Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mackenzie Andersen
06-05-2014, 09:25 PM
Post: #21
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
You assume that I'm a liberal. As usual, you're only partially correct. That also means you're partially incorrect. Hey, that's progress! However, I am neither Communist or a Collectivist. While it may be hard for your lizard brain to understand, liberal does not equal either Communist or Collectivist, any more than vomiting out thousands of words on a blog makes you an author, much less a deep thinker.

And congratulations on making whatever point that you were trying to make--however off-base it was--in fewer than 6000 words.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 11:31 AM
Post: #22
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
If you are not a collectivist why are you always citing that which you claim to be an all consuming collectivist view? Communism is the political ideology to which collectivism inevitably evolves- but Communists are clever enough to know that if their goals are to be achieved, one never calls anything by its real name.

You could congratulate yourself on making your point in fewer words if you applied self-editing over all irrelevance contributed by redundant personal attacks.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 02:08 PM
Post: #23
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
"You could congratulate yourself on making your point in fewer words if you applied self-editing over all irrelevance"

Q.E.D.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2014, 10:19 PM
Post: #24
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
So your purpose in being in this topic is to insult me-which has nothing to do with why Bob stated this topic. I would describe your purpose as trolling/
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2014, 08:54 AM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2014 09:33 AM by Mackenzie Andersen.)
Post: #25
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
For those who are viewing this topic because they are interested in it's purpose. This is an interesting looking paper on corporatism that I just spotted on twitter: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107...5728v2.pdf

Corporatism, such as has become deeply entrenched in Maine is an instrumentality of global capitalism, which can be said to be the new political ideology superseding The American political philosophy and Marxism both, patching together pieces of each in concoctions going by copacetic names such as "public-private partnerships" to serve the growth of a new class of global owners of the means of production.

An exact description of the sate of Maine's targeted sector economic policies practiced now for more than 4 decades[/php][php]

An exact description of the sate of Maine's targeted sector economic policies practiced now for more than 4 decades

Code:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/gSgUENZ9O94" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-10-2014, 09:56 AM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2014 09:57 AM by Mackenzie Andersen.)
Post: #26
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
[Image: ABOVE THE LAW transformation1000.jpg]


The timeline is annotated in an informal style- and sometimes not so informal. It's a difficult subject to sell to the public although it affects the public profoundly. When reading through the statutes used to construct the corporate state, it seems obvious that the legislature thinks they can get away with anything they want BECAUSE no one is looking at what they do !

With that said, here is another peek inside - the closing paragraph. The timeline has color coded backgrounds distinguishing the constitution- buff colored- Maine statutes- blue - my commentary yellow- and third party quotes- green- But I can't reproduce that here:

The following is an analysis of LePage's bill that did not pass- with the press declaring that it was controversial only because of the Right To Work provisions, which, given the context of Maine State Inc package of benefits to the owners of the means of production, scarcely makes a difference in practice- It is merely a public relations illusion:

Commentary The benefits to capitalists are similar to those of the Pine Tree Zone. The state commits the Maine taxpayer to covering 80% of the business owners payroll taxes. The taxed sector includes targeted sector workers and most of the state’s “UN-targeted sector”.
The qualification for a qualified employee in a “quality” job, are the following”
Quote:7. Qualified employee. "Qualified employee" means a person:
A. Who is a full-time employee of a certified or qualified applicant;
B. Whose income from employment under paragraph A is taxable under chapter 803;
C. For whom a retirement program is provided subject to the federal Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 United States Code, Sections 101 to 1461,
as amended;
D. For whom health insurance is available; and
E. Whose income calculated on a calendar year basis is greater than the per capita annual income in the State as determined by the United States Department of Commerce.

