How Capitalists React to 'The Little Guy Beating Them by Their Own Rules'

[Revoltingest]

You read the Constitution one way. I read it another way.
The preamble:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution:
...
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
...

You can combine these 2 to get a general draft.
The 13th is about slavery as such and the general draft can be considered different from slavery as it is for the common defense.
As for Kelo v New London you don't have absolute property rights, because the Government has the right to take your land in the end and do with it as it see fit. The 5th has nothing to do with Kelo v New London.

So now all I need to do as this is us playing with words, find a way to ground the minimum wage in the Constitution and its amendments. So here it is:
The 16th: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

You now pay someone a wage. As long as that gives you an income, Congress can tax you and give these money to your employee. Even if you don't make a profit, you make a profit, because you gain some benefit by paying someone a wage.
Yes, I am playing with the Constitution and so are you.
I just admit that we both are subjective in how we interpret in the end the Preamble and the rest.

The difference is that you play with words to justify
taking away liberty, & increasing power over us.

I read it rigorously as limiting government's power over us.
For example, the 13 Amendment would supersede what
came before. The military is clearly "involuntary servitude".
The exception of having been convicted of a crime doesn't
apply to draftees, who are also denied equal protection,
since it discriminates on the basis of religion, age, & gender.
It also imposes the burden based upon a lottery. Those are
flagrant violations of the 14th Amendment, which supersedes
any claims the the Constitution can raise armies by enslaving
young low-lottery-number cis-men of the wrong religion.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The difference is that you play with words to justify
taking away liberty, & increasing power over us.

I read it rigorously as limiting government's power over us.
For example, the 13 Amendment would supersede what
came before. The military is clearly "involuntary servitude".
The exception of having been convicted of a crime doesn't
apply to draftees, who are also denied equal protection,
since it discriminates on the basis of religion, age, & gender.
It also imposes the burden based upon a lottery. Those are
flagrant violations of the 14th Amendment, which supersedes
any claims the the Constitution can raise armies by enslaving
young low-lottery-number cis-men of the wrong religion.

Yeah, you speak with Truth for an us as for all humans. Well, you don't and neither do I. I just know that applies to us both. You don't.
In the end we are debating different inter-subjective social constructs. And neither of us are right not wrong. We just believe differently.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, you speak with Truth...

The amendments to the Constitution do say what they say.
That could be called "truth".
My opinion is that they should be fundamental law,
& not ignored or violated when government wants.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The amendments to the Constitution do say what they say.
That could be called "truth".
My opinion is that they should be fundamental law,
& not ignored or violated when government wants.

Your opinion is not truth. If you act like that, you don't understand how the social world works. You don't have right or liberty. That is a social construct and in the contract.
So stop arguing as if this has anything to do with truth. You have one interpretation of them and I have another.

 

[Revoltingest]

Your opinion is not truth.

Exactly.
(That's what I said.)

 

[Revoltingest]

In the news....
How the rich got richer: Reddit trading frenzy benefited Wall Street elite
Excerpted....
Last month’s GameStop trading mania was sparked by members of a popular Reddit investing community who said they hoped to strike back at the Wall Street elites who had long dismissed them as dumb money. But growing evidence casts doubt on the idea that the episode mostly benefited small-time investors.

Giant mutual funds that own the largest stakes in GameStop saw the biggest gains in value. Hedge funds — some that have started using algorithms to track retail investors on social media sites — appear to have bought and sold millions of shares during the stock’s most volatile period of trading, industry experts said.

And, in at least some cases, novice investors lost their shirts.

Instead of heralding a new wave of investor populism, the rise and fall of GameStop’s stock may end up reinforcing what professional investors have known for a long time: Wall Street is very good at making money, and more often than not, smaller investors lose out to wealthy traders and giant institutions.