#OccupyWallstreet

[werepossum]

Surprise, surprise, communists like other communists.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-10-17-07-40-45

That would be ideal for Red China. They adopt capitalism and become the strongest economic power in the world, whilst the one country capable (in theory) of preventing their worldwide hegemony embraces the Marxism they abandoned. Thus the two nations swap places, the dirt poor Marxist China begging cash-strong capitalist America for loans becomes the dirt poor Marxist America begging cash-strong capitalist China for loans. But hey, as long as those evil richers get punished, it's all worth it, right?

 

[Jhhnn]

Commie pinko hippie no-account scum! I got mine! Screw You! It's all Obama's fault! Everything!

Anything new to say?

 

[michal1980]

Link to us the data and we will explain it to you. You are using the statistics out of context.

I did. How are they out of context?

 

[michal1980]

Put it back to where it was before we "temporarily" cut taxes during 2 wars.

Don't talk about what portion they pay. They have more money, so of course proportionally they will pay more.

Why shouldn't I talk about what portion they pay?

If you make the claim they dont pay 'enough' then you have to to talk about what portion they pay.

 

[michal1980]

You are mischaracterizing the argument. This means you either don't understand the argument, are getting told what to think by talk radio/fox news, or you are purposely mischaracterizing it.

How am I miss-characterizing the argument? the 99%er's claim the 1% is screwing them, and is stealing 'their' money. I'm just point out facts, that reality is there are very very few people that make the kind of millions/billions these 99%er's are claiming.

I get the argument. A bunch of un/underemployed people have found a new scapegoat (rich/banks/government) for their problems and are taking to the street to voice their anger.

Is there some justification in that anger? of course. Is there argument badly flawed? yes.

But facts have never gotten in the way of angry protesters before. And they wont now. after all they were all told they could be whatever they want, and they all seem to think everything should be free. (yes its right when you ask them directly about work they say of course people should work for money. But one second later they talk about debt forgiveness for student loans.)

 

[Jhhnn]

Why shouldn't I talk about what portion they pay?

If you make the claim they dont pay 'enough' then you have to to talk about what portion they pay.

Because you want to talk about federal income tax as if it were the only tax people pay, and it isn't. Taxes are taxes- it doesn't matter which govt entity collects them, they all cut into the bottom line just the same.

You also choose to ignore concepts like the decreasing marginal utility of money- Righties generally do, feeling like the last dollar on the top of the pile will do them just as much good as the first, when that's obviously not true.

Here's a little reality check- The vast majority of taxpayers would laugh all the way to the bank paying Clinton era taxes on an income of $250K or more, and you'll likely never make that much yourself.

Shee-it, Sherlock- They be giddy to make that much and pay pre-Reagan tax rates, because it's not the top line that matters, but rather the bottom.

High income tax whiners are self indulgent and self important crybabies with the greatest sense of entitlement of anybody in this country. I feel for them, I really do- Tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, honest.

 

[michal1980]

Because you want to talk about federal income tax as if it were the only tax people pay, and it isn't. Taxes are taxes- it doesn't matter which govt entity collects them, they all cut into the bottom line just the same.

You also choose to ignore concepts like the decreasing marginal utility of money- Righties generally do, feeling like the last dollar on the top of the pile will do them just as much good as the first, when that's obviously not true.

Here's a little reality check- The vast majority of taxpayers would laugh all the way to the bank paying Clinton era taxes on an income of $250K or more, and you'll likely never make that much yourself.

Shee-it, Sherlock- They be giddy to make that much and pay pre-Reagan tax rates, because it's not the top line that matters, but rather the bottom.

High income tax whiners are self indulgent and self important crybabies with the greatest sense of entitlement of anybody in this country. I feel for them, I really do- Tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, honest.

Please let us all know what you think of people that have worked hard and make good money. Dont hold back now. I bet you claim your not a communist too, yet talk like one.

See people this is your classic 99%er OWS protester. Hating people for having made it in the world. Telling them they should like paying higher taxes.

