Search This Blog

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Globalism: What We're Told Vs What It IS

For pretty much most of US political history with few exceptions if you were a bank, corporation, professional capital-I Investor, made your living on Wall Street or were wealthy yourself, you voted Republican.

And when it came time to donate to parties and candidates, there was extremely little hedge betting, meaning where both parties or candidates are given contributions

This is because as a wealthy individual and entity, a Democrat in office meant higher taxes, more regulations, more controls, forced hiring and less profit.
But now in 2016, you have a candidate in Hillary (we will put aside the fact she's corrupt and should be in a women's prison um..  'interacting ' socially with like-minded people) who promises to raise taxes, put more regulations into place, etc..

And yet the wealthy corps and individuals flock to her during this election while Trump, the candidate promising to lower tax rates and everything else from the GOP holy book of Reaganomics


Simple..  one word..

Now to be clear, we are not talking about peoples of the world liking and linking up with one another, seeking commonality of shared interests and causes as we all try to make this a cleaner, happier planet.

Those are positive things.

No, we're talking about globalism as the the corporations and Investor class see it - consolidation of wealth and power across the globe where no one escapes the octopus' tentacles of social and economic control

And the change from the Democrats looked upon as obstacles to full loyal participants came with the Clintons
When Bill Clinton came to power, he basically destroyed all vestiges of the Democrat Party as it was known for decades, incorporating a Gordon Gekko'ish 'Greed is Good' mantra

Bu because he cleverly blended the yuppie mindset of 'money, money, money' with his bullshit saying of 'I feel your pain', it allowed all those millions of dum-dums to not see how dramatically their party has changed.

And why wouldn't they - everything they've achieved as a political couple is due to schmoozing and fawning over every wealthy person their networking rolodex could locate and what did it matter if the money came from Arkansas, Alaska or Albania..

Whatever it took to move up the power ladder and as for quid pro-quo favors later on?  No moral quandaries ever concerned
Here's a very quick example..

When LBJ pushed for and passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it was based on doing the right thing so we all could enjoy the same equality and freedom, black and white, and any pushback from the private sector would be dealt with later..

Had Bill Clinton been President, Wall Street would have been consulted first..

The corporations and Warren Buffets of the day would have given their say and if they expressed lack of support or fear the stock market could drop,  there would have been no Act, or perhaps passed in legislative pieces

That is the ONLY reason the BS known as gay marriage is law today -- corporations and Wall Street gave their financial blessing because they saw ways having it enacted could increase profits by attracting clientele they normally would never outwardly court without alienating people of traditional values...
So again the question is..  Why do Wall Street and corporations seem to want to back Hillary so disproportionately?

Globalism in finance terms means an open world where you have your products made in 3rd world factories and sweatshops, pay them $3 a day, then take those goods back to America where we buy the items using credit cards while paying 15-25% interest on the balance for the privilege then relocating operations to safe haven countries where corporate taxes are very low or not charged at all..

For instance the US corporate tax rate is 35% and then there's up to another 12% in state/local taxes a business has to pay out..

Ireland on the other hand is 12.5% which is why so many corporations place their operating base there..

In many island nations, the tax rate is Zero,
Trump has said what we've argued for a long time -- If American corporations are not going to make at least a certain percentage of their product in the US using American workers, their goods will see a 35% surcharge placed, thus making it more financially beneficial to pay fair wages vs watching their business be killed by the import taxes

It is called carrot and stick

Hillary will not do this..

Obama sure as shit did not..
One out of every four corporations in the US pay Zero in taxes..

This includes General Electric (as well as a lot of regional electric companies), Facebook, Boeing, Proctor and Gamble, Verizon, Metro PCS and Wells Fargo

And those that do pay, try to escape their responsibility by relocating part of all of their business operations abroad

And the US economy has suffered badly for it.
Obama is the first President where every single year GDP has not risen over 3% and he is the first where every single fiscal year, we take in Less tax revenue than what we spend..

Meanwhile we get killed in very bad trade deals intentionally because what benefits US citizens does not benefit US corporations so guess who gets the priority?

This is the new norm..

Globalism means the US is no longer a world power but merely another 'country' with as much significance and sway in world affairs as any individual US state may have in Congressional matters.

The President would just be a glorified Governor and the US military would just work for the dictates of the UN when their 'peace keeping' police force could not handle larger crises
And globalism and its one-world Order would mean global currency which would decimate the US economy since it is our reserve currency status which allowed us to manipulate out of the 2008 crash into this current swamp of stagnancy

One currency also would mean a global VAT (value added tax) on every good and service so when you buy or sell something, the county, state, Federal Government and the United Nations gets a cut

You see this in the European Union..

And when it comes to elections, the UN would have the legal right to monitor ours in the same way we monitor backwards impoverished third-world nations.
The corporations and wealthy individuals want to be able to make as much profit as humanly possible on a 24/7 cycle and be free to chase after the wealth to the four corners of the world like Captain Ahab chased down Moby Dick

And they want no allegiances to their home nation or have any concern as to how their policies hurt so many millions around the globe; they want to be above it all

Both the Wall Street whore Democrats and establishment Republicans wholeheartedly embrace this mantra

The Bernie Sanders Democrats and Trump loyalists do not.
A Trump Presidency means some effort at reigning in these soulless bastards and saying, if the US citizen is good enough to buy your shit, he/she is good enough to MAKE it as well..


Ehhh..  ~shrug~..  As long as those Clinton Foundation contributions keep coming..

Because a Hillary Presidency means three things:

Never ending Investigations, never ending scandal and never ending efforts made toward re-election in 2020..   Everyone else can go eat themselves..