大型企业是如何接管西方的政府的？
正文翻译
大型企业是如何接管西方的政府的？
评论翻译
@user-et5wy6zk9v
The big corporations have the money, govt has the power. Money & power scratch each other's backs to gain more money & more power. In the meantime the public is fed bread & circuses and kept in line under the illusion of democracy and rights.
大公司有钱，政府有权。金钱和权力互相勾结，以获得更多金钱和权力。公众在民主和权利的幻想下吃着面包和看马戏表演。
The big corporations have the money, govt has the power. Money & power scratch each other's backs to gain more money & more power. In the meantime the public is fed bread & circuses and kept in line under the illusion of democracy and rights.
大公司有钱，政府有权。金钱和权力互相勾结，以获得更多金钱和权力。公众在民主和权利的幻想下吃着面包和看马戏表演。
@sciologist
These CEO;s and Board of Directors gives themselves 10s of millions of dollars in raises and bonuses then blame their minimual wage employees for the collaps of their companies. Its like Bankers blaming their janitors and maids for the Banking Crisis.
这些首席执行官和董事会给自己数千万美元的加薪和奖金，然后把公司的倒闭归咎于他们的最低工资的员工，就像银行家把银行危机的责任归咎于看门人和女佣一样。
These CEO;s and Board of Directors gives themselves 10s of millions of dollars in raises and bonuses then blame their minimual wage employees for the collaps of their companies. Its like Bankers blaming their janitors and maids for the Banking Crisis.
这些首席执行官和董事会给自己数千万美元的加薪和奖金，然后把公司的倒闭归咎于他们的最低工资的员工，就像银行家把银行危机的责任归咎于看门人和女佣一样。
@harryholiday5356
I was telling my friends this during the 1990's decade. They all said I was crazy, and it just couldn't happen in America. Now, they are eating their words and experiencing KARMA. We are now in a very feudalist fascist system for several generations.
上世纪 90 年代，我曾跟朋友们说过这件事。他们都说我疯了，这不可能在美国发生。现在，他们正在自食其言，经历着报应。我们现在几代人都处在一个非常封建的法西斯体系中。
I was telling my friends this during the 1990's decade. They all said I was crazy, and it just couldn't happen in America. Now, they are eating their words and experiencing KARMA. We are now in a very feudalist fascist system for several generations.
上世纪 90 年代，我曾跟朋友们说过这件事。他们都说我疯了，这不可能在美国发生。现在，他们正在自食其言，经历着报应。我们现在几代人都处在一个非常封建的法西斯体系中。
@MarionGrisdale
No water supply , no electrical supply should be privatized!! No food must be kept from the people who need good! No housing shelter should be kept from the people !! Food , clean drinking water , shelter clothes need to be a BIRTHRIGHT !!
任何供水、供电都不应私有化！！不能让需要食物的人得不到食物！不应该让需要住房的人得不到住房！！！食物、清洁的饮用水、住房和衣服必须是与生俱来的权利！！
No water supply , no electrical supply should be privatized!! No food must be kept from the people who need good! No housing shelter should be kept from the people !! Food , clean drinking water , shelter clothes need to be a BIRTHRIGHT !!
任何供水、供电都不应私有化！！不能让需要食物的人得不到食物！不应该让需要住房的人得不到住房！！！食物、清洁的饮用水、住房和衣服必须是与生俱来的权利！！
@andrew69novak
Grace Blakeley has recently written a great book about this topic called "Vulture Capitalism" and I highly recommend it. The term "regulatory capture" is wholly inadequate in describing what has actually taken place.
The laws of incorporation that were passed in 1863 put the US government squarely in the pocket of bankers and robber barrons. Even FDR, the "savior" didn't take the power to print free money from bankers. Printing unlimited money allows you to purchase unlimited power and influence. We all live in the results of that.
格蕾丝-布莱克利（Grace Blakeley）最近写了一本关于这一主题的好书，名为《秃鹫资本主义》，我强烈推荐这本书。“监管俘获”一词完全不足以描述实际发生的情况。
1863年通过的公司法将美国政府完全置于银行家和强盗大亨的口袋中，即使是“救世主”罗斯福也没有从银行家手中夺走免费印钞的权力。印制无限的钞票可以购买无限的权力和影响力，我们都生活在这样的结果之中。
Grace Blakeley has recently written a great book about this topic called "Vulture Capitalism" and I highly recommend it. The term "regulatory capture" is wholly inadequate in describing what has actually taken place.
The laws of incorporation that were passed in 1863 put the US government squarely in the pocket of bankers and robber barrons. Even FDR, the "savior" didn't take the power to print free money from bankers. Printing unlimited money allows you to purchase unlimited power and influence. We all live in the results of that.
