Comments by "Don Taylor" (@dontaylor7315) on "Why This ‘Patriotic’ Millionaire Wants to Raise Taxes on the Rich | NowThis" video.

@mauriceclemens3286 Yes, when he said it he named Ford as the source. I think he was just paraphrasing though, I think the actual quote was something a bit more blunt like "Poor people can't buy my cars."
19
A traitor to his class. And his class should be blessed with more such traitors. They don't know it but they'd be better off with a more reasonable share of the wealth while living in a society that isn't broken.
16
@Hazed64 "The people aren't capable of governing themselves, it's the duty of the benevolent wealthy class to govern them wisely." Growing up in a right-wing household I heard that refrain a lot. I stopped believing it sometime in the late 60s/early 70s and I don't believe it now. Edit: You did say "most" working class people aren't qualified and that's true. Most people in ANY class aren't. I expect my elected leaders to be wiser than me. I've had a handful of bosses and coworkers who were. I doubt the chauffeured Rolls-Royce class has more than a handful who are as wise.
11
@mickym.6711 ... and that's why Scandinavia, the Netherlands etc are "pushing their Zimbabwe dollars in a wheelbarrow to the grocery store..." Stephen Prince clearly hasn't managed as many millions of dollars as you have, or projected the future effects of financial decisions at your higher level of experience. We're so lucky you're in this thread to educate us.
9
@Ach1mW That reminded me of the Johnny Cash song about the guy working in an auto plant who smuggles out one part at a time and gradually assembles a car that's simultaneously like every model they've built for a couple of decades.
9
@StarWarriorMusic and 1% is way less than they paid under Eisenhower when I was a kid and they were still living large. And there were a lot more of them than 1% in that top bracket.
6
@AdamBladeTaylor "Universal basic income is just a win for everyone, except the handful of ludicrously rich people..." Yes! I'll even go a step further and say it's a win for them as well. They're just prevented from seeing it by greed, the disease that makes them think having it all means they must have more. They won't be hurt at all by anything but imaginary pain. Stephen Prince seems miraculously immune to the disease. Perhaps he's the therapist they need.
5
@AdamBladeTaylor Or as Henry Ford said (paraphrasing): "Poor people can't buy my cars." I thought about replying to what you wrote about McDonald's in Australia. I copied that paragraph for future reference.
4
@lordireng2409 Das Kapital is a pretty boring book but maybe I'll read that section sometime. Meanwhile, I don't know of ANYONE but you who has EVER thought Ford was a Marxist. Edit: Btw you've misspelled "alienation" twice.
4
@lordireng2409 You're being cryptic. Explain. You've repeated the quote three times and never explained why you interpret it that way. You've implied that you can't explain it and only Das Kapital can clarify it. Now I suppose you'll repeat the quote again, and cite Das Kapital again, and explain nothing.
4
@lordireng2409 Henry Ford was a Marxist? Please explain how one of the most successful capitalists of all time could be a Marxist.
3
@lordireng2409 So any employer who doesn't keep their employees poor is a Marxist?
3
@Jemo_1 Wages are a function of what the laws allow, and the laws are made by the corporations that own the government. Corporate lobbyists and thinktanks dictate bills to Congress and in some cases they write the bills themselves and have a congressperson sign them. That's how unions and workers' rights are being crushed. That's government involvement.
3
@Jemo_1 Government should serve the will of the people. What it now does instead is spend the taxpayers' money on corporate welfare. The people are funding the privileges of a few when they should be funding themselves. The ruling class has to be stopped from bribing lawmakers to cheat the people.
3
@MrGtubedude @safari 87 I'll gladly support AOC for POTUS or anyone else from the corporate-free wing, but I want Nina Turner way more than any of the others.
2
@Timothy Lee Henry Ford was a civil servant?
2
@Jemo_1 I hope your wages aren't high enough to offend you since you think good wages are dumb. Ford just kept getting richer and richer after he raised his workers' pay, that's how dumb he was.
2
@Jemo_1 I want to grow the number of candidates who are running corporate-free campaigns and winning, until the will of the people can override the ruling class.
