Author Topic: Occupy!  (Read 533 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Occupy!
« on: May 01, 2012, 04:22:24 PM »
Happy May 1!  All over the world, people are expressing discontent with the status quo.

I have a 5 year old, and we don't do political actions on school nights.  But I've been following the NYC events on twitter, and I know lots of people who are participating in a variety of actions today. 

The big (legal) march starts in about 10 minutes.  But there have been small marches and civil disobedience all day. 



What is going on in your neighborhood?

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2012, 04:25:45 PM »

I have a 5 year old, and we don't do political actions on school nights.

Geez, you're so conservative....
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2012, 04:28:25 PM »

I have a 5 year old, and we don't do political actions on school nights.

Geez, you're so conservative....

It is true!  The mom of one of my daughter's classmates sent me an email this morning asking me if I wanted to join her in picking up the girls early and heading to an occupy event!  I declined. 

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2012, 04:33:03 PM »
Ha ha. Might have been an interesting show and tell session for your daughter..

" and then I saw a Policeman getting angry..."
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2012, 04:39:53 PM »
I brought my daughter to Zuccotti Park a number of times last fall during the occupation there.  We brought supplies.  We brought peanut butter and some other stuff to the kitchen.  Dropped off bandaids and rubbing alcohol to the first aid station, and soap to the hospitality station. 

Then she help make some signs.  We had talked about the issues quite a bit, and she came up with her own slogan. 

I want everyone to not be greedy. 

I was quite proud. 

Kids want to help people.  They want to make wrongs right. 

She has also expressed an interest in going to Somalia and bringing people food so they won't be hungry.  I've tried to explain that it would not be very practical.  But at some point, I know I will take her to do volunteer work in third world environments. 

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2012, 06:34:56 PM »
Live streaming of legal march (with permit) in NYC.  Taxis leading the march!

http://live.reuters.com/Event/May_Day_General_Strike

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #6 on: May 01, 2012, 11:33:54 PM »
What do they think this will accomplish? The rich people who own the government are allowing these protests because they know nothing will really change. The rich want to stay rich, and they want the poor to stay poor. The moment the status quo is actually threatened, they will order the government to shut down the protests.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Offline magicmiles

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2829
  • Darwins +175/-73
  • Gender: Male
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2012, 12:16:41 AM »
What do they think this will accomplish? The rich people who own the government are allowing these protests because they know nothing will really change. The rich want to stay rich, and they want the poor to stay poor. The moment the status quo is actually threatened, they will order the government to shut down the protests.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but who, specifically, are these rich people and in what specific ways do they own the Government?

Interested to hear other thoughts on this.

Here in Australia my brother is trying to start a movement which essentially completely breaks down the current industrialised society. He has also come to the conclusion that the traditional means of protest don't work. He is promoting a radical action of some type (he's being coy about the details)
The 2010 world cup was ruined for me by that slippery bastard Paul.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2012, 09:54:38 AM »
Oh my!  I think enormous changes in both public perception and public policy decisions have taken place in the relatively short amount of time since the movement started.  Because I know less about international economic issues, I’m going to focus on the US public perceptions and policy changes, in spite of the fact that the crisis is in fact worldwide. 

The current economic crisis has a number of complex causes.  Perhaps the most insidious causes include predatory lending practice on the parts of banks, carefully orchestrated corporate deceptions designed to falsely inflate stock values, and increasingly successful lobbying forces which resulted in unprecedented governmental subsidies for corporate interests. 

These events were taking place in an environment of a growing national debt due to a series of very expensive wars, and a strong public perception that “taxes” and other governmental revenue generating activities were bad.   So our government was spending more money, and taking in less money. 

When the housing market collapsed, and various huge unscrupulous companies collapsed, the markets fell, and the only winners were the hedge funds.  We had a bailout, we saved most of the banks from collapsing, and the bailout money was used to ensure, among other things, that the hotshots kept getting their 6 figure annual bonuses.  Stocks bounced back, and corporate profits soared.  The national economy was saved!

Except for the average American.  By the time the first occupiers set up camp in Zuccotti Park in the fall of 2011, the nation was facing the worst year ever in terms of home foreclosures.  The 12-month period preceding the occupation saw 1,200,000 American families who lost their homes to banks.  Unemployment rates among recent college graduates were the highest in our history.  Funding for public schools was being slashed.  Safety nets for the elderly, or for low income children were evaporating.  Once the bailout money was going, Infrastructure was being neglected by municipalities. 

Were there people screaming in the streets about this injustice?  Well, there were teapartiers in the streets proclaiming “big government” the enemy.  They demanded that the big bad government not tax multimillion or multibillion dollar inheritances, calling it a “death tax.”  They called the very corporations that started the crisis “the jobmakers.”  They fought for policies to restrict the abilities of government to tax capital gains. But most of all, they made politicians sign pledges that they would not raise taxes. 

And then the occupation happened.

A very small group of people started camping out in Zuccotti Park.  They didn’t even get any press at first.  But somehow, mostly through social media, word spread.  All over the country, (and even in other parts of the world) an almost spontaneous movement took place.  The first committed occupiers were the recent college grads with $50k debts and no employment options.  They had time and frustration and nothing to lose.  Next came the foreclosure victims.  The formerly middle class families who had felt so isolated.  Who felt like failures.  Then came the parents who had jobs, whose afterschool programs had been slashed, and suddenly had to pay out of pocket for childcare, further decreasing their incomes.  Then came the unions, who had been demonized by the power brokers, and who had been treated as if their health care benefits and modest pensions were the cause of the crisis.  Then came the retirees who had seen their investments dwindle after a lifetime of work. 

And suddenly, these voices became part of the public discourse.  And the whole public discourse changed.

