Stupid World

**blue rider** · 2nd July 2013, 18:16

Originally Posted by mashman

RUSSIA Suggests that WAR May Be Necessary To Stop MONSANTO

"Important to note, this report says, is that Syngenta, along with bio-tech giants Monsanto, Bayer, Dow and DuPont, now control nearly 100% of the global market for genetically modified pesticides, plants and seeds.

Also to note about Syngenta, this report continues, is that in 2012 it was criminally charged in Germany for concealing the fact that its genetically modified corn killed cattle, and settled a class-action lawsuit in the US for $105 million after it was discovered they had contaminated the drinking supply of some 52 million Americans in more than 2,000 water districts with its “gender-bending” herbicide Atrazine."

the reason might be because of

Blackwater (then XE) now Blackwater again? Who keeps track

http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/mon...-groups-23474/

http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/The-M...ction-20130528

http://english.ruvr.ru/news/2013_05_...it-squad-8013/

a big agri business.....its good for us, move along nothing to see here....

**Ocean1** · 2nd July 2013, 18:29

Originally Posted by mashman

A taxation alternative... still ultimately flawed because it is going to "work" within the confines of a financial system.

Nothing new there, local govt is mostly funded from land taxes.

Don't think it's a starter as an alternative to income tax because it lacks the direct link to an ability to pay.

Also, I note that local govt isn't slow to fuck with rating formulas purely to maximise revenue with no relation whatsoever to services supplied.

**blue rider** · 2nd July 2013, 18:54

i like this one here, comes with a link to a handy pdf.....

waterfront property anyone.....million dollar batch.....lol

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/01-7

And these areas are unlikely to be the last that will experience such problems.

But in the UK hundreds of thousands of homeowners in areas at high risk of flooding will still be able to insure their properties, after the government struck a deal with the industry.

The deal – introduced as part of the government’s new Water Bill – comes just weeks before the current agreement is set to expire and follows lengthy negotiations with the Association of British Insurers.

The agreement will cap flood insurance premiums, linking them to council tax bands so that people in high risk areas will know the maximum they will have to pay, while a levy on all UK household insurers will be used to create a fund to cover claims for people in high-risk homes.

The new Bill also includes plans to increase competition in the water market and improve drought resilience. Meanwhile the government announced an extra £370 million of flood protection funding for 2015/16 and committed to increase funding each year to 2020 – adding to the £2.3 billion they say is currently earmarked for flood defences.

**mashman** · 2nd July 2013, 19:43

Originally Posted by blue rider

i like this one here, comes with a link to a handy pdf.....

waterfront property anyone.....million dollar batch.....lol

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/01-7

I remember that stuff happening back in the 80's. Insurance company's shouldn't be given a choice in regards to what they insure. If they insure a property it shouldn't be for all acts of nature.

**mashman** · 2nd July 2013, 19:47

Originally Posted by Ocean1

Nothing new there, local govt is mostly funded from land taxes.

Don't think it's a starter as an alternative to income tax because it lacks the direct link to an ability to pay.

Also, I note that local govt isn't slow to fuck with rating formulas purely to maximise revenue with no relation whatsoever to services supplied.

Can you explain that a little further please?

No doubt that'll be offset with tax refunds or some such exclusions... perhaps a direct subsidy

Dats coz it's land based and got nuffink to do with the improvements. Which kinda makes sense if it's an LVT. It's the exclusions/special circumstances I can't find answers for... and no doubt too many won't be happy at the thought of non-working people being given a dividend just for breathing.

**Ocean1** · 2nd July 2013, 20:49

Originally Posted by mashman

Can you explain that a little further please?

Your rates are a form of land tax. The addition of "improvements" in the rules is one of the fuckings I mentioned, no point in extorting moneys from poor people is there?

Dunno what the rest of your shit is about.

**mashman** · 2nd July 2013, 21:06

Originally Posted by Ocean1

Your rates are a form of land tax. The addition of "improvements" in the rules is one of the fuckings I mentioned, no point in extorting moneys from poor people is there?

Dunno what the rest of your shit is about.

I suggest you read up on the LVT system they're talking about... as it seems to bare little to no resemblance to what you're expecting and it may also help clear up the rest of my shit.

**mashman** · 2nd July 2013, 21:16

Farming subsidies: this is the most blatant transfer of cash to the rich... we don't have them here do we?

**Ocean1** · 2nd July 2013, 21:23

Originally Posted by mashman

I suggest you read up on the LVT system they're talking about... as it seems to bare little to no resemblance to what you're expecting and it may also help clear up the rest of my shit.

I did. They even mentioned local govt was funded like that in Anglo Saxon countries. So if you can't see the similarity then at least the authors you referenced do.

As for what I expect: I expect that every entity given the power to take money from people will rapidly turn into parasites, tuning the mechanism of their authority to extract the most from their victims and providing minimal return for the trouble. That expectation's based on decades of experience with the fuckers, and I can count on the fingers of my left foot the number of times I've gotten value for money out of any of them.

**mashman** · 2nd July 2013, 22:21

Originally Posted by Ocean1

I did. They even mentioned local govt was funded like that in Anglo Saxon countries. So if you can't see the similarity then at least the authors you referenced do.

As for what I expect: I expect that every entity given the power to take money from people will rapidly turn into parasites, tuning the mechanism of their authority to extract the most from their victims and providing minimal return for the trouble. That expectation's based on decades of experience with the fuckers, and I can count on the fingers of my left foot the number of times I've gotten value for money out of any of them.

My bad... I've been doin a little reading about LVT's lately and skimmed the article believing it would be similar. The LVT that I've been reading about one that doesn't care about the property/industry/usage of the land, it's just taxed on its value. A dividend (a la Social Credit) is paid to the country's citizens as they are technically the shareholders of the land. Oddly enough it seems like the usual shifting of the chairs on deck whilst the ship sinks. But hey.

I gotta say that's awful similar to the way I see things... however I'd rather just give them what they need (no money etc...) so that it doesn't constrain the country financially, stopping important things from coming in to being.

**mashman** · 3rd July 2013, 22:38

Demand for food banks ‘has nothing to do with benefits squeeze,’ says Lord Freud ... Some people just don't have a clue... and unfortunately most of them are running their country's.

**Ocean1** · 4th July 2013, 08:05

Originally Posted by mashman

Demand for food banks ‘has nothing to do with benefits squeeze,’ says Lord Freud ... Some people just don't have a clue... and unfortunately most of them are running their country's.

He's perfectly correct. Food banks are no part of the govt's benefit system. He's also perfectly correct about the market truism that any goods made available free will produce an exponentially growing market.

I presume you simply meant to bleat about the fact that more people want more free resources now than did a few years ago, in spite of the benefit overspend of some 20 billion pounds.

Meh.