marijuana | Law | Economy | Investing | Marketing | Entrepreneurship | Economic Policy | Globalization | Emerging Markets

John Perkins: The Hit Men Strike Home

More videos from this partner:

10
Likes
0
Dislikes
RATE

  • Info
  • Bio
  • Chapters
  • Preview
  • Download
  • Zoom In
Advertisement
There are 9 comments on this program

Please or register to post a comment.
Previous FORAtv comments:
Trevar Avatar
Trevar
Posted: 05.17.11, 11:59 AM
@Letemdangle: Video is working fine on this end. You may want to try updating your Flash player: http://www.adobe.com/support/flashplayer/downloads.html If that doesn't work, let me know what browser you're using and we'll take a closer look. Thanks, Trevar
Letemdangle Avatar
Letemdangle
Posted: 05.15.11, 05:46 PM
Won't play for me. That sucks!
kujoAAR Avatar
kujoAAR
Posted: 04.22.10, 02:29 PM
Quote: Originally Posted by Soylent The easy way to deal with global warming without screwing everything up is to have a revenue neutral tax. The government doesn't need to be a bigger part of the economy, it doesn't need to ban things, it doesn't need to pick winners and losers; those would all be harmful. Every corporate tax decrease, and Corp. government contract picks winners and losers and is a mountain of overwhelming evidence there is no free market. Not 'banning things' is conversation in legalizing rackets that harm society daily. 'Please protect my criminal enterprise' is a seriously degenerate argument. Why are you so eager to please corporations by insisting there is no need to ban things?
Soylent Avatar
Soylent
Posted: 03.29.10, 03:08 AM
Underbelly, but that's not true, we can prove we're the cause of global warming. What we can't do is convince people who have ideological blinders on or make good predictions on the level of threat global warming represents; there's HUGE error bars on that. The easy way to deal with global warming without screwing everything up is to have a revenue neutral tax. The government doesn't need to be a bigger part of the economy, it doesn't need to ban things, it doesn't need to pick winners and losers; those would all be harmful. By a revenue neutral tax I mean that you would abolish VAT or other taxes and replace the revenue earned by those taxes with the revenue from the new carbon tax. What is critically important is that you do not apply a carbon tax on exports; only domestic consumption. That way there is no benefit for providers of high-carbon goods and services to flee to some other country without a carbon tax because consumption in this country will be taxed the same way whether it was imported or not and exports will not be taxed for carbon(that is for the receiving country to tax). Neither a carbon tax that raises total government revenue or a carbon tax that unfairly disadvantages domestic business will be tolerated by the populace of most countries and there is therefor no chance they will be implemented.
nikonwilly Avatar
nikonwilly
Posted: 03.10.10, 05:18 AM
Corporate slavery is what we have to look forward to. Vote with YOUR wallet and Boycott those that want control of your life.
underbelly Avatar
underbelly
Posted: 03.09.10, 05:04 AM
global warming - the argument that we should DO SOMETHING - even if we can't prove we're the cause of it... it seems the cost of DOING SOMETHING is going to be dumped on us - the people... while the profits gathered by our "old ways" of doing things remains sequestered away somewhere accruing trillions of dollars in interest to benefit shareholders who I bet will continue to live wastefully with their luxuries - while we tighten our belts and still go broke... perhaps the trillion dollar accounts amount to a buffer zone between the rich and the poor - so they don't even need us any more - we worker ants can all starve and disappear - and they'll be sitting pretty on their piles of gold
Advertisement

Advertisement