This election year, all of a sudden, politicians are not proclaiming “no new taxes” to cheering crowds.  In fact, policies have already started to change.  Last fiscal year, my governor, here in NYS, proclaimed that he would continue to protect families earning more than $500.000 per year (not net worth, annual income) from the same level of taxes that families earning $30,000 had to pay.  This fiscal year, (which started in April) things turned around.  He reversed himself completely!!!!  http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/fighting-the-governor-one-percent-epithet/

Families facing foreclosure are suddenly getting press.  And the occupiers are making their individual stories heard, and challenging the banks.  And, in some cases, the banks are backing off.

As the Super Committee grapples with the federal deficit, for the first time, heavy subsidies to oil companies, funded primarily with middle class tax dollars, are being questioned.  As are continued cuts to education. 

Unpaid student loans from unemployed college graduates loom as the next big crisis, set to rival the housing crisis.  But politicians are starting to be proactive on the topic, rather than sitting blindly and waiting for the crisis to occur.

The whole conversation has changed.  For the better.

But this is only the beginning. 

Offline Poseidon

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 399
  • Darwins +24/-0
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2012, 11:22:09 PM »
This thread kinda' ties in with the  above titled 5 Ways to Spot BS and the link to the Cracked site. The Cracked article tells why the $500,000 people are so strapped for cash. That would be a fun read if we poor working stiffs were not obliged to clip discount coupons.

Offline jeremy0

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Darwins +26/-12
  • Gender: Male
    • Economics and Technology
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #10 on: May 03, 2012, 11:49:33 PM »
What do they think this will accomplish? The rich people who own the government are allowing these protests because they know nothing will really change. The rich want to stay rich, and they want the poor to stay poor. The moment the status quo is actually threatened, they will order the government to shut down the protests.
In america, Joe B's statement is 99% accurate...[1]  I've stress-tested the system myself online.  According to my interactions with the 99%'ers, the rich own the police, the government, the news, and quite possibly the judicial system.  Sad, crazy-sounding, but an accurate statement according to my own observations during the '6-month anniversary rally'....  You can be quite certain - those who are currently in absolute power (the rich) will want to stay in absolute power when the rest of the country finally wakes up from their beer-ridden bube-tube sofas and chairs...
 1. excuse the /bad joke
"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger."
"If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me.  Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Offline Timo

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +89/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • oyeme
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2012, 11:53:31 PM »
Doesn't that kind of thinking assume that elite actors are a monolith that don't have competing interests?
pero ya tu sabes...

Offline jeremy0

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Darwins +26/-12
  • Gender: Male
    • Economics and Technology
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2012, 12:02:59 AM »
The current economic crisis has a number of complex causes.  Perhaps the most insidious causes include predatory lending practice on the parts of banks, carefully orchestrated corporate deceptions designed to falsely inflate stock values, and increasingly successful lobbying forces which resulted in unprecedented governmental subsidies for corporate interests. 
Quesi: I have written people to 1. make variable-rate loans illegal (they didn't exist in the past), 2. place more regulations on banks such as interest return rates, 3. dump the requirement that CEOs have to act in the best interests of the shareholders, thereby eliminating this 'shareholders first' perception, returning to taking care of the customer, the employee, having a profitable, well-run business, and making money vs. growing outside of your means, 4. doing away with 401Ks and replacing it with a new, more viable system that not only guarantees retirement but gives financial sectors necessary capital for whatever, 5. COMPLETELY ELIMINATE LOBBYING. 

So far, I have received little response, except for half-assed efforts to 1 (weak regulations on deceptive lending practices of banks), and 5 (recently placed legislation requiring no investments in lobbying parties by legislators).  Pretty sad efforts, in my opinion..

Quote
Were there people screaming in the streets about this injustice?  Well, there were teapartiers in the streets proclaiming “big government” the enemy.  They demanded that the big bad government not tax multimillion or multibillion dollar inheritances, calling it a “death tax.”  They called the very corporations that started the crisis “the jobmakers.”  They fought for policies to restrict the abilities of government to tax capital gains. But most of all, they made politicians sign pledges that they would not raise taxes. 
The tea-partiers really have to go...
Quote
Families facing foreclosure are suddenly getting press.  And the occupiers are making their individual stories heard, and challenging the banks.  And, in some cases, the banks are backing off.

As the Super Committee grapples with the federal deficit, for the first time, heavy subsidies to oil companies, funded primarily with middle class tax dollars, are being questioned.  As are continued cuts to education. 

Unpaid student loans from unemployed college graduates loom as the next big crisis, set to rival the housing crisis.  But politicians are starting to be proactive on the topic, rather than sitting blindly and waiting for the crisis to occur.
<snip>
But this is only the beginning.
I'm also looking at the health sector causing its own melt-down (when it reaches 25% of GDP, and/or we hit a point where employers are no longer offering health coverage, due to costs, or people can't afford to pay for the insurance, this means nobody will be able to afford their hospital bills.  Nevermind physicians.  The hospitals will go out of business in a flash.  I estimate less than 2 years in most cases.  Something will have to bail them out to keep them running, or we will have to completely revise the system at that time)

And also retirement of baby-boomers and the stability of the idea of social security/medicare.

And also gas prices, education reform, energy crises, foreign affairs, and pollution.  These are all problems I want solved. 

Best of luck to you and these 99%ers..  I want scientists on this case.
"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger."
"If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me.  Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Offline jeremy0

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Darwins +26/-12
  • Gender: Male
    • Economics and Technology
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2012, 12:07:15 AM »
Doesn't that kind of thinking assume that elite actors are a monolith that don't have competing interests?
No.  You can think of this group just like our atheist group or any group of theists - they all have different ideas and arguments, however they agree on something - that they should be in total control.  I will note that Warren Buffet did say 'we were in a class war... and we've won.'  Not funny or amusing news for me to have read about at work.  It doesn't matter much if we tax the rich at this point to stay afloat - we need the middle class back in action. 
"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger."
"If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me.  Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Offline Timo

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +89/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • oyeme
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2012, 12:54:15 AM »
Are you saying that they all agree that they, the rich, as a whole, irrespective of region, political affiliation, financial interest, etc should be in total control, at the expense of the poor and the middle class?  I don't think I understand what you're saying.
pero ya tu sabes...

