Occupy Wall Street

[TX-Beau]

Actually we didn't. Those were marginal rates that no one actually paid. You really don't believe that the tax rates made us prosperous, do you?

I think that if you push the largest portion of wealth into the middle class you create hoards of consumers, who buy things, that other people sell.

The rich for all their money simply do not have the purchasing power of hoards of middle class consumers all vying to have the latest Cadillac.

Period.

Whoppee Goldberg defined trickle down economics as golden showers on the American populace.

Taxes are not the only factor, but if your rich are paying tiny percentages of their vast incomes - well that money has to come from somewhere, guess where.

 

[JayHawk]

Yeah don't get me wrong ... we need a flatter tax code that exacts the same toll per dollar from each. If that is wealth redistribution then lets have some. Simply taxing the rich to give more to an inept government is not a program I will sign up for.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yeah don't get me wrong ... we need a flatter tax code that exacts the same toll per dollar from each. If that is wealth redistribution then lets have some. Simply taxing the rich to give more to an inept government is not a program I will sign up for.

Then sign up for the one I've proposed:

1. restore the pre-Reagan tax levels, and put that revenue in the budget, to cut the deficit.

2. on top of that, restore the Eisenhower tax levels, and put the added revenue above step 1 to paying debt -- nothing else. after two years, start introducing the same sorts of incentives as from back then.


But considering how much the bankers and super-wealthy have done to screw the country over, add

3. 0.1% tax on all electronic transactions over $1000. Throw that at the debt, too.


edit: I wouldn't give it to them, either, since they're the ones who've been conspiring to move wealth from the poor to the rich

 

[TX-Beau]

Yeah don't get me wrong ... we need a flatter tax code that exacts the same toll per dollar from each. If that is wealth redistribution then lets have some. Simply taxing the rich to give more to an inept government is not a program I will sign up for.

Oh spare me, a flat tax on 10% of a million dollars gives you huge amounts of money left. A flat tax of 10% on ten thousand dollars is a huge chunk of the money you actually need to eat and keep a roof over your head. The tax burden is fucking lopsided in favor of the rich. End of story.

Flat taxes are nothing more than gifts to the rich.

I'll tell you what, you tax the rich proportionally according to purchasing power to what the poor pay and I'll agree with you.

 

[TX-Beau]

And if the government is inept you are as much to blame as anyone else.

 

[TX-Beau]

Then sign up for the one I've proposed:

1. restore the pre-Reagan tax levels, and put that revenue in the budget, to cut the deficit.

2. on top of that, restore the Eisenhower tax levels, and put the added revenue above step 1 to paying debt -- nothing else. after two years, start introducing the same sorts of incentives as from back then.


But considering how much the bankers and super-wealthy have done to screw the country over, add

3. 0.1% tax on all electronic transactions over $1000. Throw that at the debt, too.


edit: I wouldn't give it to them, either, since they're the ones who've been conspiring to move wealth from the poor to the rich

I don't have a problem with this.

 

[Just_Believe18]

An example of why I stand by this Movement:

 

[JB3]

An example of why I stand by this Movement:

Nice 'soundbite' and nothing more. It is no more or less valid than the opposite viewpoint Jayhawk posted above.

 

[Just_Believe18]

^ "Soundbite?" Really, JB3? Would you look at that man in the face and call him nothing more than a soundbite? Show a little more humanity as to how you would want to be treated and recognized if that was you putting yourself out there for the public on such a personal level.

As for Jayhawk's "Wall Street" comparison, it was not the same. This was a personal example of an actual individual, whereas JayHawk's image was a "general opinion" of what the writer's claim to be Wall Street's employees' opinion. The author of that piece of paper may not even work on Wall Street. It seems like an anonymous uneducated opinion from some random person. Which, by the way, protestors are not asking for Wall Street employees to go out of business. The general workers are also part of the 99%. This is all about the top 1% who were involved and making the executive decisions on corrupting the government and nearly crashing the global economy.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oh spare me, a flat tax on 10% of a million dollars gives you huge amounts of money left. A flat tax of 10% on ten thousand dollars is a huge chunk of the money you actually need to eat and keep a roof over your head. The tax burden is fucking lopsided in favor of the rich. End of story.

Flat taxes are nothing more than gifts to the rich.

I'll tell you what, you tax the rich proportionally according to purchasing power to what the poor pay and I'll agree with you.

Do it this way: discretionary income. That's the income you have left after you pay your utilities, house payment if you have one, car payment, and buy groceries.

I pay Uncle Sam about 80% of my discretionary income. How about we use that for the flat tax?

And if the government is inept you are as much to blame as anyone else.

Not really. Studies have shown that politicians are over two hundred times as likely to actually talk with someone worth multiple millions and up than with an ordinary citizen. The ineptness of the government rests more on the wealthy.

 

[JayHawk]

Oh spare me, a flat tax on 10% of a million dollars gives you huge amounts of money left. A flat tax of 10% on ten thousand dollars is a huge chunk of the money you actually need to eat and keep a roof over your head. The tax burden is fucking lopsided in favor of the rich. End of story.

Flat taxes are nothing more than gifts to the rich.

I'll tell you what, you tax the rich proportionally according to purchasing power to what the poor pay and I'll agree with you.

You of course ASSUME that my plan automatically taxes someone making 10 grand at the same rate?

