Morals are something that a person feels and believes themselves, so it's a subjective rationalization for whatever behavior they are engaged in.

There is a 'capitalist mortality', I think, that champions certain false ideas and mathematically inconsistent models. For example, the right to private property. Let's say Mr. Anonymous, that you have six workers and I am one of them. You are in the textile business and I have to make one hundred t-shirts during my shift. But you pay $28 per day, even if you go and sell those shirts for over $1,000. You are objectively exploiting my labor so that you can make a profit. I could go on strike, asserting that all workers deserve 'a fair day's wage' (this is a subjective sentiment) while you snidely tell me that I should 'get a new job if I don't like what I am paid' (also a subjective sentiment). The facts are still there - that you are not paying me enough to pay my bills, and that standard of living indicators for me and the other workers would go up if you paid me more - but we all subjectively determine them differently.

In terms of my morality, I have grown more pessimistic in my worldview. There are no values or meanings for everyone's life. There is no moral foundation for which people make value judgments. In the absence of any real chance to change the world so that it's objectively a better one, we can only really learn that "if you can't beat em', join em'." So I isolate my desire for wealth from everything else, because we are in an immoral world. I am becoming a social worker partially because I know it will help a lot of people, but I also know it won't change the world and it won't radically transform the lives of those I help. I have found my reasons for declaring that major to be more based on just wanting to please my parents and my girlfriend and to get out of there as soon as possible so I can start getting a paycheck, rather than on some sort of idealism.

Lol.

There are, but it's not a fucking conspiracy. There are rich mother fuckers that want to do stuff that hurts the public, like dump waste into rivers or get rid of the minimum wage, so they are pushing for anti-democratic measures so that they can do that. It's been like that since the beginning of time. The little guy versus the big guy.

Hahaha K

Rap music.

All heads of the same dragon.

We could levy a sales tax on luxury items, such as private jets, caviar, yachts, two hundred carat bracelets, so on.

No.

"Direct democracy" (or so it's called) is utopian, unrealistic, totally impractical and impossible to implement when it comes to large social decisions.

Today's democracy is corrupt and imperfect with it's multiple parties and term limits because basically identical representatives in terms of class status (they are all millionaires) represent different capitalist investors and compete over helping their agendas, about whether to give bread crums to the masses or not, and so on.

If we want to have real democracy, then what is important is that the economy is structured in a democratic way and that there are electoral checks at every level where virtually all legislation and appointments require popular referendums and consent from regional and local representative bodies.

Probably old Tea Partiers who say "ergh, people on welfare piss me off," yet they are on Medicare and Social Security themselves.

The root of it all is overproduction and the chaos of the capitalist market.

Capitalists produce shit not for the needs of people, but to make a profit. They are in constant inter-competition with each other so they up production to a higher level. There is many ways they do this, with mechanization, or the use of machines to replace humans, being one of them. They also lay off workers and make ones that are still on the job work longer hours for shorter pay. By reducing labor costs they think they can make more cash.

Of course, what inevitably happens when they end up doing this is that so many are jobless or are being paid less that their increase of output ended up outstripping effective market demand. Or, in other words, they produced so much shit that too many people can't even afford to buy it.

Chillin

Yeah, that's been one of my criticisms of Occupy. That many are politically unadvanced and assume that, by merely having a permanent presence somewhere, we would eventually smash the violent system we live under.

But it does provide a "liberated" social space for people to converge around certain issues. In Oakland, they are going the way of the Paris Commune. In solidarity with Scott Olson and Oscar Grant, they stopped the flow of capital by blocking the entrance of their Port, they constructed makeshift barricades and battled the police, broke a few windows, shutdown a few schools and workplaces with walk-outs and effectively ended the career of Mayor Quan.

Unfortunately, we aren't doing any of that here in Gazeboville, Erie, PA.

6-7.

We've never been served by our elected officials, ever.

No, we should topple those neoliberal states who are gutting their welfare programs and giving gigantic handouts to corporations and banks and replace it with a state that represents us.

Nah, I love women and am faithful to my wife!

This is a very broad question, but on a basic level, it would require a transformation of a radical kind: a change in ownership, of distribution, and of actual relations in production. These are the different aspects of an economic system.

The capitalist market would be replaced by central planning, which would be more efficient since it doesn't have the drawback of built-in periodic crises (the 'business cycle') with all the attendant unemployment, inflation and destruction of capital. It also wouldn't have the inherent inefficiencies of private monopolies with their artificial scarcities. Financial and insurance institutions would also be collectivized and operated by a democratically-controlled national banking authority.

More revenue to the government as a result of all that would mean the availability of more funds for a greater social safetynet and for job creation. Minimum wage could be raised to $15 an hour. Compensation, re-training and other support service programs for workers affected by plant and military base closings would be financed at a higher rate. Welfare assistance and unemployment compensation could be expanded. Massive federal investment in urban and rural areas for infastructure reconstruction and economic development could create tens of thousands of jobs.

In education, we could make higher education completely free and cancel any debt students have already taken on. Full and equal funding could be provided to every school. With health care, we could abolish all private health insurance companies through the creation of a single-payer health system. Once again, we could cancel any medical debt anyone is strattled with. For housing we could make federal investments in the construction of low cost, high quality and completely eliminate homelessness. Build a fully funded high-speed national rail system, which could serve as an alternative to the gas-guzzling automobile and interstate system.

What is "novena"? Explain please.

Yes.

The President is just as responsible as they are.