格蕾丝-布莱克利（Grace Blakeley）最近写了一本关于这一主题的好书，名为《秃鹫资本主义》，我强烈推荐这本书。“监管俘获”一词完全不足以描述实际发生的情况。
1863年通过的公司法将美国政府完全置于银行家和强盗大亨的口袋中，即使是“救世主”罗斯福也没有从银行家手中夺走免费印钞的权力。印制无限的钞票可以购买无限的权力和影响力，我们都生活在这样的结果之中。
@erikeparsels
Neoliberalism isn't "market" fundamentalism, because corporate players try to escape market discipline at every opportunity. It is "private investment and profit fundamentalism" or "capitalist fundamentalism" or "corporate fundamentalism".
新自由主义并不是“市场”原教旨主义，因为企业主一有机会就会试图逃避市场约束。它是“私人投资和利润原教旨主义”或“资本主义原教旨主义”或“企业原教旨主义”。
Neoliberalism isn't "market" fundamentalism, because corporate players try to escape market discipline at every opportunity. It is "private investment and profit fundamentalism" or "capitalist fundamentalism" or "corporate fundamentalism".
新自由主义并不是“市场”原教旨主义，因为企业主一有机会就会试图逃避市场约束。它是“私人投资和利润原教旨主义”或“资本主义原教旨主义”或“企业原教旨主义”。
@fortedrummer3026
One of my seventh grade teachers, who taught civics, required our class to watch Reagan's inauguration in the classroom on January 20, 1981. So I saw him say "government is the problem" in real time. Even then, I didn't like him at all. I liked the idea that the government could help people in need. Our teacher loudly cheered him on from behind her desk. My generation turned out to be very conservative and reactionary, and pro-neoliberal, for the most part.
1981 年 1 月 20 日，我七年级时的一位教公民学的老师要求我们全班同学在教室里观看里根的就职典礼。因此，我亲眼看到他说“政府是问题所在”。即便如此，我还是一点也不喜欢他，因为我喜欢政府能够帮助需要帮助的人的想法。我们的老师在课桌后面为他大声喝彩，我们这一代人变得非常保守和反动，大部分人都支持新自由主义。
One of my seventh grade teachers, who taught civics, required our class to watch Reagan's inauguration in the classroom on January 20, 1981. So I saw him say "government is the problem" in real time. Even then, I didn't like him at all. I liked the idea that the government could help people in need. Our teacher loudly cheered him on from behind her desk. My generation turned out to be very conservative and reactionary, and pro-neoliberal, for the most part.
1981 年 1 月 20 日，我七年级时的一位教公民学的老师要求我们全班同学在教室里观看里根的就职典礼。因此，我亲眼看到他说“政府是问题所在”。即便如此，我还是一点也不喜欢他，因为我喜欢政府能够帮助需要帮助的人的想法。我们的老师在课桌后面为他大声喝彩，我们这一代人变得非常保守和反动，大部分人都支持新自由主义。
@ttystikkrocks1042
I feel like I'm getting a minor in geopolitical economics, one hour at a time. This is extremely valuable subject matter in terms of understanding the economic forces at work in the world, who benefits- and who loses.
我觉得我正在辅修地缘政治经济学，每次一小时。就了解世界上的经济力量、谁受益、谁受损而言，这是非常有价值的课题。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
I feel like I'm getting a minor in geopolitical economics, one hour at a time. This is extremely valuable subject matter in terms of understanding the economic forces at work in the world, who benefits- and who loses.
我觉得我正在辅修地缘政治经济学，每次一小时。就了解世界上的经济力量、谁受益、谁受损而言，这是非常有价值的课题。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@jordansoviet23
I hate corporations literally making the lives of the masses miserable. It is focusing on profits than pursuing the general welfare of the people thar really make me angry and sad whenever I see homeless and old people begging alms just to buy food for their immediate medical issues.
Almost every day I see this here in the Philippines. Water, electric and telecommunications utilities getting more expensive. Most of all you cannot afford to get sick here because hospitals are mostly privately owned. If you don't have money for down payment for immediate medical attention then you die or your medical conditions worsen.
我讨厌那些让大众生活痛苦的公司。每当我看到无家可归者和老人乞求施舍，只为购买食物以解决燃眉之急时，我都会感到愤怒和悲伤。
在菲律宾，我几乎每天都能看到这种情况。水费、电费和电信费越来越贵。最重要的是你在这里生不起病，因为医院大多是私人所有。如果你没钱支付首付，无法立即就医，你就会死亡或病情恶化。
I hate corporations literally making the lives of the masses miserable. It is focusing on profits than pursuing the general welfare of the people thar really make me angry and sad whenever I see homeless and old people begging alms just to buy food for their immediate medical issues.
Almost every day I see this here in the Philippines. Water, electric and telecommunications utilities getting more expensive. Most of all you cannot afford to get sick here because hospitals are mostly privately owned. If you don't have money for down payment for immediate medical attention then you die or your medical conditions worsen.