The qualifications up the cost of the payroll tax bill.
The employee is the commodity that the owners of the means of production must produce in exchange for their tax free status. Taxes on the employee produce the state’s revenue stream. “Quality jobs” are measured solely from the perspective of the corporate state’s interests- which is measured in terms of profit with any other value incidental to the profit motive despite the rhetoric found elsewhere the proof is in the pudding which in this case is the trade secret. Other values are rhetorical only as we see throughout the statutes when trade secrets and tax privacy laws take precedence over public transparency , allowing anything whatsoever to be hidden under those covers

Despite the claims from opposition that including right to work will mean employees are paid less, the targeted sector in Maine has been defined by the legislature as providing jobs that pay above average income. The advantages of targeted sector benefits to corporations and capitalists are considerable and so it would not make sense for an owner of the means of production to not hit that target, which means that the general taxpayer would, If the bill had been passed, have to cover the largest payroll tax bills in the state, covering jobs than pay more than the average taxpayer is receiving for his own labor- this is true by definition of the targeted sector- When the bill goes from 80% of the payroll taxes for 250 employees to 80% of payroll taxes for 1500 employees, that is a considerable expansion of the burden on the paying public who has to come up with the funds.

I have found no stipulation in this or other acts of legislation which prohibit the capitalist from partaking in multiple economic incentive packages available in the state of Maine- and so the real benefits to the owners of the means of production need to be calculated in the context of the full corporate welfare package which Maine makes available to capitalists. The Maine Technology Institute provides a 100% matching fund for the capitalists original investment, after which the capitalist can apply for a 60% refundable tax credit, which means 60% of the total investment now held by the capitalist after his visit to the Maine Technology Institute - but alas- the “Expanded and Improved Seed Capital Tax Credit” wasn't “impactful enough" - that’s why Governor LePage did not put his signature on the bill. The Maine Seed Capital Tax Credit program allows those who invest no more than $500,000 in a Maine business with less than $3 million in gross sales to receive refundable tax credits equal to 60 percent of the investment. Imagine how much more impactful the Seed Capital Tax Credit would be if it could be applied to those who invest $50.000.000 and employ 1500 people?

The only justification for making the UN-targeted sector and targeted sector workers pay out to the owners of the means of production is the trickle down economy argument, but not enough to justify the loss of capital and freedom for the the general public and the systemic assault on the Maine constitution, wherein the consent of the governed dwells. The public is not told what is really going on. They are sold a bill of goods about general entitlement programs, as if entitlements were the issues that they should be voting on but entitlements will become rations if the whole system keeps on incrementally transforming as it has been since the late seventies. The system will not stay the same , it will keep moving toward the goal of the central managers as long as central management retains its hold on power. I hope that I have presented this story in such a way as to catch the interest of the public, especially those in the UN targeted sector, who have been the silent majority for far too long.


DOWNLOAD COMPLETE TIMELINE HERE
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-13-2014, 04:12 AM (This post was last modified: 06-13-2014 04:14 AM by Mackenzie Andersen.)
Post: #27
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
[Image: Minimum WAGE 500.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-13-2014, 05:29 AM
Post: #28
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
There's a typo in your link ("americanpolitcal"). Plus you repeat the words "of ration" in the bottom 2 lines.

You're welcome.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-13-2014, 01:45 PM (This post was last modified: 06-13-2014 03:09 PM by Mackenzie Andersen.)
Post: #29
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
If I didn't make typo's then How would there be anyway for anyone to respond to me?

Actually I was aware of that mistake but for some reason I can't get the corrected file to upload here and I don't have time at the present to invest in figuring out why.
It's corrected here
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-19-2014, 02:55 AM
Post: #30
RE: Mackenzie Andersen
There is not enough interest in the downloadable time line to keep the Shopify store alive so that link is no longer active.

People like and share all my promos- still only one person has downloaded the link. If I feel the energy I will keep posting promo's with bits of information from the timeline in it- but no one seems to understand that the real value of the timeline is that it makes the whole visible. It is the practice of the legislature and the press to speak about the parts in a fragmented way- as if they were not a part of a much larger phenomenon- but that is not true- the parts are designed to work together.

Beth O'Conner is active on Maine Tax Payers United Facebook Page and since she is running for office again I asked her opinion on a state bank but she didn't know anything about it. I only know as a result of the targeted search I did on the 2013 legislative session which revealed more than one effort to establish a state bank. The effort has been in the works for several years now and this time around died between Houses. This caught people's interest and a discussion started- but of course not enough for any one to download the time line.



[Image: deconstruct600.gif]


The purpose of The Time Line is to put the parts into the context of the whole That's when an intentionalism
starts to seem very apparent: - with that thought in mind I am juxtaposing some of the interconnected fragments of the whole:

[Image: Resolve to establish state bank600.gif]


Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | My Site | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication