Thread: How Do You Tell a Bolivian Indian from an Ordinary American?

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff06132005.html

The Inca and Us
How Do You Tell a Bolivian Indian from an Ordinary American?
By DAVE LINDORFF

What is the difference between an Inca Indian in Bolivia, and a middle-class wage-earner in America?

Answer: The Inca Indian knows where her or his interests lie, recognizes that the leading political parties are thieves and agents of international and domestic corporate interests out to rob them, and joins with thousands of like-minded comrades to take to the streets and drive the crooks and charlatans from power, using everything from sticks to sticks of dynamite. The American, in contrast, is easily snookered by politicians who use "wedge issues" like abortion, gay marriage, defense against "terror," or posting of the 10 Commandments on public buildings to get her or him to vote against her or his own real interests.


Result: Bolivia has just seen a corrupt president driven from power and his would be successors deterred (so far) from replacing him, and is on the edge of a possible revolutionary transformation, all over the issue of whether the country's sizeable natural gas reserves should be opened to plunder by international oil companies. The U.S. meanwhile, has recently opened fragile artic wilderness (and native lands) to drilling, and continues to despoil other ecologically fragile areas, particularly in coastal waters, is about to approve yet another "free trade" pact that will massively shift jobs out of the country, and is robbing workers of pension benefits while simultaneously planning the gutting of the public Social Security system--all with scarcely an organized protest from the public. Congress even passed a repeal of the estate tax, which only fell on people with assets of over $1.6 million ($3.2 for a family)! And the public cheers.

What explains this huge difference in political awareness and political action in the face of clear threats by the rich and powerful to the welfare of the majority?

I would suggest that it is the collapse of community in the U.S.

In Bolivia, as in many developing countries, the ordinary people, often without even access to televisions, have a strong sense of community. They meet routinely and naturally in social settings-street markets, plazas, churches, and at festivals-where their common experiences and concerns are discussed.

Americans are increasingly atomized and connected to each other only through the mediation of mass electronic entertainment vehicles, which convey the official version of reality. We travel to and from our places of work in isolated automobiles, from inside which we view other vehicles and their drivers primarily as obstacles and rivals whose only significance to us is that they interfere with our ability to get to our destination. At work, we operate in neofeudal settings that discourage open discourse and that punish free speech, and that have attacked and largely destroyed any sense of collective action by virtually legislating trade unions out of existence.

Meanwhile in our communities, most of us live in single-home isolation, with green barriers or even high fences separating us from our neighbors, attending churches that, while providing some limited sense of community, at the same time increasingly act more to divide us--one church from the other (or from non-churchgoers)-than they do to unite us. In those few settings were we might be in close contact with others-at the supermarket or the gym-we plug earphones in our ears and tune in the radio or our ipods so we don't need to relate to others except for commercial transactions.

Little wonder that we are all strangers in our own neighborhoods, and that we are all fighting--and mostly losing--our individual struggles for survival while Bolivia's Incas are marching enmasse to defend their rights.

Dave Lindorff is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. His new book of CounterPunch columns titled "This Can't be Happening!" is published by Common Courage Press. Information about both books and other work by Lindorff can be found at www.thiscantbehappening.net.

He can be reached at: dlindorff@yahoo.com

Congress even passed a repeal of the estate tax, which only fell on people with assets of over $1.6 million ($3.2 for a family)! And the public cheers.

Say What??? Is this true?!?!?!?!?

What explains this huge difference in political awareness and political action in the face of clear threats by the rich and powerful to the welfare of the majority?

I would suggest that it is the collapse of community in the U.S.

And I would only add Blind Trust of the Mirage.

Little wonder that we are all strangers in our own neighborhoods, and that we are all fighting--and mostly losing--our individual struggles for survival while Bolivia's Incas are marching enmasse to defend their rights.

Bolivia is marching. Venezeula, Brazil, Argentina, Uraguay, Paraguay and others protest the FTAA. Koreans brave riot gear and clubs to protest the Asian Pacific FTA. France defeats the EU Globalist Constitution and closes its borders. Russians protest Immigration.

GO BRAVE ONES!!

This will be the year the Sun Shines On You!

Because Most Americans are still hoping they'll win the Lottery.