我讨厌那些让大众生活痛苦的公司。每当我看到无家可归者和老人乞求施舍，只为购买食物以解决燃眉之急时，我都会感到愤怒和悲伤。
在菲律宾，我几乎每天都能看到这种情况。水费、电费和电信费越来越贵。最重要的是你在这里生不起病，因为医院大多是私人所有。如果你没钱支付首付，无法立即就医，你就会死亡或病情恶化。
@donnab.333
You are absolutely right about the definition of liberalism. I didn't learn the true definition of liberalism until I took a government class during my doctoral studies. I was so shocked. Liberalism coincides with Libertarians.
关于自由主义的定义，你说得非常对。我在攻读博士学位期间选修了一门政府课，才知道自由主义的真正定义。我感到非常震惊。自由主义与自由意志主义者是一致的。
You are absolutely right about the definition of liberalism. I didn't learn the true definition of liberalism until I took a government class during my doctoral studies. I was so shocked. Liberalism coincides with Libertarians.
关于自由主义的定义，你说得非常对。我在攻读博士学位期间选修了一门政府课，才知道自由主义的真正定义。我感到非常震惊。自由主义与自由意志主义者是一致的。
@maxrobespierre9176
It’s a FEATURE of capitalism, not an anomaly. This is unavoidable when individuals and corporations have the money and the connections to exert constant pressure using both carrots and sticks as the tools crush resistance.
这是资本主义的一个特征，而不是异常现象。当个人和企业拥有足够的资金和人脉，可以利用胡萝卜和大棒作为压制反抗的工具不断施加压力时，这种情况是不可避免的。
It’s a FEATURE of capitalism, not an anomaly. This is unavoidable when individuals and corporations have the money and the connections to exert constant pressure using both carrots and sticks as the tools crush resistance.
这是资本主义的一个特征，而不是异常现象。当个人和企业拥有足够的资金和人脉，可以利用胡萝卜和大棒作为压制反抗的工具不断施加压力时，这种情况是不可避免的。
@arturoanton2958
I have learned a lot from this Ben Norton & Radhika video by seing this doctrine changing its fancy names while its purpose remained constant: stealing from the working class.Amazing.
我从本-诺顿和拉迪卡的这段视频中学到了很多东西，我看到这个学说不断变换着花哨的名字，而它的目的却始终如一：从工人阶级那里窃取利益。
I have learned a lot from this Ben Norton & Radhika video by seing this doctrine changing its fancy names while its purpose remained constant: stealing from the working class.Amazing.
我从本-诺顿和拉迪卡的这段视频中学到了很多东西，我看到这个学说不断变换着花哨的名字，而它的目的却始终如一：从工人阶级那里窃取利益。
@michaelbunner2626
The government also extended the right for corporations to have privatized military forces
Any conflict with those privatized military forces is also by decree considered a direct attack against the United States
政府还扩大了企业拥有私有化军队的权利。
任何与这些私有化军队的冲突也被法令视为对美国的直接攻击。
The government also extended the right for corporations to have privatized military forces
Any conflict with those privatized military forces is also by decree considered a direct attack against the United States
政府还扩大了企业拥有私有化军队的权利。
任何与这些私有化军队的冲突也被法令视为对美国的直接攻击。
@stegoheg
I thought I had learned economics. But I had actually been spoon fed an ideology - thanks to Ben, Radhika (and Michael) for all of your work. You have freed my mind from the shackles of propagandized junk economics. Now I am making connections and seeing the world as I have never seen it before. It's quite destabilizing but I would rather know the truth of things. Keep up the outstanding work.
我以为我已经学会了经济学，但实际上我被灌输了一种意识形态--感谢本、拉迪卡（和迈克尔）所做的一切，你们让我的思想摆脱了垃圾经济学宣传的束缚。现在，我正在建立联系，看到我从未见过的世界。虽然这很不稳定，但我宁愿知道事情的真相。请继续保持出色的工作。
I thought I had learned economics. But I had actually been spoon fed an ideology - thanks to Ben, Radhika (and Michael) for all of your work. You have freed my mind from the shackles of propagandized junk economics. Now I am making connections and seeing the world as I have never seen it before. It's quite destabilizing but I would rather know the truth of things. Keep up the outstanding work.
我以为我已经学会了经济学，但实际上我被灌输了一种意识形态--感谢本、拉迪卡（和迈克尔）所做的一切，你们让我的思想摆脱了垃圾经济学宣传的束缚。现在，我正在建立联系，看到我从未见过的世界。虽然这很不稳定，但我宁愿知道事情的真相。请继续保持出色的工作。
@LuisRiveraOtero1
Greed and personal gain are opposite to social responsibility. How could people actually fool themselves into believing that corporations ,whose sole motive for existence is to MAKE PROFIT, would care about social responsibility. �� Makes as much sense as “self regulation” of industry.
贪婪和个人利益与社会责任背道而驰。人们怎么能自欺欺人地相信以盈利为唯一存在动机的企业会关心社会责任呢？这和“行业自律”的道理是一样的。
Greed and personal gain are opposite to social responsibility. How could people actually fool themselves into believing that corporations ,whose sole motive for existence is to MAKE PROFIT, would care about social responsibility. �� Makes as much sense as “self regulation” of industry.