2
@Jemo_1 That's just another way to say make government so weak the people can't use it in their interest. Government by the people has to be made stronger and the ability of the privileged to buy elections and legislation must be prohibited. That's why Jefferson said "I hope we shall crush in its infancy the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations."
2
@Jemo_1 I'm not concerned with whose "fault" it is. If it isn't legal to buy a politician's campaign with more money than real people can spend, then it's not as easy to corrupt the politician. Civilization already has these rules. America just needs to look at civilization and do the same.
2
@Jemo_1 My position is campaign finance reform that makes it illegal to donate more than $200 to a campaign and illegal to contribute much in advertising. That means real people can't be outspent by corporations and the people own the biggest piece of the candidate.
2
@Jemo_1 They're "giving privilege to some companies" because companies are allowed to buy the politicians. In civilization they're not allowed to. America just needs to join civilization. We're the only developed western nation that hasn't already.
2
@Jemo_1 There's no law against donating so much money to a campaign that the politician feels he can't afford to displease you. There's no law against lobbying a politician who owes you favors for a huge donation. You know that already. You've posted to me eleven times and I've answered every post. If you don't understand my position by now then you either can't understand or don't want to understand. You're playing a pointless game and it's a waste of my time. Goodbye.
2
@Jemo_1 I've already answered that. If you don't understand my position by now then either you can't understand or you don't want to understand. This is a waste of my time. Goodbye.
2
@Jemo_1 I worked full-time all my life, sonny, I'm 73 and retired. You let the ruling class dictate how you live and what's best for you. If the people finally win self-government you will finally be set free even if you don't want freedom. Have a nice day. I'm not going to waste any more time on replies. You can't understand or don't want to understand.
2
"Smaller government" just means expand the rich ruling class's power to govern you directly, without some elected official getting in the way.
1
@tomservo75 I didn't say "a conservative household," I said "a right-wing household." I was growing up in the Eisenhower era and Ike was a true conservative. During his administration, corporations and the rich were paying much higher tax rates than Bernie and the Squad are asking for now. My parents, on the other hand, were against taxing the upper class and were admirers of Joe McCarthy and the John Birch society. You say they didn't sing that refrain about letting the wealthy rule the masses but you weren't there; I was and they did. If you think that's a progressive POV then why didn't Bernie and the Squad support those Trump-McConnell tax cuts for the billionaires? Why do they reject campaign money from the big donors?
1
@tomservo75 Money given to the government helps not at all as long as its main purpose is taxpayer-funded corporate welfare and handouts to the rich and privileged. When it's used as civilization uses it, to benefit the people as a whole instead of a privileged few, the upside is obvious. But in civilization democracy outranks capitalism; in the US capitalism outranks democracy. That's how corporate ownership of government works. Jefferson saw it coming and wrote "I hope we shall crush in its infancy the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations." Btw I notice you've abandoned your original point and changed the subject in your second post.
1
@tomservo75 Either you didn't read my reply or you chose not to address it. If you had read and understood the second paragraph before you wrote your "apples and oranges" analogy you'd have realized it only applies in Europe where capitalism and government are in fact kept separate. If you'd understood the third paragraph you'd have seen the two systems are anything but separate in the US, where corporations are allowed to function as an actual unelected government in the ways I detailed. In paragraphs three and four I think I made it clear enough that corporate ownership of government leads to a level of corruption that makes mismanagement a given; this necessarily includes mishandling of funds, yet you're going on about that very thing as though it weren't already addressed. Is there any part of my reply you DID understand? Certainly paragraph one doesn't seem to have been any help to you; I see nothing in your reply that suggests you've read or understood any part of the link I offered you there. If you intend to engage in any sort of discourse here we've got to be following up each other's points, not just firing off unconnected argumentative salvos.
1
@zUJ7EjVD Exactly. In civilization, democracy outranks capitalism; in America, capitalism outranks democracy. So capitalism is destroying Americans while in civilization both capitalism and the people thrive.
1