4 ms·

Obviously you belong to the same political movement as he did. A few years before his death he said in an interview the his friend Per Engdahl was a great man.

by cess11 2y ago

Obviously you belong to the same political movement as he did. A few years before his death he said in an interview the his friend Per Engdahl was a great man. He was a fascist when he died. It made a solid impression on IKEA as a company. It's why unions have never been able to form there, it's why the company 'culture' has a distinctly parasocial 'family'-character, it's why the trust invests heavily in keeping refugees in desert camps, it's why Kamprad was disgusted by the idea to pay taxes, it's why IKEA does its sourcing in countries like Russia, Romania and so on, and avoids ecological destruction in Sweden. Your link confirms what I wrote earlier. Maybe you know someone who could help you translate it? You're using radical in some highly personal sense, in common parlance it means you're trying to cause social and political change through means like civil disobedience, direct action, mutual aid, militant revolution, rather than parliamentary deliberation and compromise. Palme was likely murdered by the fascist Gladio/Stay Behind network. So yes, it's how the political hegemony you support usually does it. Either buy the mafia and make money from drugs, or hire upper class murderers that are already financed by their exploitation of workers. Kamprad had some luck and Engdahl had some money. He wasn't special, Sweden has been lenient with fascists and oligarchs during all of modernity.

tored 2y ago
No, I'm not part of that movement, another smear, directly from the communist handbook. But you will get nowhere with that here. It is of course fine to question IKEA's business practices, myself is critical of many, personally I'm all in favour of unions as a union member myself, what is not okay is for bolsjeviks to steal companies by using the force of the government and undermine the entire economic model of society in a similar fashion what happened to the kulaks. > Your link confirms what I wrote earlier. No, read again, it confirms that Astrid Lindgren payed 101.06% in taxes. And Astrid Lindgren was not the only one affected by this extreme taxation. Confirmed by this report https://cms.ratio.se/app/uploads/2014/11/den_svenska_modellen3.pdf https://cms.ratio.se/app/uploads/2014/11/den_svenska_modelle... Marginalskatten var runt mitten av 1970-talet mycket hög (se figur 4); den högsta marginalskatten var i mitten av 1970-talet runt 87 procent. Beaktades även förmögenhetsskatten kunde marginalskatten överstiga 100 procent för kapitalinkomster och för rörelsekapital kunde marginalskatten också överstiga 100 procent om hänsyn togs till både inkomstskatt och egenavgifter (Grosskopf & Rabe, 1991). Detta uppmärksammades av Astrid Lindgren och föranledde henne att skriva en saga om Pomperipossa (Pomperipossa i Monismanien, 1976) som levde i ett fantasiland (Monismanien), framställt som en idyll i mångt och mycket men där Pomperipossa tvingades att betala mer i skatt än vad hon tjänade (102 procent). Astrid Lindgren beskrev på ett målande sätt Sverige och sin egen situation vilket ledde till ett skatteuppror i Sverige och att den 100 procentliga marginalskatten ganska snart justerades nedåt (Grosskopf & Rabe, 1991) även om marginalskatten på rörelsekapital fortfarande kunde uppgå till 90 procent. Never trust left wing radicals on history or on anything actually. Lies are part of their ideology in order to turn society upside down. And why are you denying it? This is what your movement wanted and still wants, that we all should be tax slaves under an anonymous bureaucracy. In every answer you keep bringing in irrelevant arguments, but that is typical of left wing radicals, they need to create a myth that they are fighting the good fight against all these fascists, so that they can impose a tyranny on all of us.
- cess11 2y ago
  You're quoting something that quotes a story Lindgren made up. Pomperipossa is not a real person. Here's from the previous link: "Även om den fortfarande är en viktig påminnelse om värdet av låga marginalskatter, visar Timbros chefsekonom Jacob Lundbergs undersökning att hon faktiskt aldrig behövde betala 102 procent i skatt." 'Even if it's still an important reminder of the value of low marginal tax rates, an examination by the chief economist of Timbro [a reactionary propaganda organisation] shows that [Astrid Lindgren] never had to pay 102% in taxes'. Sweden hasn't had bolsheviks since the war. The communist party dislodged politically from Moscow in the sixties, though they continued to receive funds for another decade or two. You must have a very weird view of how power was transfered from the tsar to the bolsheviks. Do you seriously think that the civil war had nothing to do with it and they did it through parliamentary deliberation, like with the löntagarfonder? Or are you lying? Edit: Your buddies at the reactionary think tank has made a neat little graph at the bottom here: https://timbro.se/skattekoll/marginalskatt/ https://timbro.se/skattekoll/marginalskatt/
  - tored 2y ago
    > Pomperipossa is not a real person No shit. Talk about desperate argument. She didn't need to pay the 102% tax in the end because of the Social democrats changed the law (as I already described earlier) because it became too unpopular, if they hadn't she would have. Thus is was not made up, it was a reality. Confirmed by the report from Ratio. Thus if Astrid Lindgren hadn't written that article Social democrats would have been perfectly fine with Swedes paying more than 100% in taxes. That is why Social democrats during this era were radicals. And also even after the change in law you could still pay 90% tax. > You must have a very weird view of how power was transfered from the tsar to the bolsheviks It didn't happened that way. It was the Mensheviks that took the power from the Tsar in the February Revolution of 1917. The Bolsheviks took in turn power from the Mensheviks in the October Revolution of 1917 and then murdered the Tsar and his family who was already in house arrest by the Mensheviks. Thus Bolsheviks did not remove the Tsar from power, a common falsehood by Bolsheviks, because he had already abdicated. The Russian Civil War was a consequence of the Bolshevik Revolution against the Provisional Government, which was not accepted by many different political groups, everything from social democrats, liberals to monarchists. Somehow Bolsheviks always forgets this important detail. Wonder why. But anyway, I was correct about Löntagarfonderna, the implementation, the goal and it's consequences.