贪婪和个人利益与社会责任背道而驰。人们怎么能自欺欺人地相信以盈利为唯一存在动机的企业会关心社会责任呢？这和“行业自律”的道理是一样的。
@lesliewillis2482
The corporations are global and they are calling the shots in US and in many places around the world. Countries are tied to each other and have become quite interdependent. This is how I think of globalization. This is the environment I think we have to consider when we make assessments about reality today.
这些公司都是全球性的，它们在美国和世界许多地方都发号施令。各国相互联系，相互依存，这就是我对全球化的看法。我认为这是我认为我们在评估当今现实时必须考虑的环境。
The corporations are global and they are calling the shots in US and in many places around the world. Countries are tied to each other and have become quite interdependent. This is how I think of globalization. This is the environment I think we have to consider when we make assessments about reality today.
这些公司都是全球性的，它们在美国和世界许多地方都发号施令。各国相互联系，相互依存，这就是我对全球化的看法。我认为这是我认为我们在评估当今现实时必须考虑的环境。
@aleaiactaest8354
Good discussion.
In neoliberal countries the state is so weakend that its only tools are tariffs and subsidies. Hence, as Radhika points out, it ends up being a version of neoliberal economy where the biggest customer is the state, to privatly owned corporations. Futhermore many of the subsides invesments into "green" economy/energy will be far from econoical and benifital to the broader populous...will end up being very expensive. But the investment class is have a party...
讨论得很好。
在新自由主义国家，国家的力量非常薄弱，其唯一的工具就是关税和补贴。因此，正如 Radhika 指出的那样，新自由主义经济的最大客户是国家而不是私有企业。此外，许多对“绿色”经济/能源的补贴投资将远非经济和有益于广大民众......最终将非常昂贵。不过，投资阶层正在狂欢......
Good discussion.
In neoliberal countries the state is so weakend that its only tools are tariffs and subsidies. Hence, as Radhika points out, it ends up being a version of neoliberal economy where the biggest customer is the state, to privatly owned corporations. Futhermore many of the subsides invesments into "green" economy/energy will be far from econoical and benifital to the broader populous...will end up being very expensive. But the investment class is have a party...
讨论得很好。
在新自由主义国家，国家的力量非常薄弱，其唯一的工具就是关税和补贴。因此，正如 Radhika 指出的那样，新自由主义经济的最大客户是国家而不是私有企业。此外，许多对“绿色”经济/能源的补贴投资将远非经济和有益于广大民众......最终将非常昂贵。不过，投资阶层正在狂欢......
@roguecow9632
Thank you for explaining Liberalism. I probably should've done research on this word that causes so much friction and confusion, but now I see it for what it is--just another trap for the average worker fall into. For those of us who do real work and don't earn passive income there's no point in participating in Their capitalist system as it only serves Them (the few) and having served this class my whole life, I've nothing to show for it but worn out joints and a depressed bank account.
谢谢你对自由主义的解释。我也许应该研究一下这个会引起这么多摩擦和混乱的词，但现在我看清了它的真面目--只是普通工人掉进的另一个陷阱。对于我们这些从事实际工作、不赚取被动收入的人来说，参与资本主义体系毫无意义，因为它只为他们（少数人）服务，而我一辈子都在为这个阶层服务，除了关节磨损和银行账户缩水之外，我一无所获。
Thank you for explaining Liberalism. I probably should've done research on this word that causes so much friction and confusion, but now I see it for what it is--just another trap for the average worker fall into. For those of us who do real work and don't earn passive income there's no point in participating in Their capitalist system as it only serves Them (the few) and having served this class my whole life, I've nothing to show for it but worn out joints and a depressed bank account.
谢谢你对自由主义的解释。我也许应该研究一下这个会引起这么多摩擦和混乱的词，但现在我看清了它的真面目--只是普通工人掉进的另一个陷阱。对于我们这些从事实际工作、不赚取被动收入的人来说，参与资本主义体系毫无意义，因为它只为他们（少数人）服务，而我一辈子都在为这个阶层服务，除了关节磨损和银行账户缩水之外，我一无所获。
@Xestra37490
It’s very dangerous to privatize fundamental things. Food source, electricity and water. It’s like privatizing the air we breathe. I’m for privatization but not natural fundamental to survive that sustain life.
Are going to say oh you won’t drink unless you pay for the water?;(
把基本的东西（如食物来源、电力和水）私有化是非常危险的，这就像把我们呼吸的空气私有化一样。虽然我支持私有化，但不支持将维持生命的自然基本要素私有化。
难道你想说除非你花钱买水，否则你就不能喝水吗？
It’s very dangerous to privatize fundamental things. Food source, electricity and water. It’s like privatizing the air we breathe. I’m for privatization but not natural fundamental to survive that sustain life.
