Support NeoGAF

[timetokill]

Ah ha! Damn Firefox dictionary didn't pick up my bad...uh...italian?

Sorry, not to distract from your point -- I thought it was a good post. But that bit had me laughing

 

[Timedog]

Yeah Deku is really airballing this one. I'm disappointed.

I disagree with him most of the time, but he's usually not terrible.

 

[akira28]

Did you mean: gazpacho

Yes. That's what he meant.


Deku is talking about this person's blog: http://actuallyyourethe47percent.tumblr.com/

This is the 'hipster' that he refers to. Because having a blog is a hipster thing.

 

[AstroLad]

Yes. That's what he meant.


Deku is talking about this person's blog: http://actuallyyourethe47percent.tumblr.com/

This is the 'hipster' that he refers to. Because having a blog is a hipster thing.

that drawing on there (i know it was posted earlier) is like some awesome spin-off of Lucky Ducky in terms of the brazenly stupid assumptions underlying it. i know it's been mocked relentlessly, but man....

 

[Karma Kramer]

the fact deku resorts to character assassination that has zero implication on a person's actual character shows his irrational bias that contributes to his opposition to OWS.

 

[Something Wicked]

Well, selling mortgage backed securities filled with a bunch of shit, and then betting against that shit-filled mortgage backed security sure sounds like fraud to me.

But it was not illegal and is still not illegal. Being "illegal" is breaking a very specific law. Show me the specific laws such actual people (name names) broke. Until then, do not use the term "illegal."

Also, in reality, the real shit were the initial mortgages themselves. If such shitty mortgages were never given out or accepted in the first place, a real-estate bubble (of the same degree) and ensuing recession would not have happened. However, most of the lending of such mortgages were not "illegal" either- in fact, they were highly encouraged by many members of government, in which some encouraged much more than others as well.

 

[empty vessel]

Simply yelling "higher taxes" isn't a helpful solution. Intelligent solutions specify which taxes, and which rates for which brackets.

Are you sure? Because simply yelling "lower taxes" worked out really fucking well for the highest income earning Americans. So well, in fact, that the reduction in taxes they enjoyed as a result of yelling "lower taxes" over the last 30 years is one of the main contributors to increasing their share of the country's total income at the expense of the rest of us.

Are you sure your objection is only to specification of which income tax brackets tax raises are sought for? Because that really doesn't strike me as like you. (If you want a hint at what the movement might be after in terms of specifics, consider that it is explicitly targeting the top 1% of income earners.)

 

[ronito]

But it was not illegal and is still not illegal. Being "illegal" is breaking a very specific law. Show me the specific laws such actual people (name names) broke. Until then, do not use the term "illegal."

Also, in reality, the real shit were the initial mortgages themselves. If such shitty mortgages were never given out or accepted in the first place, a real-estate bubble (of the same degree) and ensuing recession would not have happened. However, most of the lending of such mortgages were not "illegal" either- in fact, they were highly encouraged by many members of government, in which some encouraged much more than others as well.

Yeah and a lot of what the ruling french did wasn't technically "illegal" either. Didn't help them much when the mob caught up to them. Again this is a protest. Not a courtroom.

 

[Loki]

But it was not illegal and is still not illegal. Being "illegal" is breaking a very specific law. Show me the specific laws such actual people (name names) broke. Until then, do not use the term "illegal."

More proof that the rules governing the markets need to be prescriptive rather than proscriptive. Tell these greedy fucks what they CAN do, and anything that falls outside those bounds is necessarily illegal. Tell them what they CAN'T do and they'll just devise new ways of playing their game, like creating more exotic financial instruments.

 

[Something Wicked]

Yeah and a lot of what the ruling french did wasn't technically "illegal" either. Didn't help them much when the mob caught up to them. Again this is a protest. Not a courtroom.

And the ruling French class did not have machine guns, M1 Abrams, F-22s, VX gas, and thousands of nuclear warheads. I don't expect the US Proletariat to win any "revolutions" by force anytime soon, as especially when the half of Proletariat that actually has guns will likely not side with the other half. Now, if you accept that the system will essentially never dramatically change, you can calmly join the table and the discussion in how we can tweak the system to aid in one's personal goals in a reasonable and specific manner.

 

[ronito]

And the ruling French class did not have machine guns, M1 Abrams, F-22s, VX gas, and thousands of nuclear warheads. I don't expect the US Proletariat to win any "revolutions" by force anytime soon, as especially when the half of Proletariat that actually has guns will likely not side with the other half. Now, if you accept that the system will essentially never dramatically change, you can calmly join the table and the discussion in how we can tweak the system to aid in one's personal goals in a reasonable and specific manner.

You don't make friends with M1 Abrams.

 

[Piecake]

But it was not illegal and is still not illegal. Being "illegal" is breaking a very specific law. Show me the specific laws such actual people (name names) broke. Until then, do not use the term "illegal."

Also, in reality, the real shit were the initial mortgages themselves. If such shitty mortgages were never given out or accepted in the first place, a real-estate bubble (of the same degree) and ensuing recession would not have happened. However, most of the lending of such mortgages were not "illegal" either- in fact, they were highly encouraged by many members of government, in which some encouraged much more than others as well.

Thats why I said that the securities were filled with shit, since the filling is the initial mortgages. The mortgages were given out because it made the mortgage company and investment bankers like Goldman Sachs a shit ton of money. They are linked. You can't just say that oh, if the mortgages were never given out, then it would not have happened. Banks like Goldman Sachs created the HUGE demand for those subprime mortgages and mortgage companies were all to happy to comply since it made them a ton of cash as well

And hey, people are stupid and gullible, and believed that housing prices would always go up, and a bank wouldnt give them a loan that they couldnt afford, because well, that would be just silly.

 

[Something Wicked]

You don't make friends with M1 Abrams.

Who needs friends when you have 67 tons of steel equipped with a 105 mm L52 M68 rifled cannon and a .50 cal M2HB machine gun?

 

[akira28]

Who needs friends when you have 67 tons of steel equipped with a 105 mm L52 M68 rifled cannon and a .50 cal M2HB machine gun?

You really think freedom rings? Doesn't sound like it Mr Tienanmen Square.

 

[Joe]

PersonA hates seeing PersonB talk about politics because PersonA thinks that PersonB knows what he/she is talking about but really has no clue.

is there a word for PersonA?

I think that is the source of energy for the naysayers and 53%'ers. It is akin to when Obama was running for president and the huge amount of support he garnered from the youth. Lots of people that are completely indifferent to politics and know nothing of any policy mocked and belittled Obama supporters in the same way.

 

[jamesinclair]

Heres what I dont get:

Protesters: We want jobs!
Online comments: These idiot protesters should get a job!


It's like....wait, what?

 

[lednerg]

Occupy Trenton (New Jersey) has been on the ground just across the street from the New Jersey State House (Gov. Chris Christie's office) 24 hours a day since October 5th, LiveSteaming all day and night.

http://occupynewjersey.org/
http://facebook.com/occupynj
http://livestream.com/occupynj_statehouse/

Videos:
Alexander Higgins Speech On Why #OccupyTrenton Was Launched As Part Of #OccupyWallStreet
Edward Anthony, one of the original Occupiers in Trenton

I've been there myself, sorry no photos or anything. Still, I can attest to not only their solidarity with OWS, but just how seriously they are taking this. They are not just trading conspiracy stories with each other and having a good ol' time, nor are they being obnoxious with the police or anything else like that. They are a small group, without many of the creature comforts found in the Occupations in larger cities.

The latest update from the ground is that they've been sleeping on concrete in the rain for the past couple nights, and the State Troopers just had them remove their free-standing structure which was protecting their gear from the rain.

BTW - Don't confuse them with this fake, personal facebook page purporting to be "Occupy New Jersey", which has been soaking up all the "Likes" the actual ground crew has been more than entitled to. The owner of that page has decided on his own to block all communication from the group on the ground in Trenton to the 3600+ people who actually do like them.

 

[kame-sennin]

- Kurt Vonnegut

posting one more time for good measure lol...

Racism is a huge factor in this:

Though this critique is not solely aimed at persons of color, there is little doubt but that the history of growing opposition to social safety net efforts — which were wildly popular among most whites from the 1930s through most of the 1960s — mirrors, almost perfectly, the time period during which black and brown folks began to gain access, for the first time, to such programs. While blacks, for instance, were largely excluded from Social Security for the first twenty years of its existence, and while very few people of color could access cash benefits until the 1960s, by the 1970s, the rolls of such programs had been opened up, and the public perception was increasingly that those people were the ones using (and abusing) the programs. So in large part, the critique of “entitlement” has been bound up with a racialized narrative of the deserving and undeserving, which can be seen, in many ways, as a racist meme.

It goes on to poke holes in the mentality that the 53 percenters seem to hold:

So, for instance, those with money have benefitted directly from substantial public investment in schools (either for themselves or their employees), roads, technology and communication infrastructures that have been publicly subsidized, as well as fiscal and monetary policy aimed at making capital available to businesses. We make choices as a society, through instruments like the Federal Reserve, to either tighten or loosen the reins of credit — either of which decision can have a huge impact on whether or not you can hire new people, build a new plant, or expand your business — as well as what types of things to subsidize via the tax code (investment, home ownership, hiring, advertising, etc.), all of which can be made more or less costly due to the existence and size of various tax credits for each.

In other words, the wealth of individuals is only partly about their own hard work; more so, it is the result of the cumulative decisions made by lots of people. So if I have a successful business that relies on technologies and knowledge generated by others before me, I am not really “self made,” in that I am, to a large extent, “free riding” on the labor of others. Likewise, without the labor of my employees (without whom my “good idea” would mean nothing), I would be devoid of wealth or status too. And without public roads, rail lines, and subsidized air transport, there is very little that even the most ingenious entrepreneur could accomplish on their own.

Then of course, there is the little matter of intergenerational inheritance. Although we like to deny it, the fact remains, a large amount of wealth and status held by those at the top, and their high incomes as well, are the result of having started out with advantages relative to others. They are not things they “earned” under any rational definition of the term.

According to the available research, if your father’s wages rank in the top fifth of all income earners in the country, you’ll have nearly a 60 percent chance of surpassing your dad’s status over time. On the other hand, if your father’s earnings fall in the bottom fifth, the odds that you’ll do better than him one day plummet to less than 5 percent. And not only is mobility itself limited, it appears to be diminishing relative to previous generations. As a recent study for the Boston Federal Reserve Bank discovered, among the nation’s poorest families, the percentage that were able to climb simply to the next quintile (still far from well-off), fell from over half in the 1968-78 period, to only 46 percent in the period from 1993-2003. Additionally, the study found that poor families are 10 times more likely to remain poor than to move into the highest income quintile, while those who started out rich are 5 times more likely to remain there, as to fall into either of the lower two quintiles of earners.

We should be asking ourselves, our children, and our politicians why the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans now owns roughly half of the financial wealth of the nation, whereas in the 1970s they owned “only” 26 percent of it. Did the wealthiest 3 million or so people double their work effort? Do they not sleep any more, so busy are they creating jobs and the other wonders of the modern society? Or is it because of tax policy, fiscal policy, monetary policies, and trade policy that favored these few at the expense of the others? And if the answer is the latter (and it is), then what are we going to do about it? Not so as to “punish” high achievers, but so as to create a society in which high achievement is more broadly spread throughout the society, where people can live up to their true potential, and where reward will follow actual effort, not ascriptive characteristics like who your family was, what connections you have, and whether or not you lived in the “right” neighborhood.

http://www.timwise.org/2011/09/getting-what-we-deserve-wealth-race-and-entitlement-in-america/

The rest of the article is great, as is usually the case with Time Wise.

 

[Slavik81]

But it was not illegal and is still not illegal. Being "illegal" is breaking a very specific law. Show me the specific laws such actual people (name names) broke. Until then, do not use the term "illegal."

Also, in reality, the real shit were the initial mortgages themselves. If such shitty mortgages were never given out or accepted in the first place, a real-estate bubble (of the same degree) and ensuing recession would not have happened. However, most of the lending of such mortgages were not "illegal" either- in fact, they were highly encouraged by many members of government, in which some encouraged much more than others as well.

That isn't even the fundamental problem. The real issue was that the risk was miscalculated. The math is a little complicated, but long story short, somebody made some bad assumptions. If the real risk had been properly understood, they could have been priced accordingly. At that higher price, fewer would have been sold, and thus fewer iffy mortgages would have been granted.

On top of that technical problem, there was a process issue that failed to catch it until it was way too late. And further process problems that allowed a the damage to spread. Of those, the most important problem to solve is the one that allowed the mistake to go unchallenged before the product it was applied to became so popular.

 

[Jenga]

opie and anthony go and visit an occupy movement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQlYC8Yjirc&feature=player_embedded

the asian dudes and the "normal" dude at the end are the type of people the movement really needs more of

oh and more bear girls


god you guys need more bear girls

 

[HurricaneJesus]

There is an occupation starting this Saturday in Vancouver in the downtown at the art gallery. I am going to spend Saturday there to see what it is all about, and to show support for OWS. Can't find any Guy Fawkes masks, so I am making some out of origami for the occasion. Will let you all know how it goes.

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

There is an occupation starting this Saturday in Vancouver in the downtown at the art gallery. I am going to spend Saturday there to see what it is all about, and to show support for OWS. Can't find any Guy Fawkes masks, so I am making some out of origami for the occasion. Will let you all know how it goes.

Please don't wear the Guy Fawkes mask or any imitation of it. Some douche was wearing one at the occupy I was at on Wednesday and all I could do was shake my head. He almost didn't get a free water from me, almost.

 

[Slavik81]

There is an occupation starting this Saturday in Vancouver in the downtown at the art gallery. I am going to spend Saturday there to see what it is all about, and to show support for OWS. Can't find any Guy Fawkes masks, so I am making some out of origami for the occasion. Will let you all know how it goes.

You're going to go protest while you figure out why you're protesting?

 

[akira28]

Truly, can you tell us why you feel the need to invoke Guy Fawkes?

 

[alstein]

I knew eventually as this keeps going on stuff like this will happen due to the makeup of the protestors

All I can say is, a lot of military folks , at least on the enlisted side, have mega support for the OWS folks. If I was there, I'd probably throw out/beat up/get my ass kicking trying to beat up the guy doing that.

The military aren't our enemies. The enlisted often enlist because they're part of the 99 and have to. The officers are a bit of a different story, but many of them are good people also.

(That's not me hating on officers, but there is a group of religious fundy corporate elitist officers out there , especially in the general ranks)

 

[Evlar]

Bloomberg has postponed the "cleanup" of Zuccotti Park, by the bye. Might have had something to do with AFL-CIO telling their members to show up at the park this morning to support the protesters.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...olice-averted/2011/10/14/gIQAHXUXjL_blog.html

 

[eznark]

There is an occupation starting this Saturday in Vancouver in the downtown at the art gallery. I am going to spend Saturday there to see what it is all about, and to show support for OWS. Can't find any Guy Fawkes masks, so I am making some out of origami for the occasion. Will let you all know how it goes.

I like that you're supporting it before knowing what it's about. Shows a real herd mentality. Stick with the pack son.

 

[RJT]

@sparker Sean Parker
do we really believe that #OWS is anything other than an excuse for bored (possibly unemployed) people to have a great big party?

@sparker Sean Parker
ok ok, the #OWS remark was a joke, sort of...it's true that most protesters don't know why they're there and they are having a good time

 

[eznark]

Perfect.

http://pajamasmedia.com/eddriscoll/...oment-and-a-movement-come-together-like-this/

 

[planar1280]

As always Calvin delivers

 

[ronito]

Who needs friends when you have 67 tons of steel equipped with a 105 mm L52 M68 rifled cannon and a .50 cal M2HB machine gun?

Well if you want a functioning country and to keep your favorable status amongst your allies, you do need friends.

 

[Guileless]

Well, selling mortgage backed securities filled with a bunch of shit, and then betting against that shit-filled mortgage backed security sure sounds like fraud to me.

It sounds like fraud. But that is a very long way from proving in court that someone broke a specific law beyond a reasonable doubt. If it were possible, an ambitious prosecutor who wants to run for high office would do it because that would make her extremely popular and famous.

 

[Barrett2]

Also, in reality, the real shit were the initial mortgages themselves. If such shitty mortgages were never given out or accepted in the first place, a real-estate bubble (of the same degree) and ensuing recession would not have happened. However, most of the lending of such mortgages were not "illegal" either- in fact, they were highly encouraged by many members of government, in which some encouraged much more than others as well.

This is missing the point. Giving a mortgage to someone with bad credit is still a known variable, the banks knew exactly what they were doing giving mortgages to people with shit credit. Even if some of the mortgages had gov backing, so what, that's not what crashed the economy. What crashed the economy was taking these loans, bundling them into securities in a way that intentionally hid the risk, then trading a security on the open market with unknown risk, and leveraging it 60x face value. The mere weakening of the mortgage market was itself tiny compared to the money lost by bundling them into securities with unknown risk and betting upwards of 60x face value against them.

