Corporatocracy

Maybe not proportionally, but there should still probably be a requirement of payment of taxes for the past few years.

Oligarchies have historically existed and it turns out giving disproportion power to small groups and they will use it to further strengthen their position at the expense of the public, thinking CEO's will be more benevolent than other historic oligarchs is naive

>>1563923

Paying taxes is against the law anyways.

Can you stop being a dumbass yet?

>>1563943
Corporatocracy+Military Power

Corporatocracy handles the civilian side of things, military power stops the downsides of global capitalism like mass immigration

>>1563940
If you receive more in government services/federal aid than you pay in taxes, you don't deserve the right to vote.

It'd be like walking into a steakhouse as a vegetarian, ordering a steak, not paying for it, and demanding nobody else can have steak.

>>1563949
Those "downsides" are what corporations want. A corporatocracy wouldn't be opposed to immigration. You cannot have two separate powers with extremely opposed goals without one having the upper hand or you end up with your military taking over and setting up a military dictatorship.

>>1563970
Blackwater would profit from guarding the border and increased police presence

Private prisons could be a source of cheap labor, rather than having to import immigrants

>>1563981
In the type of corporatocracy you want CEO's and the corporate community would be setting the agenda not one specific corporation. You could put 100% of your population into prison and get free labour out of them but you'd still want to increase your population to get even more.

>>1563953
then some/most corporations would be BTFO, too, because of the benefits they get from the government, in many cases

>>1564001
>"haha a company gets subsidies clearly they shouldn't get the right to vote, they may employ thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people but when you think about it it's really the same as some trailer trash or a ghetto welfare whore"

>>1564007
I'm not saying it's right, I'm just suggesting a more specific criteria, because one of those is actually contributing to the GDP

>>1564014
That's true I guess. I mean, I'm not a big of a lot of corporate welfare projects, but some of them aren't that bad.

Should we really be making a big deal out of building some excess Abrams tanks to keep blue collar workers employed as part of a "deficit reduction" strategy when our entitlements are growing unsustainably?

>>1563923
No, because then "taxation" would become lobbying. The corporate rulers who hire lobbyists would instead spend the same lobbying money on taxes instead for extra votes.

>>1563949
>military (arm of government)
>stopping mass immigration
Lad, the government is the one pushing for the immigrants in the first place.

>>1563953
This lad's got the right of it. You can eventually get off the dole and pay your god damn taxes, it's not oppression. It's demanding participation.

>>1564182
And then the goverment has a lot more money to play with? I could be wrong here but more tax money is good for the goverment. If this caught on full swing you might be able to make taxes a voluntary thing.

>>>/pol/
>>>/r9k/

>>1564207
My mistake for not clarifying: the people receiving the lobbying right now would receive the same money through tax funding instead. No matter what happens the government agents would get paid by the corporations, this option just makes it easier.

It sounds absurd, but so does our current system. Bribery of government agents is legal and encouraged because it's called lobbying instead.

>>1563923
>Would replacing democracy with corporate oligarchy be good for the country?
Democracy is bad enough without making it even MORE moneycentric.
Hang yourself.