Are going to say oh you won’t drink unless you pay for the water?;(
把基本的东西（如食物来源、电力和水）私有化是非常危险的，这就像把我们呼吸的空气私有化一样。虽然我支持私有化，但不支持将维持生命的自然基本要素私有化。
难道你想说除非你花钱买水，否则你就不能喝水吗？
@KoDeMondo
You don't need an Oxford degree to understand that if you mindlessly give away money for ten years, encouraging people to go into debt, and then suddenly do the exact opposite, the country will go into disarray.
你不需要牛津大学的学位就能明白如果你连续十年无意识地发钱，鼓励人们负债，然后又突然反其道而行之，国家就会陷入混乱。
@泰久山田-b5b
You don't need an Oxford degree to understand that if you mindlessly give away money for ten years, encouraging people to go into debt, and then suddenly do the exact opposite, the country will go into disarray.
你不需要牛津大学的学位就能明白如果你连续十年无意识地发钱，鼓励人们负债，然后又突然反其道而行之，国家就会陷入混乱。
@泰久山田-b5b
Ronald Reagan put tariffs and also pushed Plaza Accord on Japan for resolving US trade deficit. This reduced the value of U.S dollar Japan earned into less than a half of its former value.
罗纳德-里根为了解决美国的贸易赤字，对日本征收关税并推行《广场协议》。这样一来，日本赚取的美元价值就降到了以前的一半以下。
罗纳德-里根为了解决美国的贸易赤字，对日本征收关税并推行《广场协议》。这样一来，日本赚取的美元价值就降到了以前的一半以下。
@nicholasszegho6768
Globalisation in Australia brought Americans owning more than 50% of our largest corporations, including all the banks and mining. Large amounts of retail and infrastructure. Most of the bureaucracy has been contracted out to large consultancy companies like pwc, Deloitte and kpmg. America owns our means of production
在澳大利亚，全球化让美国人拥有了超过50%的大型企业，包括所有的银行和矿业。大量零售业和基础设施也是如此。大部分官僚机构都外包给了普华永道、德勤和KPMG等大型咨询公司。美国拥有我们的生产资料。
Globalisation in Australia brought Americans owning more than 50% of our largest corporations, including all the banks and mining. Large amounts of retail and infrastructure. Most of the bureaucracy has been contracted out to large consultancy companies like pwc, Deloitte and kpmg. America owns our means of production
在澳大利亚，全球化让美国人拥有了超过50%的大型企业，包括所有的银行和矿业。大量零售业和基础设施也是如此。大部分官僚机构都外包给了普华永道、德勤和KPMG等大型咨询公司。美国拥有我们的生产资料。
@clumsytriangle2436
I'm so happy i chose China as my country to work in when i decided to leave my home country 11 years ago. Something in my fate sent me to the right place for these historic times we are living through.
我很高兴11 年前当我决定离开家乡时，我选择了中国作为我工作的国家。在我们所经历的这个历史性时代，我的命运把我送到了正确的地方。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
I'm so happy i chose China as my country to work in when i decided to leave my home country 11 years ago. Something in my fate sent me to the right place for these historic times we are living through.
我很高兴11 年前当我决定离开家乡时，我选择了中国作为我工作的国家。在我们所经历的这个历史性时代，我的命运把我送到了正确的地方。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
@tonyfluxman7596
Desai is superb. She maintains a strong Marxist underpinning in all of her analysis, which allows her to penetrate the myths of neoliberalism, anti socialism, etc., and cut through to the essence of the class character of the contemporary socio-political world.
Desai非常出色。她的所有分析都以马克思主义为基础，这让她能够穿透新自由主义、反社会主义等神话，直指当代社会政治世界的阶级特性本质。
Desai is superb. She maintains a strong Marxist underpinning in all of her analysis, which allows her to penetrate the myths of neoliberalism, anti socialism, etc., and cut through to the essence of the class character of the contemporary socio-political world.
Desai非常出色。她的所有分析都以马克思主义为基础，这让她能够穿透新自由主义、反社会主义等神话，直指当代社会政治世界的阶级特性本质。
@Kimberly_Chappell
This makes me think of Gavin Newson and his folks dining at the French Laundry when everybody else in the world was under quarantine. That was about the same time he was getting huge PPP loans for his winery etc. while old people and children alike were piled up in hospitals suffocating on their own mucus.
这让我想起加文-纽森（Gavin Newson）和他的家人在法国洗衣店（French Laundry）用餐的情景，当时世界上所有人都被隔离了。就在同一时间，他的酒庄等获得了巨额 PPP 贷款，而老人和孩子们却被自己的粘液憋死在医院里。
This makes me think of Gavin Newson and his folks dining at the French Laundry when everybody else in the world was under quarantine. That was about the same time he was getting huge PPP loans for his winery etc. while old people and children alike were piled up in hospitals suffocating on their own mucus.