by cess11 2y ago

tored 2y ago

No, I'm not part of that movement, another smear, directly from the communist handbook. But you will get nowhere with that here. It is of course fine to question IKEA's business practices, myself is critical of many, personally I'm all in favour of unions as a union member myself, what is not okay is for bolsjeviks to steal companies by using the force of the government and undermine the entire economic model of society in a similar fashion what happened to the kulaks. > Your link confirms what I wrote earlier. No, read again, it confirms that Astrid Lindgren payed 101.06% in taxes. And Astrid Lindgren was not the only one affected by this extreme taxation. Confirmed by this report https://cms.ratio.se/app/uploads/2014/11/den_svenska_modellen3.pdf https://cms.ratio.se/app/uploads/2014/11/den_svenska_modelle... Marginalskatten var runt mitten av 1970-talet mycket hög (se figur 4); den högsta marginalskatten var i mitten av 1970-talet runt 87 procent. Beaktades även förmögenhetsskatten kunde marginalskatten överstiga 100 procent för kapitalinkomster och för rörelsekapital kunde marginalskatten också överstiga 100 procent om hänsyn togs till både inkomstskatt och egenavgifter (Grosskopf & Rabe, 1991). Detta uppmärksammades av Astrid Lindgren och föranledde henne att skriva en saga om Pomperipossa (Pomperipossa i Monismanien, 1976) som levde i ett fantasiland (Monismanien), framställt som en idyll i mångt och mycket men där Pomperipossa tvingades att betala mer i skatt än vad hon tjänade (102 procent). Astrid Lindgren beskrev på ett målande sätt Sverige och sin egen situation vilket ledde till ett skatteuppror i Sverige och att den 100 procentliga marginalskatten ganska snart justerades nedåt (Grosskopf & Rabe, 1991) även om marginalskatten på rörelsekapital fortfarande kunde uppgå till 90 procent. Never trust left wing radicals on history or on anything actually. Lies are part of their ideology in order to turn society upside down. And why are you denying it? This is what your movement wanted and still wants, that we all should be tax slaves under an anonymous bureaucracy. In every answer you keep bringing in irrelevant arguments, but that is typical of left wing radicals, they need to create a myth that they are fighting the good fight against all these fascists, so that they can impose a tyranny on all of us.

cess11 2y ago
You're quoting something that quotes a story Lindgren made up. Pomperipossa is not a real person. Here's from the previous link: "Även om den fortfarande är en viktig påminnelse om värdet av låga marginalskatter, visar Timbros chefsekonom Jacob Lundbergs undersökning att hon faktiskt aldrig behövde betala 102 procent i skatt." 'Even if it's still an important reminder of the value of low marginal tax rates, an examination by the chief economist of Timbro [a reactionary propaganda organisation] shows that [Astrid Lindgren] never had to pay 102% in taxes'. Sweden hasn't had bolsheviks since the war. The communist party dislodged politically from Moscow in the sixties, though they continued to receive funds for another decade or two. You must have a very weird view of how power was transfered from the tsar to the bolsheviks. Do you seriously think that the civil war had nothing to do with it and they did it through parliamentary deliberation, like with the löntagarfonder? Or are you lying? Edit: Your buddies at the reactionary think tank has made a neat little graph at the bottom here: https://timbro.se/skattekoll/marginalskatt/ https://timbro.se/skattekoll/marginalskatt/
- tored 2y ago
  > Pomperipossa is not a real person No shit. Talk about desperate argument. She didn't need to pay the 102% tax in the end because of the Social democrats changed the law (as I already described earlier) because it became too unpopular, if they hadn't she would have. Thus is was not made up, it was a reality. Confirmed by the report from Ratio. Thus if Astrid Lindgren hadn't written that article Social democrats would have been perfectly fine with Swedes paying more than 100% in taxes. That is why Social democrats during this era were radicals. And also even after the change in law you could still pay 90% tax. > You must have a very weird view of how power was transfered from the tsar to the bolsheviks It didn't happened that way. It was the Mensheviks that took the power from the Tsar in the February Revolution of 1917. The Bolsheviks took in turn power from the Mensheviks in the October Revolution of 1917 and then murdered the Tsar and his family who was already in house arrest by the Mensheviks. Thus Bolsheviks did not remove the Tsar from power, a common falsehood by Bolsheviks, because he had already abdicated. The Russian Civil War was a consequence of the Bolshevik Revolution against the Provisional Government, which was not accepted by many different political groups, everything from social democrats, liberals to monarchists. Somehow Bolsheviks always forgets this important detail. Wonder why. But anyway, I was correct about Löntagarfonderna, the implementation, the goal and it's consequences.