"Occupy Wall Street" movement another example of people power

  • Thread starter DeletedUser16008
  • Start date

DeletedUser

I am unemployed and used to be a business owner.. I had to close my business because of the housing collapse. I haven't worked in 2 years and cannot (could not) collect unemployment because I have always been self-employed. I don't blame anyone because I made the business decisions.

I cant figure out why would you protest the banks and rich people when it is government policy that determines who is corrupting the public at this point in time...

In the 1970's The Congress says: we need housing for the poor, pressure is put on the banks to lend to non credit worthy folks. This is accomplished by FED not lending money or strong arming the banks that don't comply with loose lending practices.
The banks and shareholders (you own a mutual fund? you may be a shareholder) need to protect themselves from all this potentially bad debt, and sell off the mortgages to Fanny and Freddy and boom we have a bust!

I love rich people, Their job is to buy stuff and pay taxes! check this out:

Sometimes politicians, journalists and others exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!" and it is just accepted to be fact. But what does that really mean?

Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the following will help. Please read it carefully.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."

Dinner for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free.

But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison.
"We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

SO WHY ARE THEY OCCUPYING AGAIN??
 

DeletedUser

You are making the same mistake so many others have made when discussing the real estate bust. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not government agencies.

Also, your argument is invalid, a sort of slippery slope fallacy built on a faulty premise due, in large part, on your failure to consider (or intentionally failed to disclose) that the U.S. is by far the greatest consumer market, with Western Europe being second. Being here, participating in business here, is a win situation for deep pocket individuals and businesses. Taxation, does not discourage them, because the market compels them. The profit margins far outweigh what they would normally be taxed if it were not for Bush' tax cuts and the Republican-led pitbull Congress.

It is a gross and unconscionable 'spin' to argue the wealthy should receive lower tax rates than everyone else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

what is that you said? gobbldy gook what?

The Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA; OTCBB: FNMA), commonly known as Fannie Mae, was founded in 1938 during the Great Depression as part of the New Deal. It is a government-sponsored enterprise (GSE), though it has been a publicly traded company since 1968.[2] The corporation's purpose is to expand the secondary mortgage market by securitizing mortgages in the form of mortgage-backed securities (MBS),[3] allowing lenders to reinvest their assets into more lending and in effect increasing the number of lenders in the mortgage market by reducing the reliance on thrifts.[4]

fanny and freddy are not government agencies, true, but they may as well be for all practical purposes. oh yes a Democratic Program...

The Dems have held a majority in both house and senate for far far longer than the Republicans since the 70's. The policies I refer to are 1000% Democratic. Very similar to the view on wealth re-distribution summed up on my little story. Keep the middle class dependant and they will always be in line for a hand out... since the Republicans generally want to encourage independence from government, and are more likely to cut welfare, the Dems get the votes. Lets face it, if you are getting any kind of entitlement, the last thing you want is to vote for a party willing to stop YOUR benefits.

This is why I think the OCCUPY movement is a little mixed up ...but then most uninformed people are.
 

DeletedUser

By the way, who said the wealthy should have lower tax rates? The top 10% of income earners pay 70% of the tax the government takes in.. read the story.. why should a man who pays nothing in get something out?
 

DeletedUser16008

It appears you have a skewed idea of what tax the rich actually pay and what is enough or not. No way should the higher paid pay less of a % of their income. Some get plenty out just by paying and lobbying congress to enable their companies etc to increase profits. As for the sentiment they will go elsewhere ? well as an american citizen your taxed and obliged to pay TAX on earnings as such no matter where in the world you live or work, sow that up properly and it makes no difference where they go, if they are a US citizen they pay ... quite simple really

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/aug/15/warren-buffett-higher-taxes-super-rich

And hes not the only one.

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/27/most-millionaires-support-warren-buffetts-tax-on-the-rich/

Maybe you should also become more informed.

True the occupy movement needs to refine their focus but it had to start somewhere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser16008

Democrat or Republican how are people like this supposed to even have a clue what the average persons life is like ?