Offline jeremy0

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Darwins +26/-12
  • Gender: Male
    • Economics and Technology
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2012, 01:40:20 AM »
Are you saying that they all agree that they, the rich, as a whole, irrespective of region, political affiliation, financial interest, etc should be in total control, at the expense of the poor and the middle class?  I don't think I understand what you're saying.
i.e. in effect, yes. 
1.  The income of the top 1% has risen astronomically in the last 8 years when compared to the feeble growth elsewhere.  This indicates that the rich are squandering money instead of creating jobs.  At the same time, most taxes come from the middle class, which was used to bail out the people that were a large part of the problem.  Also, the middle class paid for large stimulus packages that were only temporary in nature, which accomplished no form of monetary generations later, and when removed will have had no effect whatsoever on economic growth.  These are examples of the rich maintaining wealth at the expense of the middle class..[1]

2.  Warren Buffet stated that for the past several years, america has been in a class war, and that the rich have already won it.  This is an example of an agreed-upon action by the rich community that they should be in control of the nation...[2]

3.  As I've stated, I've stress-tested the system on the sixth anniversary march conducted by the OWS group..  The result was that there was police brutality, little to no response from the judicial system, little to no lawsuits filed, and no news of the actual events that transpired there escaped except for videos on youtube and a small organization that reported to google.  Everybody else only reported the police statements, which were literally a skewed version of the actual events that took place that day.  There was no political statement.  Actually, political figures have ignored each of OWS' demands for reversing or revising legislation.  The only political thing that happened was from the judicial branch in CA, after several complaints from people, including an ex-marine that got his head cracked in by police, reacting to police brutality and constitutional rights.  For several years now, many of these groups have enacted laws in direct violation of the bill of rights and other sections of the constitution, have also failed to own up to their obligations as directed in the constitution, and all the while people think the only thing they can do about it is vote ignorantly...  At the same time, policies like SOPA, abortion rights, etc. were passed ridiculously out of time and scope against the will of the public's opinions.  All of the people involved were in part or in fact, rich.  This tells me that the rich community actually 'owns' all of these groups, and we are in fact, very corrupted as a society. [3]

4.  The 'recovery' of this economic crises is a complete and utterly dispicable illusion..  Unemployment by population percentage is the figure to look at, and it hasn't budged a bit since 2008.  This is a clear indication that we are going nowhere, even with all the spending we have done to save ourselves from depression.  The reason we haven't recovered is because of #s 1&2 above, and more realistically because money isn't actually moving through the economy from the rich population - instead, it is exchanging hands in wall street and being held in offshore bank accounts, which still dodge taxation.[4]

5.  The top 1% of the nation pays a smaller percentage of taxation than the rest of the population.  When Warren Buffet explained this, he was criticized by the same people that 'don't forget we get taxed twice - once corporate tax and once individual tax'.  Cry me a freaking river if you have more money than you'll ever realistically need to live a comfortable life, at the expense of everyone else who gave you said money, continue to not create jobs and feel you deserve that money at everyone's turmoil, and turn around and say it isn't fair if you get taxed the same as your accountants or secretaries..[5]

6.  I will add that if you think this housing market bust was a problem - pebbles in the pool compared to the upcoming possible healthcare bust.  Healthcare will soon be 25% of GDP.  No legislation is slowing down the growth in healthcare costs.  This means that we will inevitably reach a point where we can't afford to go to the hospital, maybe reach a point where we can't see our physician because they demand no pay-for-service people, and potentially can't afford medications for things like heart problems, cancer, etc.  When this happens, say good-bye to about 20% of the economy and millions of lives, unless we are totally prepared with the correct 'prescription for the problem', so to speak, at that exact moment.  This is my shithole scenario...[6]
 1. I will add that the separation and continued separation of the rich and everyone else will only exacerbate the problem - this is the reason why a free market is doomed to collapse in the long run.  The only way to fix the problem is for the rich to finally re-inject their money back into the economy.  Instead, it is being pocketed, and that being said, there is no way possible that the Republican viewpoint of giving more tax holidays to business owners and 'job creators' is actually going to 'trickle-down' for anybody.  No chance of working, high chance of backfire when removed, entirely a hopeless economic policy or agenda.  period.
 2. Also, let's not forget lobbying - the constitution dictates that a congressman must faithfully represent the majority of the interests of his/her constituents.  This means their populous.  It doesn't mean a bribe coming not from a legal corporate entity, which would mainly represent said corporations' employees, but rather from business owners pushing for an agenda, or executives pushing for an agenda on behalf of shareholders.  I doubt our founding fathers envisioned this to happen...
 3. I verified for myself the level of control that is being enacted by the rich community against these people - shutting them up and treating them like morons when they have a clear case is a prime example of just how much power and control they currently wield..
 4. If I give you 5 dollars, you give me 3 back, then I give you 1, then you give me 10 - this is an example of what wall street does.  It's called trading.  It isn't being used for anything.  IPOs these days aren't being used to generate corporate capital when needed as it used to.  It's simply there for people to gamble on.  Our 401K has no business being in a gambling system, 25% baby-boomers being able to retire is no mistake here..  What we need to do is make money move through the economy - as long as that is happening, and money at least moves through the hands of the middle class, it doesn't matter how much money the rich have.  It will have been put to some sort of use.  The way to do this is to either create jobs, invest in small growth business or entirely new growth business, etc.  Giving to charity will not solve the problem.  This is something every dumbassed economist should be able to agree on.  This is the only way we will actually recover from anything at all...
 5. If I'm a rich man, and money is a limited resource, I have in effect squandered money away from everyone else.  It would be wise, in order to protect your own individual wealth as a business owner, to make sure the people around you and that work for you are also well-off financially.  This is so the system can afford to still make wanted purchases based on desire as opposed to necessity-goods-only.  We are rapidly moving towards the latter.  This is a serious problem.  Yes, being rich means you do it at the expense of everyone else - money is a limited resource.
 6. This is not make-believe.  This is what congress was trying to do in passing healthcare regulations, they have seen this one coming for decades.  We should have solved it during the Clinton Administration; however, the population listened to false advertisements by the insurance industry and the idea was squashed.  Sad, but absolutely true..
« Last Edit: May 04, 2012, 02:00:54 AM by jeremy0 »
"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger."
"If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me.  Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Offline Timo

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +89/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • oyeme
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2012, 05:20:03 PM »
Alright so, you wrote a lot there.  So this is going to be a long response.  I'm going to try and more or less take this point by point.