这让我想起加文-纽森（Gavin Newson）和他的家人在法国洗衣店（French Laundry）用餐的情景，当时世界上所有人都被隔离了。就在同一时间，他的酒庄等获得了巨额 PPP 贷款，而老人和孩子们却被自己的粘液憋死在医院里。
@aishikgupta
How do we bring about real change on the ground rather than just watch YouTube Webinars and keep analyzing the system...where is Real Change happening?? In India Capitalism is brazen.
我们该如何在当地实现真正的变革，而不仅仅是观看 YouTube 网络研讨会和不断分析系统......真正的变革发生在哪里？在印度，资本主义肆无忌惮。
How do we bring about real change on the ground rather than just watch YouTube Webinars and keep analyzing the system...where is Real Change happening?? In India Capitalism is brazen.
我们该如何在当地实现真正的变革，而不仅仅是观看 YouTube 网络研讨会和不断分析系统......真正的变革发生在哪里？在印度，资本主义肆无忌惮。
@billmarrufo
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism—ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power".
April 29, 1938, Franklin D. Roosevelt
“如果人民容忍私人权力增长到比民主国家本身还要强大的地步，那么民主国家的自由就是不安全的。从本质上讲，这就是法西斯主义--个人、团体或任何其他控制性私人势力拥有政府"。
1938 年 4 月 29 日，富兰克林-罗斯福
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism—ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power".
April 29, 1938, Franklin D. Roosevelt
“如果人民容忍私人权力增长到比民主国家本身还要强大的地步，那么民主国家的自由就是不安全的。从本质上讲，这就是法西斯主义--个人、团体或任何其他控制性私人势力拥有政府"。
1938 年 4 月 29 日，富兰克林-罗斯福
@lortega70
Only one detail of precision for this excellent report: before the neoliberalism was implemented in USA and UK by Reagan and Thatcher, in the 1980s, neoliberalism was rehearsed —imposed by force by Washington and the transnational Western oligarchy, using the CIA for preparation operations— in Chile from September 1973 with the military coup d’état against democratic socialist president Salvador Allende where, locally, general Augusto Pinochet and a military junta took the power bombing the government palace and assassinating Allende (who’s said that committed suicide, but in fact was assassinated and then his body set up to pretend suicide ). The Chilean military dictatorship implemented all the points included in the Washington Consensus about 7 years before this oligarchic model was implemented in US, UK and from there in all the rest of the “Western world”.
这份出色的报告只有一个细节是精确的：在里根和撒切尔于 20 世纪 80 年代在美国和英国推行新自由主义之前，新自由主义就已经在智利演练过了--从 1973 年 9 月针对民主社会主义总统萨尔瓦多-阿连德的军事政变开始，华盛顿和跨国西方寡头集团通过武力强加给智利，并利用中央情报局开展准备行动。在当地，奥古斯托-皮诺切特将军和军政府夺取了政权，炸毁了政府宫殿，暗杀了阿连德（据说他是自杀的，但实际上是被暗杀的，然后他的尸体被摆放起来假装自杀）。智利军事独裁政权实施了“华盛顿共识”中的所有要点，比美国、英国以及“西方世界”其他国家实施这种寡头模式早了大约 7 年。
Only one detail of precision for this excellent report: before the neoliberalism was implemented in USA and UK by Reagan and Thatcher, in the 1980s, neoliberalism was rehearsed —imposed by force by Washington and the transnational Western oligarchy, using the CIA for preparation operations— in Chile from September 1973 with the military coup d’état against democratic socialist president Salvador Allende where, locally, general Augusto Pinochet and a military junta took the power bombing the government palace and assassinating Allende (who’s said that committed suicide, but in fact was assassinated and then his body set up to pretend suicide ). The Chilean military dictatorship implemented all the points included in the Washington Consensus about 7 years before this oligarchic model was implemented in US, UK and from there in all the rest of the “Western world”.
这份出色的报告只有一个细节是精确的：在里根和撒切尔于 20 世纪 80 年代在美国和英国推行新自由主义之前，新自由主义就已经在智利演练过了--从 1973 年 9 月针对民主社会主义总统萨尔瓦多-阿连德的军事政变开始，华盛顿和跨国西方寡头集团通过武力强加给智利，并利用中央情报局开展准备行动。在当地，奥古斯托-皮诺切特将军和军政府夺取了政权，炸毁了政府宫殿，暗杀了阿连德（据说他是自杀的，但实际上是被暗杀的，然后他的尸体被摆放起来假装自杀）。智利军事独裁政权实施了“华盛顿共识”中的所有要点，比美国、英国以及“西方世界”其他国家实施这种寡头模式早了大约 7 年。
@crazyforcanada
Big corpotations require a formal charter from government in order to operate. The companies must state their business activities. If it turns out that corporations are taking over functions of government, which undermines self-determination, and changes the form of government de facto, then obviously this is not authorized in their corporate charters, which can be yanked to shut them down and prohibit them from operating outside their charters.
