Still looking for the anti-American forces behind OWS? Look no further than the creator(s) of the entire event...Reading is fundamental, Chapter 1 - He responded to it by alleging that "anti-American" sources are "behind ... funding" the OWS movement. When asked to support that claim, and specifically when challenged to show "anti-American" sources are a substantial source of funding (since pretty much anyone can make incidental contributions that have no material impact on direction and goals)," he mysteriously lost his bravado and started avoiding the subject. Now I don't know how human behavior works in CADWorld, but here in the real world, that strongly suggests he was full of it and his claim was a baseless attack.
Duh! You think? Did you figure that out yourself, or did you wait for the RNC talking points? It's a massive movement that's open to anyone. Having a diverse mix of people is a given.
Reading is fundamental, Chapter 2 - Who? Give us links. Show us who is denying that some people involved may have anti-American sentiments (for sufficiently wing-nut definitions of anti-American, of course).
The issue, once again, is whether "anti-American" sources are a substantial source of funding (since pretty much anyone can make incidental contributions that have no material impact on direction and goals)." Anything less is meaningless partisan noise. There are KKK members in the GOP, but that doesn't mean the Republican agenda is set by the KKK. Or maybe you think it is? Bad example? That might explain your paranoia.
Nice bit of revisionist history mixed with fact. While I'll agree that the FRB of the Depression era did the wrong things, the need for them to do anything extraordinary, like become the lender of last resort, flood financial markets with liquidity, was the result of the massive collapse of financial capitalism, of the bubble economy of the 1920's.
The notion that the New Deal didn't positively affect the lives of millions of Americans is utter garbage. The WPA & others employed millions who would otherwise have been unemployed, and created an enormous amount of infrastructure still in use today.
Some of those innovations carried beyond WW2 & provided the framework for the rise of a broad middle class we have today-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal
http://www.asdk12.org/staff/miller_...eat Depression/New Deal Alphabet Agencies.pdf
I have the numbers in several forms-
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=456
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
Most interesting of all-
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph
Tax rates for the top 1% have fallen by a third, even as their share of income more than doubled since 1980. It's not how much of the govt's revenues they contribute, it's what they have after they do, and they've done disproportionately well, very well indeed.
Huh?
The top 1% have 16.5% of the AIG (according to YOUR link) and pays 36.7% of federal income tax revenue in 2009.
So they get 16.5% AIG and pay double that.
Hrm.
http://occupywallst.org/article/1-have-addresses-99-have-messages/
OWS crowd is so smart
meet people "wearing ridiculous costumes"
LOL. Talk about mature and grown up thought.
You made a bold allegation and I'm asking you to support it. But hey...I understand your inability to factually support your horseshit remark.Troll elsewhere. You're boring.
Wow, talk about stooping to a new low.
Validates my theory that OWS are attention whores. They rant and raved in the parks and Times Squares and Wall Street unequivocally gave them a "meh".
Now they are pranking people to get attention? Fail.
AGI comes after deductions. The more money you make, the more deductions you are eligible for. Effective tax rate is the number you are looking for.
False. The more money you Make the less deductions you are allowed to take. They "phase out".
I wouldn't necessary say they're "not available." It's probably more accurate to say they're simply "not viable;" but yes, you're correct either way.He is talking about tax shelters. Rich people can use lots of tax shelters that are not available to lesser incomes.
Still looking for the anti-American forces behind OWS? Look no further than the creator(s) of the entire event...
"America, the great liberator, is in desperate need of being liberated from itself -- from its own excesses and arrogance. And the world needs to be liberated from American values and culture, spreading across the planet as if by divine providence." -- Kalle Lasn
Uhmmm, they are protesters, of course they are after attention.
What did you think the purpose of a protest was?
/crickets
I wouldn't necessary say they're "not available." It's probably more accurate to say they're simply "not viable;" but yes, you're correct either way.
That's not anti-American.
/crickets
That's not anti-American. The supporters of raping the middle class are anti-American.
Don't cheapen the term "rape" if you've had a friend, sister, mother or other family member every raped, you wouldn't toss it out so easily.
Don't cheapen the term "rape" if you've had a friend, sister, mother or other family member every raped, you wouldn't toss it out so easily.
"And the world needs to be liberated from American values and culture, spreading across the planet as if by divine providence." -- Kalle Lasn
LOL, if that statement is not anti-American, I don't know what is .
Valuing diversity and not wanting one culture to dominate the world isn't 'anti-'.
Are you anti-rock and roll? What if it was wiping out other forms of music, and being played to the point of absurdity inappropriately? When a ball game starts, no national anthem, rock and roll. When presidential debates start, no introductory remarks, instead a set of rock songs. At some point when you say 'the world needs to be liberated from the spread of Rock and Roll everywhere', is that anti-rock and roll, if you still enjoy listening to it?
You can think America is the best country in the world with the best culture in the world and still agree with the comments above, that the world should not be homogenized.
And not thinking a country is THE BEST IN THE WORLD is not 'anti-that country'.
People in one of the worst countries in the world can agree with that and love their country.
Ironically, you actually validate the speaker above, by your being unable to tell the difference between 'how DARE you say the US culture should not be spread everywhere in the world and wipe out any other' and 'anti-American'. That's the sort of 'arrogance' the speaker was referring to, and you protest it's wrong while proving it.
Some of these jackasses would deny that Tuesday follows Monday if admitting as much damages their agenda."And the world needs to be liberated from American values and culture, spreading across the planet as if by divine providence." -- Kalle Lasn
LOL, if that statement is not anti-American, I don't know what is .
Some of these jackasses would deny that Tuesday follows Monday if admitting as much damages their agenda.
We're surrounded by f'n kooks...Craig and his "Comrades" worship anti-American morons like Lasn...