Since humans are so flawed, how do Marxists change/persuade such persons to accept and believe Marxist philosophy as truth? I ask honestly, because the tone of your rhetoric seems to be very non-persuasive in a philosophical way via insulting rhetoric. You are ‘preaching to the choir.’
Beyond ‘totalitarianism’ is there a more persuasive way to appeal to such persons who seem to be obviously less intelligent and in a way that they would understand?
From an economic standpoint, it seems to me the ‘first world’ is in economic trouble and are buying few of our treasuries. Other than printing dollars is there way for the government to increase the financial well-being of the poor?
I’m very middle class in regards to financial wealth and as inflation increases (?due to deflation in the value of the dollar) I could become lower middle class financially and quickly. And since the ‘middle class levels’ seem to be the majority, does that mean that for government income(taxes) that taxes need to be raised even for middle/lower class people?
The ‘elites’ are enormously more wealthy but they are also enormously more able to ‘protect’ their wealth. I would be laughed at if I tried to ‘off-shore’ or invest my meager savings to protect it. There certainly wouldn’t be a useful income
from the amount to make any meaningful benefit after investment expenses were paid.
I am at a loss to answer either question with any logical answer. Thanks for any philosophical/economic answer. I’m just flawed in thinking that I can maintain my own self-interested support in at least a lower class lifestyle without more financial support (social security) than I have now. That is my reality.
How do we (you) define real outcome from a Marxist/financial perspective that is even probable. Changing reality up or down in financial terms seems expensive either way.
A majority of ‘someones’ have to lose or gain and ‘who decides what is equitable’ and how does ‘equity’ become acceptable among all the classes? The answers seem unfathomable to me. Thanks. I hope my comments/questions are not unfathomable themselves.
There is no need to lower middle class incomes to lower class levels to support the poor. That is a fallacy, sorry. It doesn’t work that way in my book. Taxes to some extent do need to be raised on the middle classes. We need to get rid of the Bush tax cuts, and we need to put back in the Social Security portion that is taken out of the checks.
The SS holidays that Obama keeps pushing are jeopardizing the integrity of the SS system. We need to get rid of the Bush tax cuts in order to effect the solvency of the state itself.
There is no inflation problem, and there is no inflation risk.
Most things we would tax you on, you’re going to get a direct benefit from in services. That’s what it’s all about. For instance, national health care would raise your taxes, but in return you get free health care. Free free free free! Exactly how many middle class folks have been reduced to penury via taxation? Even in social democratic states with high taxation, most people live very well indeed. I’m not aware of any cases in social democratic societies of middle class folks being reduced to penury, eh?
P.S. I do not support Marxism or Communism for the United States.