From: Wilson@nowhere.invalid   
      
   On 1/12/2026 1:24 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   > On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 12:50:31 -0500, Wilson    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/12/2026 11:37 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 10:55:14 -0500, Wilson    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 1/12/2026 8:38 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 01:31:52 -0800, dart200   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 1/11/26 3:36 PM, vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:   
   >>>>>>> *+-how would we fund consumerism tho???   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> All the economists, right and left thik consumer spending is   
   unproductive,   
   >>>>>>> which is why they would prefer a consumtion tax over an income tax.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> consumers buying things is unproductive?? what in the fuck is the point   
   >>>>>> of the economy even?? to make things that aren't consumed??   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> consumer spending is supposed to be the fucking bedrock guidance of the   
   >>>>>> economic engine, that's the how the market is supposed to work. if   
   >>>>>> consumers can't spend ... how in the fuck do we know what to produce,   
   eh???   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> ofc we wouldn't need usury to fund consumer spending if they were paid   
   >>>>>> more fairly regardless of whether we tax them or not. idk why ur   
   >>>>>> bringing up tax that ain't the question here   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Discourage consumprion, encourage income.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> THe problem is the right doesn't trust the left with two taxes.  THey   
   want   
   >>>>>>> the left to admit defeat and repeal the income tax amendment first.    
   But   
   >>>>>>> tariffs are primarily how the USA was financed before an income tax.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> i want us to stop using the federal govt, to do things that should be   
   >>>>>> state level orchestration. the feds were supposed to be a *limited*   
   >>>>>> power govt, not governing everything power govt   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> and fuck tariffs, eh??   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> #god   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> like bro ... u telling me the richest most powerful country on the   
   >>>>>> planet can't complete on the open market without tariffs??? where's the   
   >>>>>> permanent state of many tariffs edition of us "capitalism"???   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> fucking ??   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Usury is an integral part of this system.  No way could consumerism   
   >>>>> generate wealth for a few if they couldn't use money to make more   
   >>>>> money.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> consumerism   
   >>>>> tariffs   
   >>>>> various tax schemes   
   >>>>> politics   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Something is wrong with this system.  Perhaps we could think of a new   
   >>>>> one that has not been tried before.  Because, so far, nothing works   
   >>>>> long term, which is why we are here fussing about the system that we   
   >>>>> are left with after the others failed.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Human beings want to matter, to feel important and appreciated, and by   
   >>>> doing so improve their place in the world. So they do things to those   
   >>>> ends. Whether or not they actually make things better for others is   
   >>>> ultimately always secondary to those primary goals.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> This is true of people everywhere. We are built by our evolution to   
   >>>> improve our social status. Because having a high status conferred an   
   >>>> increased chance of survival.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> This is how we've been behaving:   
   >>>>    > see that things aren't working as well as we think they should   
   >>>>    > design a solution to make things better (and improve the status of   
   >>>> those involved in the repair)   
   >>>>    > solution does not make everything better   
   >>>>    > some things are even worse   
   >>>>    > repeat   
   >>>   
   >>> So it is time for a new idea, not revert to an old idea like   
   >>> libertarianism.   
   >>   
   >> Because giving people that much freedom doesn't work for you, as I   
   >> explained:   
   >   
   > Because reverting to failed past ideas seems kinda stupid.  As you   
   > mentioned once upon a time, those ideas were left behind for a reason   
   > with intention to do things in a better way.  It occurs to me that   
   > perhaps you don't like the better way that was chosen.  You really   
   > have no interest in possible new ways of handling those old problems.   
      
   Leaving behind the ideals of liberty is the end of civilization.   
      
      
   >   
   >>>   
   >>>> If you say that the best possible system would be to just allow folks to   
   >>>> make their own decisions based on their own motivations and incentives   
   >>>> with as little oversight interference as possible, you're utopian or a   
   >>>> bigot and a hater. (Don't you even CARE?!)   
   >>>>   
   >>>> But mostly the problem with allowing that much freedom is there'd be no   
   >>>> place for them to repair the rupture of perfection and be the hero.   
   >>>   
   >>> Who are you and what have you done with wilson?   
   >>   
   >> Yeah, my views do evolve over time. If instead of projecting who you   
   >> think I am onto me, and you actually listen, you might learn something   
   >> about what I think.   
   >>   
   >> Shocking developments! More at 6!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)