OB-RF613_presid_G_20120103121423.jpg
 

DeletedUser

super rich will always be super rich.. the name of the game is employment who employes more people, a person making 50000 per yr or 100000? I only make pennies and I still pay for a haircut and used car...so it could be said that I employ at least a minimum of people.
 

DeletedUser

Rather than taxing the rich, let's have them invest in positive societal programs, such as a complete overhaul of the education system and funding public research. That way, they aren't 'penalized' and they get good press. More innovations has positive technological and economic effects and a more educated populace will be far better than the current 12 year baby-sitting school system.
 

DeletedUser16008

Rather than taxing the rich, let's have them invest in positive societal programs, such as a complete overhaul of the education system and funding public research. That way, they aren't 'penalized' and they get good press. More innovations has positive technological and economic effects and a more educated populace will be far better than the current 12 year baby-sitting school system.

you mean like this ? http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/

Hmmm getting good press etc dosnt mean they do it just for the good of society.

They also also funded the womens movement, whilst good in a way it also put millions into the tax paying working system so it had two objectives ... 1 on a positive 2 on a self serving basis.
 

DeletedUser

I mean like this ---> http://www.ted.com/
Scientists/researchers/other intellectuals have proposed sound, implementable plans for improving the human condition. All that's needed is wide-scale financial support.
btw, I've never heard of the rockefeller foundation and it looks so very vague.....lol
 

DeletedUser16008

looks interesting rice...

Never heard of rockerfeller ? ooo boy google him ;)
 

DeletedUser

But then who would pay for Social Security, Defense, Welfare, Unemployment Insurance, and all the other socialist programs
I say give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day.. give him a pole and he can feed himself until we say he has to pay his fair share.
 

DeletedUser

SO you are saying that if we started all over from scratch, the smart people would run things better? Isnt that how we got here?


try telling that to a High School grad with 5 kids..

The schools and colleges are flooded intellectuals that are teaching less and want more $$.. Are they are spewing out is socialist garbage instead of good, productive reading writing and math skills.
I am not interested in in political correctness, not hurting the feelings of the tree huggers, nor do I wish to save a species of animal that nature has selected for extinction. If they want to save flipper, then eat him! It will inspire someone to find a way to profit from breading them. There is one for the occupy crowd.


there will always be poor
there will always be hard workers
there will always be someone that thinks they know better
 

DeletedUser

It's refreshing to see someone who is so comfortable with his gross ignorance.
 

DeletedUser

The schools and colleges are flooded intellectuals that are teaching less and want more $$.. Are they are spewing out is socialist garbage instead of good, productive reading writing and math skills.
Your short post, even on the most generous count, contains at least 2 errors of punctuation, 2 of grammar and 1 spelling mistake, so I assume you are speaking from experience.
I am not interested in in political correctness, not hurting the feelings of the tree huggers, nor do I wish to save a species of animal that nature has selected for extinction. If they want to save flipper, then eat him! It will inspire someone to find a way to profit from breading them.
The huge value of ivory or rhino horn has not aided the survivability of elephants or rhinos; nor did its economic importance save the Great Auk. Please think before you post.
there will always be someone that thinks they know better
Indeed there will, sir. Indeed there will. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

And, PS.......
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
Without his 10 best customers the restauranteur went bust, and since the rich man's business consisted of running a food-delivery company he also went bust without the restaurant's custom. In the end, everyone lost their jobs because of his obsessive greed, even when he already had enough.
These corny anecdotes mean nothing, or whatever you want them to mean.
 

DeletedUser

That is so typical... and one more reason why liberal/ socialists cant hold a candle to conservative principals. The truth is hard to debate so why not just call them ignorant and gloat at their intellect
 

DeletedUser

Trying to keep myself our of this, but it is interesting to see someone who is so firmly in conflict with common sense...
 

DeletedUser

That is so typical... and one more reason why liberal/ socialists cant hold a candle to conservative principals. The truth is hard to debate so why not just call them ignorant and gloat at their intellect
Don't you mean "principles"?
*gloat, gloat*:)
 
Top