The income of the top 1% has risen astronomically in the last 8 years when compared to the feeble growth elsewhere.  This indicates that the rich are squandering money instead of creating jobs.

Not really.  The "job creators" line was bullshit in the first place.  They're not "squandering" anything.  They were just never the "job creators" that the Republicans think we should pray to in the hopes that we might, once again, see full employment.

Part of the problem here is that, however effective it was in reality, there was an actual rationale for supply-side economics in the 80s.  But it had to do with the particulars of the era.  Since then, however, Republicans and economic conservatives have taken it to be the be all and end all of fiscal policy...even today, when we have had incredibly low interest rates for about as long as I have been aware of that sort of thing.  And so instead of coming up with new policy ideas, they've decided to come up with new justifications for their old ideas.  Hence: job creators.

At the same time, most taxes come from the middle class, which was used to bail out the people that were a large part of the problem.

A couple of things.  I don't think that you're right about the middle class' share of the tax burden.  I think that it's the upper class and the upper middle class that pays most of the federal taxes.  After all, we have a disgusting level of income inequality in this country and they have most of the money.  It is true that the middle class often pays a higher proportion of their income in taxes, but that's not exactly the same thing. 

With respect to the bailouts, I'm not sure how this is supposed to cast aspersions against the entirety of the monied class.  However ham-fistedly we dealt with the financial crisis, this was something that threatened to destroy the world economy in 2008 and was therefore in everyone's economic interest.  Furthermore, there's more to the 1 percent than the financial services sector of the economy.

Also, the middle class paid for large stimulus packages that were only temporary in nature, which accomplished no form of monetary generations later, and when removed will have had no effect whatsoever on economic growth.

I'm not sure I understand your point.  Are you saying the stimulus packages under Obama, or economic stimulus packages in general don't work?  Do you have some economic analysis to back this up?  Are we just throwing out Keynsian economics now?  If so, what should take its place?

Warren Buffet stated that for the past several years, america has been in a class war, and that the rich have already won it.  This is an example of an agreed-upon action by the rich community that they should be in control of the nation...

So you're saying that there is a uniformity or near uniformity of opinion among wealthy Americans that, prior to say, the 1980s or so, that the poor and middle class just had too much money, and that they, the rich, needed to enact a series of policies to see to it that this goal would be acheived?  Do you have any evidence to back this up?

I mean, really, I find it kind of ironic that you would use this Warren Buffet quote to back up your assertion when Warren Buffet, like most liberals, rich or otherwise, is politically opposed to this sort of thing.

As I've stated, I've stress-tested the system on the sixth anniversary march conducted by the OWS group.

What exactly do you mean here?  Do you mean that you've performed some systematic analysis of the system, perhaps on behalf of a government or corporate entity?  Or do you just mean that you've studied this all closely, perhaps out of personal curiosity?  And what was your methodology?

With respect to police brutality, fam, the media has always been deferential to police departments when they take controversial actions.  I don't think this has anything to do with the aims of OWS in particular.  They've been whooping black and brown people's asses, sometimes even killing us, for decades, which is why this is one of my favorite tweets ever:



And if we're talking about the NYPD in particular, man we can cry about the eviction of Zuccotti Park, but this is the same department that shot Amadou Dialo 41 times like it was okay. 

At the same time, policies like SOPA, abortion rights, etc. were passed ridiculously out of time and scope against the will of the public's opinions.  All of the people involved were in part or in fact, rich.  This tells me that the rich community actually 'owns' all of these groups, and we are in fact, very corrupted as a society.

SOPA wasn't passed.  And abortion rights?  Fam, you're against abortion rights?  Really?  Please tell me that I misunderstood you before I go off on a rant.

The 'recovery' of this economic crises is a complete and utterly dispicable illusion..  Unemployment by population percentage is the figure to look at, and it hasn't budged a bit since 2008.  This is a clear indication that we are going nowhere, even with all the spending we have done to save ourselves from depression.

Do you have a source for this?  I was under the impression that the unemployment rate had been trending downward since 2009.  See:



The top 1% of the nation pays a smaller percentage of taxation than the rest of the population.  When Warren Buffet explained this, he was criticized by the same people that 'don't forget we get taxed twice - once corporate tax and once individual tax'.  Cry me a freaking river if you have more money than you'll ever realistically need to live a comfortable life, at the expense of everyone else who gave you said money, continue to not create jobs and feel you deserve that money at everyone's turmoil, and turn around and say it isn't fair if you get taxed the same as your accountants or secretaries.

Again, Warren Buffet, like a lot of liberals finds the current tax scheme to be unfair.  If you actually look at polling data surrounding tax policy, you'll find that where we sit tends to define where we stand.  Republicans are, for example, more likely to agree that the Buffett Rule is an "election year gimmick" than Democrats.

I will add that if you think this housing market bust was a problem - pebbles in the pool compared to the upcoming possible healthcare bust.  Healthcare will soon be 25% of GDP.  No legislation is slowing down the growth in healthcare costs.  This means that we will inevitably reach a point where we can't afford to go to the hospital, maybe reach a point where we can't see our physician because they demand no pay-for-service people, and potentially can't afford medications for things like heart problems, cancer, etc.  When this happens, say good-bye to about 20% of the economy and millions of lives, unless we are totally prepared with the correct 'prescription for the problem', so to speak, at that exact moment.  This is my shithole scenario...

