direct sales tax. This will never happen, as the liberal movers and shakers are neck deep in huge "charitable" trusts and foundations as much as their right wing counterparts. You don't think the Kennedy's would ever tolerate paying a fixed percentage of the value of their trusts to the feds do you?
AgentR11 wrote:You'd have to be a moron to invest wealth back into the community at this point.
Return to Geopolitics & Global Economics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests