where are you on the hierarchy? (Prosper, Clint: renting, loan, unemployed)

[rb4browns]

Originally Posted by houston-nomad

I think you may have misunderstood the Occupy movement. The point is not that they want handouts. Many of these people have jobs; some don't. But they recognize that individuals of normal means are being disenfranchised, because of the influence of the wealthy (and corporations) on the political process.

So why are unions being welcomed at these occupy protests when big labor throws hundreds of millions of dollars at elected officials and their campaigns? How about the Hollywood stars who have access to the President and other pols that average people don't have? Or Michael Moore, who is worth $50 million yet shows up at occupy wall street and claims he is not part of the "1%"? I only see the dirty hippies wallowing in their own filth crying about Republicans.

These occupy protests are sort of like Obama's 2008 campaign. Everyone supporting them (or Obama) sees/saw what they wanted to see instead of reality.

And can we dispense with the fiction already that "individuals of normal means" are being disenfranchised? Both moveon.org and Ron Paul's "moneybombs" have proven that ordinary individuals with modest amounts of money have the ability to influence elected officials with their money.

[testmo]

So if ordinary individuals with modest amounts of money, your words, are able to influence politicians that must mean Obama stands for the real American? you should do one of his commercials. look at the amount of money he has raised from regular families (not unions, businesses, lobbies etc)

but no he is only influenced by unions... that makes sense. what other entities donate ridiculous amounts of money to campaigns. what can we say about them?


calling people "dirty wallowing hippies" does not a rational/intellectual debate make

[chris_ut]

Originally Posted by RCH99

It's confusing, but this explains what it's about.


Haftin' To Be Uproared - Occupy Atlanta - YouTube

[chris_ut]

Originally Posted by rb4browns

Can you cite this claim? Your logic seems faulty, in that better to have the cash in the united states with 5% taken off then a 35% rate on nothing, since the government has created an incentive for the money to be sheltered off shore.

Study is referenced here: US firms cut thousands of jobs during last tax holiday, study reveals | World news | guardian.co.uk . It would be better to have the money here but by giving the holidays you incentivize the companies to keep stashing it overseas waiting for the next holiday and effectively move the tax burden to companies who do not have the global presence to pull this kind of thing off.

[travelguy_73]

Eugene Isenberg Of Nabors Industries To Net $100 Million For Dropping CEO Duties

CEO pay has gotten so huge that at most firms it's larger than what they pay in taxes, according to a study by the Institute of Policy Studies cited by the Washington Post. A quarter of the highest paid executives earned more than their company's tax expense in 2010, the study finds.

[rb4browns]

Originally Posted by chris_ut

Study is referenced here: US firms cut thousands of jobs during last tax holiday, study reveals | World news | guardian.co.uk . It would be better to have the money here but by giving the holidays you incentivize the companies to keep stashing it overseas waiting for the next holiday and effectively move the tax burden to companies who do not have the global presence to pull this kind of thing off.

The problem is in the concept of a "tax holiday." Temporary tax cuts do not change behavior. How about the rate just be cut to 5% period, which nullifies the lure of a foreign countries low rates and keeps the cash on our shores.

[rb4browns]

Originally Posted by testmo

So if ordinary individuals with modest amounts of money, your words, are able to influence politicians that must mean Obama stands for the real American? you should do one of his commercials. look at the amount of money he has raised from regular families (not unions, businesses, lobbies etc)

but no he is only influenced by unions... that makes sense. what other entities donate ridiculous amounts of money to campaigns. what can we say about them?


calling people "dirty wallowing hippies" does not a rational/intellectual debate make

Actually, they are not my words, they are houston-nomads. And you seem to be missing my point I think. Why are not all wealthy entities which influence government with their money being called out? Again, if these occupy movements are about protesting money in politics, why is Big Labor (Unions) being welcomed and why is Big Entertainment (Hollywood) not being castigated?

And if you don't believe my description of the protesters as dirty, smelly hippies wallowing in their own filth is rational or intellectual, please take a look at the pics in the link below and tell me what you see.

Zombie » Is Occupy Oakland as Bad as They Say?

[houston-nomad]

Originally Posted by rb4browns

Actually, they are not my words, they are houston-nomads. And you seem to be missing my point I think. Why are not all wealthy entities which influence government with their money being called out? Again, if these occupy movements are about protesting money in politics, why is Big Labor (Unions) being welcomed and why is Big Entertainment (Hollywood) not being castigated?

And if you don't believe my description of the protesters as dirty, smelly hippies wallowing in their own filth is rational or intellectual, please take a look at the pics in the link below and tell me what you see.

Zombie » Is Occupy Oakland as Bad as They Say?

Michael Moore, unions, Hollywood, etc. do influence politics. But apparently it's NOTHING compared to Wall Street. See events of the past 4 years for examples. Apples and oranges.

Plus, the other point remains: the banks got us into this mess, and instead of fixing it, they are hoarding their money, refusing loans, and demanding an end to the regulations put in place to protect us from future disasters. Huh?? But sure, blame dirty wallowing hippies. Surely they caused the current economic crisis. Or better yet, blame immigrants. Or teachers. Choose your favorite scapegoat, throw in some insults or ethnic slurs, and feel better about yourself.

[rb4browns]

Originally Posted by houston-nomad

Michael Moore, unions, Hollywood, etc. do influence politics. But apparently it's NOTHING compared to Wall Street. See events of the past 4 years for examples. Apples and oranges.

Plus, the other point remains: the banks got us into this mess, and instead of fixing it, they are hoarding their money, refusing loans, and demanding an end to the regulations put in place to protect us from future disasters. Huh?? But sure, blame dirty wallowing hippies. Surely they caused the current economic crisis. Or better yet, blame immigrants. Or teachers. Choose your favorite scapegoat, throw in some insults or ethnic slurs, and feel better about yourself.

You may be right, Goldman Sachs donated four times as much money to our current president as they did the Republican candidate. Apples and more apples. But that's not the point. If this movement is about protesting Big Money in politics, than be about that and not select one slice of the contribution pie.

I would blame the Jews like a lot of these protesters are doing, they are the world's traditional scapegoat. But since I'm Jewish I guess that wouldn't make much sense.

And as far as the banks, the causes of our mess was many, but one of the main causes was undue political pressure exerted through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make loans to unqualified people in the name of "diversity" led to this mess. Home ownership somehow became a "right" and people received loans with lousy credit at over %100 of the home's value.

And if you question whether these people are dirty hippies wallowing in filth, what else would you call the folks in these photos?

Zombie » Is Occupy Oakland as Bad as They Say?

[SugarLandMomGCUSA]

Great thread. I'm somewhere in the top 10%...
As a small business owner, I am appalled by the actions of bigger business. YOU are only as GOOD as your employees THINK YOU ARE. Why can't they GET THAT? If your employees HATE YOU... guess what? The businesses that interact with you, the customers who took a chance on you, and the public are going to think you are *what you ARE*... NOT what you SAY you are! DUH!