And now you're off message.  Homie, what does it have to do with your point?  How does this demonstrate that the rich believe that it should be them that are in charge?  The only way I can see this relating to your point is that it demonstrates that, to the extent that they're already in charge, they're not very competant.

And nah, we should have solved this in the Nixon administration.

In conclusion, man, you've said a lot of things but you haven't made much of a point.


Peace
pero ya tu sabes...

Offline RNS

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
  • Darwins +12/-1
  • Diplomat
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2012, 05:43:05 PM »
BM
love and truth and love of truth

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2012, 06:05:06 PM »
5.  The top 1% of the nation pays a smaller percentage of taxation than the rest of the population.  When Warren Buffet explained this, he was criticized by the same people that 'don't forget we get taxed twice - once corporate tax and once individual tax'. 

2 rebuttals of that.  First, one I've heard elsewhere:  Money gets taxed again and again at every transaction.  These unfortunate rich people -- oh, how I weep for them -- will have to pay sales taxes when they spend the money and property taxes on something they already own and paid for.

The other is that the Supreme Court recently expanded the rights of corporations as persons before the law.   They used to be persons in civil court for the questions of law suits.  Now they have freedom of speech.  AT&T even sued all the way to the SCOTUS that their corporation's person could suffer embarassment and had a citizen's right of privacy.  SCOTUS rejected that with a horse laugh but it shows the contention.

The rich aren't taxed twice.  The person of their corporation is taxed for his[1]  income.  Then the employees' incomes are taxed when he pays them money for their hard work.  Then the stockholders are taxed when he gives them money for their hard work of -- y'know -- owning.
 1. Or "her".  Now that a corporation has freedom of speech he or she should not be called "it".

Offline shnozzola

Re: Occupy!
« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2012, 08:00:30 PM »
I think another problem is the global tax structure.  For the business - sell it everywhere you want, but don’t use the tax system from the area where you are selling.  Or is this just fair business that consumers need to overlook?

Example:
Quote
The real genius of Apple: Tax avoidance
Here's how these tax avoidance strategies work: Apple conducts the bulk of its product and research development in the United States. This work is done largely by engineers educated in U.S. schools, often using basic research that was funded by U.S. taxpayers. Apple then takes the patents earned by its U.S. labs and registers them offshore in tax haven nations that impose little or no taxes on income on royalties from patents and other intellectual property. When Apple sells an iPod or Mac, it charges a lot for the use of the patents, telling the IRS that without this intellectual property, the product would be virtually worthless. By doing this, Apple transfers much of the profit from each sale to the tax haven, while retaining the costs of research, advertising and management in the United States.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-04-09/news/bs-ed-apple-taxes-20120409_1_tax-avoidance-apple-tax-bill
“I wanna go ice fishing on Europa, and see if something swims up to the camera lens and licks it.”- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Offline jeremy0

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Darwins +26/-12
  • Gender: Male
    • Economics and Technology
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #20 on: May 05, 2012, 09:33:03 PM »
Alright so, you wrote a lot there.  So this is going to be a long response.  I'm going to try and more or less take this point by point.
OK, fam - I'll try to clarify...
Quote
The income of the top 1% has risen astronomically in the last 8 years when compared to the feeble growth elsewhere.  This indicates that the rich are squandering money instead of creating jobs.
Not really.  The "job creators" line was bullshit in the first place. <snip-irrelevant>

<snip>And so instead of coming up with new policy ideas, they've decided to come up with new justifications for their old ideas. 
Your statement here is partially correct.  Yes, the 'job creators' bit was total BS.  We gave tax holidays in the past, during the bush administration we gave corporations tax breaks, and personal tax breaks.  What I mean to say here is that giving more money to corporations or the rich through tax-exemptions or tax breaks does not create jobs - it's a failing economic strategy to spur job growth.  Also what I was saying is, when you later remove a tax break, businesses and owners will want to maintain the level of income they were used to, so likely you would see them revolt at that time, perhaps firing some employees or doing some tightening to maintain their high level of income.. We'll see what the case is when the bush-era tax cuts expire eventually...
http://fwcon.wordpress.com/where-does-government-get-its-money-from/ - see taxation only - high/low taxation later..

Yes, we are going through something completely different, that we haven't experienced before.  Therefore, we need new ideas to get out of it..
Quote
At the same time, most taxes come from the middle class, which was used to bail out the people that were a large part of the problem.

A couple of things.  I don't think that you're right about the middle class' share of the tax burden.  I think that it's the upper class and the upper middle class that pays most of the federal taxes.  After all, we have a disgusting level of income inequality in this country and they have most of the money.  It is true that the middle class often pays a higher proportion of their income in taxes, but that's not exactly the same thing.
This is actually what I meant.  Thanks for clarifying that:
Quote
Here’s how to read this: 40 percent of taxpayers with incomes between 30K and 40K pay more than 12.9 percent of their income in income and payroll taxes; meanwhile, 25 percent of people with incomes over $1M pay less than 12.6 percent of their income in these taxes. This suggests that there are a lot of very-high-income guys paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries.
 

Quote
With respect to the bailouts, I'm not sure how this is supposed to cast aspersions against the entirety of the monied class.  However ham-fistedly we dealt with the financial crisis, this was something that threatened to destroy the world economy in 2008 and was therefore in everyone's economic interest.  <snip>
I am of the opinion that we should have only bailed out the homeowners, thereby bailing out bottom-up instead of top-down, which would have averted the housing disaster.  What would you like to say?  Here is a loan against your current loan - you are currently re-financed out of your shitty loan from the bank.  Pay it back as usual.  Or 2: banks - you have committed a crime.  But that's ok - here's your money, and we will do it again if necessary.  GM: here's money for you, as long as you pay it back, for being such dumbasses and running a crappy auto business..  thanks for all of your incompetence. 
I would have rather said the former, as I'm sure Ben Stein would agree.  Yes, we had to do something about it.  Does that mean we employed the right thing?  I don't think so.  I would have left GM to do a bankruptcy restructuring program, just as many other multi-billion-dollar companies were forced to do.  I don't care how large GM was.  Something would have replaced it, and quite frankly they will go through bankruptcy protection again in the near future.  Moot point.  Also - why did our borrowing skyrocket if we supposedly got all this money back?  Did we spend it elsewhere later?  I want to see those figures.. 
I was pointing to the organizations that caused the mess in that statement, not the '1%'...
Quote
Also, the middle class paid for large stimulus packages that were only temporary in nature, which accomplished no form of monetary generations later, and when removed will have had no effect whatsoever on economic growth.

