Democrats at the DNC: “Let’s Ban Profits!”

Alright, I’m being self-indulgent here, two posts no less, but it’s just too damn hilarious and delicious to pass up sharing it with a very substantial grin on my face that just won’t go away.

Short Peter Schiff video totally trolling the Democrat National Convention.

I take substantial heat, ridicule, and I am regularly dismissed over my choice of words to describe my opinion of the intelligence of the average leftist or Democrat. But listening to the video—and these are delegates to the national convention—perhaps people should give my derisive comments toward the left on Facebook another try. 🙂

…Hey, here’s an idea. How about we cap what any sports, entertainment, or media personality can negotiate in any contract to, say, whatever median national income is, or something like that?

Combined with banning corporate profits, I see a movie ticket, popcorn, and a soda for a buck fifty in all of our futures.

Just do it!

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More


  1. Beans McGrady on July 25, 2016 at 16:37

    My word. Bernie is speaking tonight. I think his own supporters might storm the stage and kill him for endorsing Hillary. Can’t wait.

    • Richard Nikoley on July 25, 2016 at 16:42

      Yea, I might have to feel the Burn tonight.

      I’m at my bro’s place. Fortunately, he has plenty of guns, so I’ll be able to dry fire at the TV.

    • Richard Nikoley on July 25, 2016 at 22:30

      Literally the very first Sanders speech I’ve ever listened to.

      Oh, my.

      I have been far too gentle with the invective towards the left. I never knew the struggle for basic intelligence was so real.

      • Evan Eberhardt on July 25, 2016 at 23:49

        Funny you mention that, because I stumbled across a comment today that refuted Trump supporters as ‘low-info’ since the Dems have more minority support than Republicans by wide margins, and, apparently…how did I miss this getting my psychology degree years ago?…the average IQ of American blacks is 85 and Hispanics is 89 (whites is 100, Asian 106, Ashkenazi Jews 112). 85! And that is higher than most sub-Saharan Africans because of some co-mingling with whitey over the years, apparently (I thought I was reading BS, but then spent 3 hours on the Internet looking into this IQ stuff, and it is true according to multiple sources and was found out decades ago but our PC leftist freaks have kept it under wraps pretty well by annihilating the careers of anyone who dares to bring it up).

        Can this really be? Well, it would sure explain a lot if it is indeed the case. Are blacks and Hispanics (in general, always many exceptions of course) just dumber? I can forgive the first couple decades of AA and civil rights stuff not working out, but we are fifty fucking years in and blacks have apparently still not noticed that their culture is a goddamn mess despite endless ‘assistance’ from whitey. Is it simply because too many of them literally just can’t comprehend what is going on?

        As for Hispanics, I see first hand here in Colorado what is happening with public schools. When the Hispanic levels rise, the school scores go down (almost without exception…the black heavy schools have been bad forever). Before, I assumed this was because of schools being ill equipped to handle the influx of all these kids, many of which do not speak English well (and no doubt this plays a role). But do the scores take such a hard hit simply because the kids are not as intelligent?

        Christ, I was plenty weary of immigrants before, but I will championing to build that wall now and in favor of mass deportation (shit, I will go pick crops on weekends happily if there is suddenly a labor shortage). America is doomed if we let less intelligent people waltz right in here and pop out 10 kids. Oh, and Arabs averaged 84 IQ. So, like their goddamn tyrannous religion isn’t bad enough, they are also not too bright. Trump was right. Ban all Muslims immediately (and probably forever).

        Do Democrats literally want the destruction of America? Because with the decline of white people (and the average 100 IQ), that will be the result in the not too distant future.

  2. LaFrite on July 26, 2016 at 01:32

    Haha, yeah, quite “hillaryous” indeed 😀

    More seriously:

    I hope the guy’s right. I don’t care much about Trump but Clinton president gives me nightmares.

  3. thhq1 on July 26, 2016 at 09:37

    Good picture of the Arkansas Werewolf showing the fangs and claws. The Clintons have never been good at hiding their intentions but they’re masters of downplaying their significance.

    Schultz was a bus-kill appetizer. We’re what’s for dinner.

  4. S on August 16, 2016 at 14:57

    I can see where this opinion might come from. The whole objection to capitalism from a “socialist” point of view is that profit is appropriated from the worker – i.e. the worker does not receive the full value of his labour, which is regarded as exploitation.

    An alternative would be an enterprise fully owned by its workers such that the “profit” just falls back on the workers. This would make concept of profit redundant.

    • Richard Nikoley on August 16, 2016 at 17:43

      Not bad, S. Don’t know whether this is original or you’re piecing together bits. No matter. In the main, you are talking about Karl Marx’s “labor theory of value.”

      I like to call it the “Mud Pie Theory of Value.” They worked very long and hard to create those beutiful mud pies, so you must find them very valuable, per se.

      There is a certain disconnect, and the quasi-moral complaint from the left is that even if you acknowledge there would be no value creation without the capital investment, there would also be no value add without the labor.

      Sorry, that’s stupid, because the capitalist can just bid labor up or down. This is the whole point of capital. In today’s world, everyone thinks in terms of credit and debt, not cash flow. They think in terms of profit and loss, not Balance Sheet.

      …Sure they are all manner of mutual companies, cooperatives, non-profits, and whatever people want. Nothing outperforms capitalist enterprise, for employees, customers, shareholders and etc, for over $15o years, now.

      Dr. Mike Eades actually emailed this to me yesterday and it’s a very decent expose of capitalism from different paradigmatic perspectives…which was the topic of our email exchange. Highly recommended. I have a critique on Facebook, which is that while his synthesis is good, he did not account for corporate rent seeking behavior.

      • S on August 17, 2016 at 01:27

        Thanks for the youtube link, it was entertaining, and surprisingly aligned with the democratic worker cooperative movement. “Dynamism and decency” – You want to take the best of capitalism while discarding the worst. The best way for capitalists to agree to be decent to theirs workers is if the capitalist and the worker are one and the same. And this solution is elegant because nobody is forced to do anything – the state doesn’t need to legislate anything to do with worker’s rights because they will automatically be taken care of. Not to mention a myriad of other benefits; for example, the worker/owners are likely to live local to the workplace, which incentivises good environmental practices.

        “…Sure they are all manner of mutual companies, cooperatives, non-profits, and whatever people want. Nothing outperforms capitalist enterprise, for employees, customers, shareholders and etc, for over $15o years, now.”

        This might not be the case at all. Here’s some research:

        So imagine that a large sector of the economy was taken up by democratic worker coops, and that this sector is in competition with traditional capitalist enterprises. Given that the worker coop sector would be likely to pay their workers more, and provide a more satisfying work experience, the capitalist sector would be forced to “up their game”.

      • Richard Nikoley on August 17, 2016 at 09:01

        I don’t think cooperative schemes provide any sort of direct comparison as they represent such an overall minuscule portion of the economy. Moreover, they necessarily rely upon many capitalist enterprises, so it’s all confounded.

        The question is, could they succeed and flourish in an economy without any private ownership and direction of capital elsewhere in that economy and I think the answer is no.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow by Email8k