大公司需要政府的正式特许才能运营。公司必须说明其业务活动。如果事实证明公司正在接管政府职能，从而破坏了自决并在事实上改变了政府的形式，那么这显然不是其公司章程所允许的，可以撤销公司章程，让其停业，并禁止其在章程之外开展业务。
Big corpotations require a formal charter from government in order to operate. The companies must state their business activities. If it turns out that corporations are taking over functions of government, which undermines self-determination, and changes the form of government de facto, then obviously this is not authorized in their corporate charters, which can be yanked to shut them down and prohibit them from operating outside their charters.
大公司需要政府的正式特许才能运营。公司必须说明其业务活动。如果事实证明公司正在接管政府职能，从而破坏了自决并在事实上改变了政府的形式，那么这显然不是其公司章程所允许的，可以撤销公司章程，让其停业，并禁止其在章程之外开展业务。
@aryasyailindra9680
if Education is not affordable in a country, if Health Care is expensive, and your basic need also expensive such as electricity, water, food ect, a state owned company now owned by private, that's the sign that a Country had been taken over by Corporations and the irony is this case happened in Developed country like in most Western country and in asia Japan also have this problem i think
如果一个国家的教育负担不起，如果医疗保健昂贵，如果你的基本需求（如电、水、食物等）也很昂贵，如果国有企业现在被私人拥有，这就是一个国家被企业接管的迹象。具有讽刺意味的是这种情况发生在发达国家，如大多数西方国家，而在亚洲，我认为日本也存在这个问题。
if Education is not affordable in a country, if Health Care is expensive, and your basic need also expensive such as electricity, water, food ect, a state owned company now owned by private, that's the sign that a Country had been taken over by Corporations and the irony is this case happened in Developed country like in most Western country and in asia Japan also have this problem i think
如果一个国家的教育负担不起，如果医疗保健昂贵，如果你的基本需求（如电、水、食物等）也很昂贵，如果国有企业现在被私人拥有，这就是一个国家被企业接管的迹象。具有讽刺意味的是这种情况发生在发达国家，如大多数西方国家，而在亚洲，我认为日本也存在这个问题。
@jimmy31mk2h8
You just described the Australian Government all sides! We are no longer the “Lucky Country” we are “the Lobby Country” We have common law and statue law law we move further and further from common law too legislative law! That’s because our parliament only makes laws for politicians!
你刚才描述了澳大利亚政府的方方面面！我们不再是“幸运之国”，我们是“游说之国”，我们有普通法和成文法，但我们离普通法和立法法越来越远！这是因为我们的议会只为政客制定法律！
You just described the Australian Government all sides! We are no longer the “Lucky Country” we are “the Lobby Country” We have common law and statue law law we move further and further from common law too legislative law! That’s because our parliament only makes laws for politicians!
你刚才描述了澳大利亚政府的方方面面！我们不再是“幸运之国”，我们是“游说之国”，我们有普通法和成文法，但我们离普通法和立法法越来越远！这是因为我们的议会只为政客制定法律！
@liemvo6469
Reforming the banking sector and financial market in advanced economy is prerequisite for exerting some sorts of control over these neoliberal tactics. what has just happened in gold market in Vietnam over the past few months would give you a nice demonstrations of this. Essentially, the government has to ultimately sell its gold reserve at specific prices via state owned banks to bring down gold prices, after so many attempts at "market mechanisms" have failed (the lies by the capitalist class are so overwhealming).
改革发达经济体的银行业和金融市场是对这些新自由主义策略进行某种控制的先决条件。过去几个月越南黄金市场发生的事情就是一个绝佳例证。本质上，在多次“市场机制”尝试失败之后（资本家阶级的谎言如此铺天盖地），政府最终不得不通过国有银行以特定价格出售其黄金储备以压低金价。
Reforming the banking sector and financial market in advanced economy is prerequisite for exerting some sorts of control over these neoliberal tactics. what has just happened in gold market in Vietnam over the past few months would give you a nice demonstrations of this. Essentially, the government has to ultimately sell its gold reserve at specific prices via state owned banks to bring down gold prices, after so many attempts at "market mechanisms" have failed (the lies by the capitalist class are so overwhealming).
改革发达经济体的银行业和金融市场是对这些新自由主义策略进行某种控制的先决条件。过去几个月越南黄金市场发生的事情就是一个绝佳例证。本质上，在多次“市场机制”尝试失败之后（资本家阶级的谎言如此铺天盖地），政府最终不得不通过国有银行以特定价格出售其黄金储备以压低金价。
@CesarNostradamus-wj9uq
Trickle-down economics refers to economic policies that disproportionately favor the upper tier of the economic spectrum, comprising wealthy individuals and large corporations. The policies are based on the idea that spending by this group will "trickle down" to those less fortunate in the form of stronger economic growth.[1] The term has been used broadly by critics of supply-side economics to refer to taxing and spending policies by governments that, intentionally or not, result in widening income inequality; it has also been used in critical references to neoliberalism.[2] Despite this, the term does not represent any cohesive economic theory.[3]
Ronald Reagan's economic policies, dubbed "Reaganomics" by opponents, included large tax cuts and were characterized as trickle-down economics. In this picture, he is outlining his plan for the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 from the Oval Office in a televised address, July 1981.