I'm not sure I understand your point. <snip - irrelevant garbling>
Let me rephrase: approximately 70% of taxation comes from what I would consider today's middle class - 300,000&v.  When you use a stimulus package like we did - rebuilt roads and bridges - in an attempt to put construction workers back to work..  Did that part of it work?  No.  Most of the money went to machinery, then back to the contract owners.  So in affect, you haven't changed anything.  It also doesn't generate any future revenue, like we did with the Hoover dam.  Also, a stimulus like this is only temporary.  it's purpose is to have it in affect long enough that when you remove it, and the benefit gets removed, the jobs are back.  Since the jobs for these construction workers aren't back, it has had literally a very small impact.  Also, cutting taxes a little for people has also had a very small impact.  Cutting taxes for corporations has had a small impact.  Yes, it's affective over the short term.  But long-term?  I would argue to the contrary.  This isn't Bonzai-economics.  This is the reality of stimulus packages.  300Bln to create 1% domestic growth is a lot of money for very little interest..  What you actually want right now is to grow back into a healthy market.  This is only going to happen by getting people to create jobs.  (See my first link above)
This - http://www.epi.org/publication/policies_to_create_jobs/ is retarded.
This - http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/06/20/promoting-open-investment-policy-create-jobs-and-grow-economy is an example of something that would work
So are these -
http://www.populistdaily.com/politics/a-tariff-policy-to-create-jobs.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/12/06/obama039s_clean-energy_policies_create_jobs_268651.html

I'm pretty damn tired of hearing retarded economists use taxation as a means for 'creating jobs'.  It hardly budges anything.  Call that bonzai economics, if you want..
http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/07/news/economy/obama_stimulus_impact/index.htm 

Quote
Warren Buffet stated that for the past several years, america has been in a class war, and that the rich have already won it.  This is an example of an agreed-upon action by the rich community that they should be in control of the nation...

So you're saying that there is a uniformity or near uniformity of opinion among wealthy Americans that, prior to say, the 1980s or so, that the poor and middle class just had too much money, and that they, the rich, needed to enact a series of policies to see to it that this goal would be acheived?  <snip>
I'm saying that I'm looking at two figures: 1.  The wealth/job growth of most of the population vs. 2. The wealth growth of the upper-income population.  You know what, let me just show you a chart, and see if you can figure out whether or not the 'rich population is owning up to their end of the bargain.'  Who is using their money to create jobs?  If they were creating jobs instead of getting richer, would we be better off?  If we were in such an economic disaster, why are the rich generating vastly more amounts of money than they were prior to 2008?  Fuck off..

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/the-fight-over-inequality/
I want to see what you can get out of just the above graph..  what can you infer?

Quote
As I've stated, I've stress-tested the system on the sixth anniversary march conducted by the OWS group.

What exactly do you mean here? <snip>

With respect to police brutality, fam, the media has always been deferential to police departments when they take controversial actions.  I don't think this has anything to do with the aims of OWS in particular.  They've been whooping black and brown people's asses, sometimes even killing us, for decades, which is why this is one of my favorite tweets ever:
<snip>
And if we're talking about the NYPD in particular, man we can cry about the eviction of Zuccotti Park, but this is the same department that shot Amadou Dialo 41 times like it was okay. 
I see your point now... I was shocked to see that only the police reports made news.  Now you're telling me why.  I guess that explains that.  Would be good to know that the news isn't totally nuts.. However, I'm also looking at legislation that has been getting passed against your rights in the constitution.  That worries me - even if it is in the name of 'protecting us from terrorists'.  I don't think legalizing things that go against freedoms is the way to combat terrorism..

However, if what you are alluding to is true, this means that at least I still have some good friends.  Good to know that not everyone has swallowed the red pill..

What I mean is nobody cared about OWS.  I saw that as a problem.  Nobody wants to report on police brutality, government abuse of power, etc.  I find that very odd that groups like these are being shut-up..

Quote
At the same time, policies like SOPA, abortion rights, etc. were passed ridiculously out of time and scope against the will of the public's opinions.  All of the people involved were in part or in fact, rich.  This tells me that the rich community actually 'owns' all of these groups, and we are in fact, very corrupted as a society.

SOPA wasn't passed.  And abortion rights?  Fam, you're against abortion rights?  Really?  Please tell me that I misunderstood you before I go off on a rant.
Careful -

I am not against abortion rights.  My stance is it is not my place to tell somebody else whether or not they should or can have an abortion on an unwanted child or due to possible birth defects.  However, states have been passing laws stating a baby is legal life 2 weeks before inception (see Arizona, etc.)  We've discussed these things on this forum, I'll have you know that bit, bro..
Quote
The 'recovery' of this economic crises is a complete and utterly dispicable illusion..  Unemployment by population percentage is the figure to look at, and it hasn't budged a bit since 2008.  This is a clear indication that we are going nowhere, even with all the spending we have done to save ourselves from depression.

Do you have a source for this?  I was under the impression that the unemployment rate had been trending downward since 2009.  See:
You are looking at the numbers given by corporate data.  I read news about a week ago about April figures.  It stated unemployment per population growth hasn't budged since 2008.  That's the real number on unemployment..
The following might explain a part of what I mean..
http://www.examiner.com/article/april-2012-unemployment-what-s-the-real-number
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-04/unemployment-drops-but-fewer-americans-are-working.html
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20120505/NEWS0107/205050367/
..I wish I could locate the exact news for you that showed that figure, however, news is very hard to go back and dig-up..  apologies fam.