Tsk fucking tsk

I have posted previously but will state it again for those of you that dont keep up... The poverty rate as defined currently doesn't describe poverty. It describes hopeless nothing where working does nothing but waste energy. No, the Poverty level in this country should be around 30K for single.

The flat tax I refer to removes the "shelters" built into our tax code for those with the means to use them. If everyone who made 30k or more paid ten percent of what they owed then we would have no issue with any of our programs.

We would still have an issue where the congress raids SS at their leisure.
We would still have social safety nets that do not require drug testing.
We would still have senators serving one term and getting paid for LIFE.
We would still have regulatory commissions across the spectrum run by campaign donors who came from the very industries they presume to regulate.

There is a lot broken and a lot that can be fixed. Throwin rocks at cops won't affect any of that change. Take a look at Martin Luther King if you would like a success model on pacifistic reform.

But feel free not to lecture me on what you assume I propose.



Kuli I would sign up for half of that BUT desire real reform in government and the return of the public servant.


For all of you who support and march with OWS you must remember that as a group you may not all be drugged out hippies. As a group you may not all condone or participate in rock throwing at cops. However as a group you will pay the consequences. I live it everyday. My task in many places would be ten times easier but for the actions of a few that preceded me.

 

[palemale]

Actually we didn't. Those were marginal rates that no one actually paid. You really don't believe that the tax rates made us prosperous, do you?

Post WWII, the government had sufficient tax revenue to invest billions of dollars in infrastructure, the GI bill, etc. So yes, the tax rates made us prosperous.

 

[Stardreamer]

Post WWII, the government had sufficient tax revenue to invest billions of dollars in infrastructure, the GI bill, etc. So yes, the tax rates made us prosperous.

I suspect the shift of the economy from a wartime footing to a consumer based one might of had a little to do with it.

 

[bankside]

http://blog.ted.com/2011/10/24/how-economic-inequality-harms-societies-richard-wilkinson-on-ted-com/

This excellent narrative shows the effects of an unbalanced distribution of income.

It also points out something (starting at 10 minutes) I've wondered about for a long time: that inequality does not need to be resolved through higher and higher taxation on wealth. You can just pay people more equally.

 

[jackoroe]

Post WWII, the government had sufficient tax revenue to invest billions of dollars in infrastructure, the GI bill, etc. So yes, the tax rates made us prosperous.

OK, the confiscatory marginal rate that no one actually paid, led to growth. Got it!

 

[EastMed]

The latest ILO report on employment prospects indicate a rather depressing outlook.
What's really depressing is that the financial system is not investing in the real economy.

http://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/press-and-media-centre/news/WCMS_166395/lang--en/index.htm

Thanks to:

http://www.ilo.org/global/lang--en/index.htm#a3

 

[T-Rexx]

OK, the confiscatory marginal rate that no one actually paid, led to growth. Got it!

You still haven't explained how the USA went from the (then) biggest income gap in history (1929) to the smallest (1950s) in just 21 years.

Did rich people just decide to start handing out free money? Or did all those New Deal programs designed to pump money into the middle class and reform banking and business actually do something?

The latest ILO report on employment prospects indicate a rather depressing outlook.

What's really depressing is that the financial system is not investing in the real economy.

The USA now has a third world economy. We've been in recession (truly) for four years (began December 2007). And in two months, we will begin the fifth year of this misery. As EastMed points out, there is no sign of relief anytime soon. I'm sorry, but recessions don't last that long. This is a PERMANENT change. Reaganomics has turned us into that icon of prosperity - Bolivia.

We are looking at permanently high unemployment, permanently high poverty rate, and permanent high density, multi-generational housing in cities.

When you make rich people ultra-rich, it destroys prosperity.

And when you vest so much power in such a tiny percentage of people, it destroys democracy.

And only the OWS people seem to care about this.

 

[Kulindahr]

I have posted previously but will state it again for those of you that dont keep up... The poverty rate as defined currently doesn't describe poverty. It describes hopeless nothing where working does nothing but waste energy. No, the Poverty level in this country should be around 30K for single.

Have you got a set of figures for reaching that, or is it gut guesstimate?

Kuli I would sign up for half of that BUT desire real reform in government and the return of the public servant.


For all of you who support and march with OWS you must remember that as a group you may not all be drugged out hippies. As a group you may not all condone or participate in rock throwing at cops. However as a group you will pay the consequences. I live it everyday. My task in many places would be ten times easier but for the actions of a few that preceded me.

I'd say I've proposed "real reform in government".

And I have yet to hear about rock-throwing from a reliable source.

 

[Kulindahr]

Post WWII, the government had sufficient tax revenue to invest billions of dollars in infrastructure, the GI bill, etc. So yes, the tax rates made us prosperous.

OK, the confiscatory marginal rate that no one actually paid, led to growth. Got it!

Jackoroe, you help turn people more liberal with this sort of simple-minded, inane response. Palemale is 'way ahead of you on this one.

The way you respond, I'd have to assume you don't think that watering a lawn makes it green -- it just gets it wet, right?

For one thing, those high marginal rates led to growth BECAUSE no one paid them. Think about it.

 

[White Eagle]

OK, I've ran across this video from an email I got today. It's something I've been doing for quite a while. However, this goes several steps ahead of what I've been doing. When you get junk mail in the snail mail system, this is how you respond.