Since we are off the gold standard and printing money is off the charts, this theory is null and void because by the time the money gets to the poor people inflation already set in and thus the purchasing power is less.
涓滴经济学（Trickle-down Economics）是指过度偏向由富人和大公司组成的经济上层的经济政策。这一术语被供应方经济学的批评者广泛用于指政府有意或无意导致收入不平等扩大的税收和支出政策；它也被用于批评新自由主义。尽管如此，这一术语并不代表任何有凝聚力的经济理论。
罗纳德-里根的经济政策被反对者称为“里根经济学”，其中包括大规模减税和涓滴经济学。照片中，1981年7月，里根在椭圆形办公室发表电视讲话，概述了他的 1981 年《经济复苏税收法案》（Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981）计划。
由于我们已经脱离了金本位制，印钞机也在疯狂地印钞票，因此这一理论已经失效，因为当钱到达穷人手中时，通货膨胀已经开始了，因此购买力降低了。
Trickle-down economics refers to economic policies that disproportionately favor the upper tier of the economic spectrum, comprising wealthy individuals and large corporations. The policies are based on the idea that spending by this group will "trickle down" to those less fortunate in the form of stronger economic growth.[1] The term has been used broadly by critics of supply-side economics to refer to taxing and spending policies by governments that, intentionally or not, result in widening income inequality; it has also been used in critical references to neoliberalism.[2] Despite this, the term does not represent any cohesive economic theory.[3]
Ronald Reagan's economic policies, dubbed "Reaganomics" by opponents, included large tax cuts and were characterized as trickle-down economics. In this picture, he is outlining his plan for the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 from the Oval Office in a televised address, July 1981.
Since we are off the gold standard and printing money is off the charts, this theory is null and void because by the time the money gets to the poor people inflation already set in and thus the purchasing power is less.
涓滴经济学（Trickle-down Economics）是指过度偏向由富人和大公司组成的经济上层的经济政策。这一术语被供应方经济学的批评者广泛用于指政府有意或无意导致收入不平等扩大的税收和支出政策；它也被用于批评新自由主义。尽管如此，这一术语并不代表任何有凝聚力的经济理论。
罗纳德-里根的经济政策被反对者称为“里根经济学”，其中包括大规模减税和涓滴经济学。照片中，1981年7月，里根在椭圆形办公室发表电视讲话，概述了他的 1981 年《经济复苏税收法案》（Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981）计划。
由于我们已经脱离了金本位制，印钞机也在疯狂地印钞票，因此这一理论已经失效，因为当钱到达穷人手中时，通货膨胀已经开始了，因此购买力降低了。
@KoDeMondo
Most people believe that money is real wealth. Yet, everything we spend money on requires energy to mine, create, deliver, run, maintain, and dispose of. In this way, money is ultimately a direct claim on energy and resources.
Our economic stories assert that with more money we can create more of anything. The truth is we cannot create energy. We both extract and burn it faster by using technology and printing money.
Natural capital -particularly energy-is the true foundation of our monetary systems. As we create more money we don’t create more resources, we merely access them faster.
大多数人认为，金钱才是真正的财富。然而，我们花钱购买的一切都需要能源来开采、创造、交付、运行、维护和处置。因此，金钱最终是对能源和资源的直接索取。
我们的经济故事断言，只要有更多的钱，我们就能创造更多的东西。事实上，我们无法创造能源。通过使用技术和印钞，我们可以更快地提取和燃烧能源。
自然资本--尤其是能源--是我们货币体系的真正基础。当我们创造出更多的货币时，我们并没有创造出更多的资源，我们只是更快地获取了这些资源。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Most people believe that money is real wealth. Yet, everything we spend money on requires energy to mine, create, deliver, run, maintain, and dispose of. In this way, money is ultimately a direct claim on energy and resources.
Our economic stories assert that with more money we can create more of anything. The truth is we cannot create energy. We both extract and burn it faster by using technology and printing money.
Natural capital -particularly energy-is the true foundation of our monetary systems. As we create more money we don’t create more resources, we merely access them faster.
大多数人认为，金钱才是真正的财富。然而，我们花钱购买的一切都需要能源来开采、创造、交付、运行、维护和处置。因此，金钱最终是对能源和资源的直接索取。
我们的经济故事断言，只要有更多的钱，我们就能创造更多的东西。事实上，我们无法创造能源。通过使用技术和印钞，我们可以更快地提取和燃烧能源。
自然资本--尤其是能源--是我们货币体系的真正基础。当我们创造出更多的货币时，我们并没有创造出更多的资源，我们只是更快地获取了这些资源。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
很赞 9
收藏