Quote
Again, Warren Buffet, like a lot of liberals finds the current tax scheme to be unfair.  If you actually look at polling data surrounding tax policy, you'll find that where we sit tends to define where we stand.  Republicans are, for example, more likely to agree that the Buffett Rule is an "election year gimmick" than Democrats.
If I had it my way, my economic taxation standard wouldn't stop at 300,000.  It would continue to rise in brackets astronomically, especially for the super-rich.  People don't need 250mln dollars in the bank.  Cry me a river if you think it's not fair to tax the shit out of the rich..
Quote
<snip>The only way I can see this relating to your point is that it demonstrates that, to the extent that they're already in charge, they're not very competant.
Yeah - the way I currently see CEOs is that they are incompetent... Running your own company into the ground repeatedly - I took strategic management.  I was very good at it.  These guys look like they don't care about the business AT ALL.  I can't believe their strategies.  They suck.  Steve Jobs had a winning strategy - you want to know what it was?  Ignore the shareholders.  Concentrate on serving your customers and building a successful business.  Compete through higher quality, innovation, and creation of new products and new market segments.  Move products that don't work in their current segment into new segments.  Satisfy unmet customer needs.  It's that simple of a strategy, and it wins almost every time...
Quote
In conclusion, man, you've said a lot of things but you haven't made much of a point.
Sez you, bro :D

Peace
[/quote]
« Last Edit: May 05, 2012, 09:36:51 PM by jeremy0 »
"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger."
"If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me.  Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Offline jeremy0

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Darwins +26/-12
  • Gender: Male
    • Economics and Technology
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #21 on: May 05, 2012, 11:54:22 PM »
I'll try to clean up what I'm saying as well as I can..

1.  Stress-testing OWS:  I specifically told OWS three things: a. local law and city regulations should never override the constitution.  You have the right to peaceful assembly - regardless of what a police officer has to say about it.[1] b. if legislators won't listen to your demands, go to the justice department and start filing complaints/suits that congress is not living up to its obligations to serve its constituents[2]  c.  If the justice department won't hear your case, blast it to the news.  The news aren't giving these people any voice... As I didn't see a, b, or c put into action or working; my assumption was that since this group argues against the 1% (the richest), that means the 1% is trying to simply shut-them-up. 

2.  Lobbying: this is a bribe to legislators.  They also used to use it to their advantage by investing in related legislation.  This is called 'corruption'.  It needs to stop.  End of discussion.  When petitions don't work, but bribes do - if I were to do the same with law enforcement officers - what reaction do you think I would get?  I think legislators have crossed the line.

3.  Laws passed that cater to the rich: The bush administration passed massive tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations in order to 'create jobs'.  This is a common economic flaw in policy - it doesn't work as intended.  If I had 500 million, and you allowed me to have 550 million, and my business can get through on its current employee level - why would I hire anybody?  I would take the money.  That is what is going on.  Drop me back down to 500 million/year, and I might get upset... This is the problem with taxation as a means to spur economic growth.  First, it doesn't work.  Later, it backfires.
To prove this idea, if the bush era tax cuts and oil company cuts really did what they were supposed to do - why did we have an economic bust and huge layoffs when this should have created millions of jobs?  Also, why did gas prices rise astronomically while oil companies reaped the best profits ever?  Weren't these tax cuts supposed to do something?

4.  Our economic models that you are taught in college are wrong.  Absolutely wrong.  They are too simple.  They are based on a perfect-world scenario.  The real world doesn't work the same way.  If you want me to go into detail proving this, I can.  However, I don't feel I need to prove my points here...

5.  Refer to the following link about taxation, I want to make some points:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#Income_tax_withholding
[3]

5.  Look at some opinions on taxing the rich vs. the Republican proposed 'flat tax'...
http://www.zompist.com/richtax.htm

6.  Look at the republican and tea-party propositions to fix medicare/social security.  They want to get rid of both.  Replace with a voucher system and privitize social security... The outcome?  You don't get as much out of it as you otherwise would have.  If you need heart medications, or need to go to the hospital - better check your 'coupons'..  This is what they meant by 'sacrifice'.  They don't care much, because they don't have to worry about these things.  Your families do.. 
[4]

7.  The countries that are not having a systemic meltdown financially right now are the European countries that have closer to ideal distribution of wealth.  I can't stress this enough - the more wealth the middle class has in a nation, the more buying power, meaning more desired goods are purchased.  When you strip the middle class - the majority of the nation - to necessity goods, it means businesses will be struggling.  When businesses struggle, they cut jobs and increase prices to maintain revenues/cost ratios.  This is exactly what I've been seeing.  It's contradictory to economic models of supply and demand.  Also, our trade is contradictory to economic models of trade.  This would tell an adult that our economic models are seriously flawed.  How do we fix these problems?  Forget about economic theory as we know it and create a better theory. 

8.  Stimulus.  Why does it work temporarily and then stop working?  Simple - it's a temporary stimulus.  We aren't building anything that will generate revenue or maintain jobs after the stimulus is removed.  That's why I don't agree with that policy.  That simple.

9.  We need to also look at what's ahead that could be an economic problem.  Just like the financial industry caused their own meltdown through irresponsible leadership and greed, so too will the health industry - pretty soon.  The growth in costs of the health industry is unsustainable.  Nothing is being done to address these problems...[5]
In this footnote, I've outlined the major problems immediately facing the future economic situation, and simple things that can be done about it.  This is what I'm talking about when I've seen things being half-assed...