 

[senseamp]

Please let us all know what you think of people that have worked hard and make good money. Dont hold back now. I bet you claim your not a communist too, yet talk like one.

See people this is your classic 99%er OWS protester. Hating people for having made it in the world. Telling them they should like paying higher taxes.

Some worked real hard. Others played with other people's money, took the winnings for themselves, and saddled the taxpayers with the losses.

 

[michal1980]

Some worked real hard. Others played with other people's money, took the winnings for themselves, and saddled the taxpayers with the losses.

Wrong.

Most worked hard.

Just like most banks payed back the bailout money.

but keep telling yourself whatever you need to justify your anger.

 

[davmat787]

Because you want to talk about federal income tax as if it were the only tax people pay, and it isn't. Taxes are taxes- it doesn't matter which govt entity collects them, they all cut into the bottom line just the same.

Correct me if I am wrong, but not all taxes are the same. How is a non voluntary tax like Income Tax equivalent to the taxes you pay on an iPhone+Data Plan, smokes, which foods you prefer, cars, etc?

Now, I understand someone making 40K will pay a much higher % of their income to these so called voluntary taxes than someone making $1 million, but the point remains I think.

 

[fskimospy]

Wrong.

Most worked hard.

Just like most banks payed back the bailout money.

but keep telling yourself whatever you need to justify your anger.

Oh wow, what amazing and virtuous citizens. They made insanely risky and irresponsible bets. When they won, they pocketed their winnings. When they lost, they came crying to the government to save them and we did. (because their irresponsibility was basically holding the world economy hostage). So yeah, when you work in a sector where the government guarantees your business against failure and lets you keep your winnings as you please, you get to pay some higher taxes. I love how things so blindingly obvious as this come under 'hating the rich'.

If someone is not angry at the behavior of our investment banks they are either blinded by ideology or they don't know what they're talking about. I was (and still am) for the banking bailout, but what we have done afterwards has not been nearly enough to bring these incredibly irresponsible people to heel.

 

[shadow9d9]

Why shouldn't I talk about what portion they pay?

If you make the claim they dont pay 'enough' then you have to to talk about what portion they pay.

Amount total is irrelevant, a red herring. They could pay less of a percentage but still pay more. If you can't see how this number is used all the time to try to mislead, then you either are ignorant or purposely misleading and claiming ignorance. I believe it is the latter.

 

[shadow9d9]

Wrong.

Most worked hard.

Just like most banks payed back the bailout money.

but keep telling yourself whatever you need to justify your anger.

Doesn't matter if they paid it back. They got a 0% interest loan while then giving that same loan out for 2% to the rest of the country. Did you get a proportional free loan from the government at any point for failing?

 

[Ausm]

Oh wow, what amazing and virtuous citizens. They made insanely risky and irresponsible bets. When they won, they pocketed their winnings. When they lost, they came crying to the government to save them and we did. (because their irresponsibility was basically holding the world economy hostage). So yeah, when you work in a sector where the government guarantees your business against failure and lets you keep your winnings as you please, you get to pay some higher taxes. I love how things so blindingly obvious as this come under 'hating the rich'.

If someone is not angry at the behavior of our investment banks they are either blinded by ideology or they don't know what they're talking about. I was (and still am) for the banking bailout, but what we have done afterwards has not been nearly enough to bring these incredibly irresponsible people to heel.

Sounds like privatization of profits and socialization of loses to me

 

[IceBergSLiM]

why do poor people so staunchly defend the ultra wealthy??

 

[michal1980]

Amount total is irrelevant, a red herring. They could pay less of a percentage but still pay more. If you can't see how this number is used all the time to try to mislead, then you either are ignorant or purposely misleading and claiming ignorance. I believe it is the latter.

I'm not talking about amounts. I'm talking about PERCENTAGES.

READ.

 

[michal1980]

Doesn't matter if they paid it back. They got a 0% interest loan while then giving that same loan out for 2% to the rest of the country. Did you get a proportional free loan from the government at any point for failing?