The repeal of the estate tax which is to be accomplished over several years was part of Bush's tax cut plan. NOW--I am FOR the repeal of the estate tax because I feel that it is double taxation. The person who dies and leaves an estate has already PAID income tax on that money and, usually, at the very highest rate. I just don't think that the government should get 48% of a person's estate no matter HOW MUCH money that person has left. When a person has worked that hard or been that innovative that they are worth that much money, the person's family deserves that money. NOT THE GOVERNMENT to give away to everyone who abuses the system. My main argument against this tax is that fact that it's double taxation and that is not right under any circumstances.

Bootsie, is it true, if you know, that it repealed ONLY for estates of $1,600,000 or $3,200,000 and larger?

No one supports the estate tax. The whole concept is criminal.

But if it was repealed it would/should have to be repealed for everyone. This author is saying it did not repeal for estates below $1,600,000 and $3,200,000?

Does anyone know or can anyone verify this?

This is outrageous!!!

I thought they had already exempted portions of estates up to some amount so that you only paid on the amount above? Maybe this repeal took it the rest of the way so that everyone is free of the estate tax now--which I support and is a good thing.

NOW, if we can only get the FairTax passed, the "tax" problems of our nation would be summarily solved.

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/art ... 43,00.html

Estate Tax Questions

Reminder: Most relatively simple estates (cash, publicly-traded securities, small amounts of other easily-valued assets, and no special deductions or elections, or jointly-held property) with a total value under $1,000,000 do not require the filing of an estate tax return.

Q: What is the Estate Tax?

The Estate Tax is a tax on your right to transfer property at your death. It consists of an accounting of everything you own or have certain interests in at the date of death (Refer to Form 706). The fair market value of these items is used, not necessarily what you paid for them or what their values were when you acquired them. The total of all of these items is your "Gross Estate." The includible property may consist of Cash and Securities, Real Estate, Insurance, Trusts, Annuities, Business interests and other assets.

Once you have accounted for the Gross Estate, certain deductions (and in special circumstances, reductions to value) are allowed in arriving at your "Taxable Estate." These deductions may include Mortgages and other Debts, Estate Administration expenses, property that passes to Surviving Spouses and Qualified Charities. The value of some operating business interests or farms may be reduced for estates that qualify.

After the net amount is computed, the value of lifetime taxable gifts (beginning with gifts made in 1977) is added to this number and the tax is computed. The tax is then reduced by the available unified credit. Presently, the amount of this credit reduces the computed tax so that only total taxable estates and lifetime gifts that exceed $1,000,000 will actually have to pay tax. In its current form, the estate tax only affects the wealthiest 2% of all Americans.

with a total value under $1,000,000 do not require the filing of an estate tax return.

In its current form, the estate tax only affects the wealthiest 2% of all Americans.

If this was actually repealed, the rich just got a tax break.

okay

Judy--it used to be anything over $650,000 maybe. I may be a LITTLE off on my figures because I'm answering from memory. This repeal gradually increased the amount that it allowed to be UNTAXED. I think either last year or this year, the amount was the 1.2 million. Anything OVER that was taxable. And, each year that amount that was not taxed was to be increased. BUT, under Bush's plan, this was to expire at some point UNLESS Congress renewed it. I'll have to do some further research to see what the status is now or if Congress HAS voted again on it.

John--This is NOT a tax break for the rich. THIS is DOUBLE TAXATION. People who have that much money have USUALLY EARNED IT and paid tax at the highest rate on what they've earned. Any money they EARN from that money in the way of interest or dividends is also taxed. This is money that a person leaves when they die that has already been TAXED TO DEATH!

This tax is DOUBLE TAXATION.

OKAY--Here's the schedule. I was thinking back to 1991. At that time, anything OVER $500,000 was taxable.
Bush's tax cuts changed that so that the amount that was NOT TAXABLE increased yearly until 2011 at which time a sunset provision kicks in and it will go back to $1 million.
For 2005, the NON-TAXABLE amount is 1.5 million.
For 2006, 2007 and 2008 it will be 2 million.
For 2010, NOTHING will be taxable BUT you will have to plan to die in 2010 IF you have a taxable estate and want to avoid this estate tax because, in 2011, it will drop back down to $1 MILLION that is not taxable.

I hope this is one tax that they will repeal altogether but I doubt VERY seriously that the Democrats will have ANYTHING to do with THAT PLAN.

This just shoots to hell Judy's SAVE, DON'T SPEND theory. Because, why would you want to save just to have to die and give half of back to the government?? AFTER you had already been paying taxes on it all your working life or retirement life???