Those are the points I was trying to make, which are related to a. income inequality, b. problems facing the economy, c. abuses of power, and d. everything that OWS is currently fighting over...
 1. Congress, police, the justice system, the news, all of these groups kept it quiet.  The sixth month march looked like a march taking place in China.  We're not china.  We have rights as free citizens here.  Why are these rights being ignored?
http://www.aclu.org/keep-america-safe-free/top-ten-abuses-power-911
Details about the 'assumed' class war, and income inequality.
http://www.alternet.org/economy/145705/the_richest_1%25_have_captured_america%27s_wealth_--_what%27s_it_going_to_take_to_get_it_back
In the above, CEOs get paid big bucks to cater to the shareholders.  The shareholders that benefit the most are the actual owners (major).  This means that CEOs are meant to push financial numbers, not actually run the business.  It leads to massive debt, growth beyond the company's means, etc.  It was not only personal debt that caused the crises, but corporate debt.  This is what causes an unstable free market.  This is what OWS noticed.  Why haven't you?
 2. OWS had a list of demands.  It had almost unanimous support, on each one.  This is called 'petitioning the government'.  It's not working - they are not listening.  That's illegal according to the constitution.  What is working is lobbying, which under the constitution doesn't even refer to the legal person that is a corporation.  People are people.  Corporations are not people.  End lobbying.  Period.
 3. Looking at all the different forms of taxation that is imposed on people, do you really think that the top 1% pays, in total, taxes that are the same percentage of income as the average american, when the average american means household incomes of 300,000 and under?  Look at all the different forms of taxation - my simple answer is, no, most americans pay much more as a percentage in tax comparing to income than the top 1%.  Actually, the top 1% invests a lot of their money, which means they are actually paying taxes on further income, not further expenditures..
 4. Imagine you are 35.  You've paid into your own social security fund, which is now a form of 401K that doesn't make any interest.  You've been putting money into 401K, but your shitty options have left you losing money overall.  You get paralyzed in a car accident.  You can no longer work.  You declare yourself disabled.  What do you now get?  Only what you have put into it so far.  Once that is up, your family has to foot the rest of your expenses.  I hope you have a really rich and caring family...
Now, imagine you get cancer.  Because of the voucher system, you can't pay for it.  You go to the hospital anyway.  They deny you treatment because you lack federal funding.  You die because of this.
Then, imagine you require heart medications.  But the ones you need cost 2,000 dollars a month in the US.  Because of the voucher system, you have to spend sometimes 6 weeks off of your medications, possibly months at a time.  After going two months without, you die.  I guess that means we didn't have to pay for your ass..
 5. 
1.  Healthcare.  We are already, when we are insured, paying for the insurance mostly ourselves.  Those that aren't insured are required by hospitals to be treated.  This gets paid for by the government.  When everybody fits into this category, it will cause at least a hospital financial catastrophe.  Imagine for 1. not being able to afford a needed operation and 2. going to the ER, where they have to treat you, and not being able to pay, even with insurance..  Now you can see why I say this is the next major problem.  These hospitals will cost themselves right out of business.  Why not turn it into a tax, that everybody pays, and have a certain procedure cost a certain amount; fund pharmacology through milestone payments and then allow generics, and certain payments for doctor visits, then force everyone to have some sort of primary care physician who routes patients based on symptoms to either themselves or the hospital, unless it is a life-threatening emergency?  This will also control costs, and this is actually a better model than France has, and France is #1 in healthcare..  We could implement this model as soon as healthcare causes its own financial collapse..  (a.  assuming costs keep rising, we will reach a point where we can no longer afford healthcare.  This is the next thing that will cause an economic crises, in my opinion)

2.  Education.  We have an existing problem with student loans, where kids are life-long in debt to universities instead of buying a home.  College tuition rose at a brisk pace over the last several decades.  Also, we've dummed-down most of our education system to fit those less suited for learning.  We try to keep kids in school using this tactic.  Fail.  What we should do is incorporate learning across institutions.  i.e. allow kids to read books from experts, do their own learning, etc.  Kids should be able to move through grades in school based on skill, not on age.  We should stop giving out student loans the way we do, and instead route kids to a college they can realistically afford, unless they continue to show high skill and aptitude.  We should allow non-university based training, and require only standard certifications to prove they are capable of performing a job vs. 4 years or droned lecture/simple tests and a diploma.  This would accellerate the system and allow people to switch careers on a dime..

3.  Retirement.  Get it out of the stock markets, and give it to financial sectors.  This funds use of money rather than trade of money, helping the economy on multiple fronts, even during the onset of a recession.  It's a simple concept, that can generate guaranteed interest, while still allowing financial sectors to make money.  Make variable rate loans illegal as the step to fixing the financial sector's oversight issues and issues that led us to its meltdown. 

4.  Medicare.  Not necessary under revision #1.  Can now be eliminated. 

5.  Income inequality - the problem in a free-market that causes depressions and major recessions.  What can we do?
a.  Implement not a flat-tax, but an escalating tax based on income - whether personal or invested - any income is taxable.  Escalate it to a degree that means a person can't make much more than a specified amount per year.  This would mean it would be meaningless to make more than a certain amount.  Don't require the same for corporations.  Make a flat corporate tax - don't prefer industries.  This would a. end greedy individual wealth and b. force companies to do something with their profits instead of paying shareholders dividends.  This would create tons of jobs, get rid of income inequality, all with one simple fix - tax structure.
b.  Make a minimum-pay-rate on different employment grades.  This would be overly-complicated, and require overhead and oversight.  Also, who would agree on the minimum salary requirements?
c.  Implement a maximum-income cap.  Nobody can make more than a specified amount.  This is similar to (a), however, not likely to be realistic legislation.
d.  any other ideas that would guarantee income equality are certainly open to debate - these are just off the top of my head...
« Last Edit: May 06, 2012, 12:08:28 AM by jeremy0 »
"If you find yourself reaching for the light, first realize that it has already touched your finger."
"If I were your god, I would have no reason for judgement, and you have all told endless lies about me.  Wait - you do already. I am not amused by your ignorance, thoughtlessness, and shallow mind."

Offline Timo

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +89/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • oyeme
Re: Occupy!
« Reply #22 on: May 07, 2012, 09:20:48 PM »
Damn, the homie jeremy's working on a policy paper over here.  That's a lot to digest.  I'll get back to you in a bit.
pero ya tu sabes...