Fair tale land again

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...2-profit-to-taxpayers-beating-treasuries.html

"The government has earned $25.2 billion on its investment of $309 billion in banks and insurance companies, an 8.2 percent return over two years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That beat U.S. Treasuries, high-yield savings accounts, money- market funds and certificates of deposit. Investing in the stock market or gold would have paid off better. "

P.S.

Free money for the 'people'

http://www.creditcards.com/low-interest.php

look at all those 0% credit card offers.

 

[Jhhnn]

Please let us all know what you think of people that have worked hard and make good money. Dont hold back now. I bet you claim your not a communist too, yet talk like one.

See people this is your classic 99%er OWS protester. Hating people for having made it in the world. Telling them they should like paying higher taxes.

Dive headfirst into that Bunker O'Denial. Rave a few insults & self serving catch phrases over your shoulder while you're doing so.

The hardest working people I've ever known were often the poorest, and the laziest & luckiest exploiters of other people's efforts some of the best-off. Like I offered, median families would weep tears of joy to pay more taxes on any income they made over $250K/yr, because they'd still end up with 4X the disposable income. They'll trade places with the well-heeled whiners any time.

And I don't recall people who were extremely well off snivelling & carrying on about high taxes prior to Reagan, either- most of those guys had some sense, & some decency, realized just how lucky they were to have what they had, regarding paying big taxes on big money as a privilege & a patriotic duty.

Communist? Really? The tax policies post-WW2 & pre-Reagan were Communist?

Does that mean Joe McCarthy was right, & the last 60 years have just been a plot to fluoridate the water & pollute our precious bodily fluids? OMG! The Horror!

 

[Nebor]

why do poor people so staunchly defend the ultra wealthy??

Because they're not selfish. They care about others more than themselves. Noble, I say.

 

[Jhhnn]

Because they're not selfish. They care about others more than themselves. Noble, I say.

Because they're delusional dreamers & worshippers, more like.

 

[JD50]

why do poor people so staunchly defend the ultra wealthy??

I guess for the same reason anyone defends someone that isn't like themselves if they feel like that other group is being poorly treated. Why don't people understand this?

50 years ago - why do white people so staunchly defend black people?

 

[fskimospy]

I guess for the same reason anyone defends someone that isn't like themselves if they feel like that other group is being poorly treated. Why don't people understand this?

50 years ago - why do white people so staunchly defend black people?

Are you seriously trying to compare a group of people who have seen their wealth and personal well being increase enormously, much of it explicitly through government policy, with a race of people that suffered institutional enslavement and discrimination for centuries?

Dude, bad analogy.

Right wing people defend the rich because it is part and parcel with their ideology. They believe that society functions best with a system that would treat the rich the same as the poor in terms of taxation, etc. They generally are very reluctant to have government intervene to redistribute wealth and that probably gives a bit of a bias to the assumption that wealth has been obtained fairly.

The only problem with all this is that our current situation of extreme disparity is a drag on the whole country, the rich included (eventually). Third world levels of inequality like we have retard economic growth.

 

[JD50]

Are you seriously trying to compare a group of people who have seen their wealth and personal well being increase enormously, much of it explicitly through government policy, with a race of people that suffered institutional enslavement and discrimination for centuries?

No, not at all.

 

[First]

No, not at all.

Yeah except you did.

 

[Jhhnn]

Right wing people defend the rich because it is part and parcel with their ideology. They believe that society functions best with a system that would treat the rich the same as the poor in terms of taxation, etc. They generally are very reluctant to have government intervene to redistribute wealth and that probably gives a bit of a bias to the assumption that wealth has been obtained fairly.

You give them too much credit. If we examine every Repub tax proposal from Forbes' so called flat tax to Ryan's proposals to Cain's 999 plan, what they propose is truly regressive taxation, where the wealthy escape taxation almost entirely, particularly when all of the other taxes we pay are entered into the equation.

Every last one of those proposals eliminate capital gains and dividend taxes, which are the only significant taxes that the investor class pays at all, other than perhaps property tax. All other taxes shrink to insignificance in the face of their enormous investment derived incomes.

What we're dealing with are the deceivers and the dupes, make no mistake about it.