 

[bjb]

@sparker Sean Parker
do we really believe that #OWS is anything other than an excuse for bored (possibly unemployed) people to have a great big party?

@sparker Sean Parker
ok ok, the #OWS remark was a joke, sort of...it's true that most protesters don't know why they're there and they are having a good time

I thought the movement was legit. For awhile. Then when the talk started of protesting on rich people's homes / lawn - just completely killed it.

 

[bjb]

I knew eventually as this keeps going on stuff like this will happen due to the makeup of the protestors

You get enough jobless people in one setting there's bound to be some unstable assholes.

 

[Tawpgun]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCRnkamitVk&feature=player_embedded

Friend posted this on his wall. I liked.

 

[empty vessel]

That isn't even the fundamental problem. The real issue was that the risk was miscalculated. The math is a little complicated, but long story short, somebody made some bad assumptions. If the real risk had been properly understood, they could have been priced accordingly. At that higher price, fewer would have been sold, and thus fewer iffy mortgages would have been granted.

Risk was "miscalculated"? Somebody made some bad assumptions? Junk was rated AAA. A metric shit ton of junk was rated AAA. Ratings agencies were paid to rate junk as AAA. According to the Senate subcommittee:

1. Inaccurate Rating Models. From 2004 to 2007, Moody’s and S&P used credit rating models with data that was inadequate to predict how high risk residential mortgages, such as subprime, interest only, and option adjustable rate mortgages, would perform.

2. Competitive Pressures. Competitive pressures, including the drive for market share and need to accommodate investment bankers bringing in business, affected the credit ratings issued by Moody’s and S&P.

3. Failure to Re-evaluate. By 2006, Moody’s and S&P knew their ratings of RMBS and CDOs were inaccurate, revised their rating models to produce more accurate ratings, but then failed to use the revised model to re-evaluate existing RMBS and CDO securities, delaying thousands of rating downgrades and allowing those securities to carry inflated ratings that could mislead investors.

4. Failure to Factor in Fraud, Laxity, or Housing Bubble. From 2004 to 2007, Moody’s and S&P knew of increased credit risks due to mortgage fraud, lax underwriting standards, and unsustainable housing price appreciation, but failed adequately to incorporate those factors into their credit rating models.

5. Inadequate Resources. Despite record profits from 2004 to 2007, Moody’s and S&P failed to assign sufficient resources to adequately rate new products and test the accuracy of existing ratings.

6. Mass Downgrades Shocked Market. Mass downgrades by Moody’s and S&P, including downgrades of hundreds of subprime RMBS over a few days in July 2007, downgrades by Moody’s of CDOs in October 2007, and actions taken (including downgrading and placing securities on credit watch with negative implications) by S&P on over 6,300 RMBS and 1,900 CDOs on one day in January 2008, shocked the financial markets, helped cause the collapse of the subprime secondary market, triggered sales of assets that had lost investment grade status, and damaged holdings of financial firms worldwide, contributing to the financial crisis.

7. Failed Ratings. Moody’s and S&P each rated more than 10,000 RMBS securities from 2006 to 2007, downgraded a substantial number within a year, and, by 2010, had downgraded many AAA ratings to junk status.

8. Statutory Bar. The SEC is barred by statute from conducting needed oversight into the substance, procedures, and methodologies of the credit rating models.

9. Legal Pressure for AAA Ratings. Legal requirements that some regulated entities, such as banks, broker-dealers, insurance companies, pension funds, and others, hold assets with AAA or investment grade credit ratings, created pressure on credit rating agencies to issue inflated ratings making assets eligible for purchase by those entities.

http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/Financial_Crisis/FinancialCrisisReport.pdf (PDF)

All of this is a polite way of saying organized fraud and collusion (as between financial institutions and credit ratings agencies and even including the government--see #8). The credit ratings agencies were not selling the service of risk assessment. They were selling AAA ratings. Why? Because it was much more lucrative to sell AAA ratings than to sell a credible risk assessment service. And if you think the entities seeking these ratings also did not understand that they were buying AAA ratings instead of buying the service of risk assessment, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Unrelated: The man who blocked John Lewis speaks.

 

[RSTEIN]

Are you sure? Because simply yelling "lower taxes" worked out really fucking well for the highest income earning Americans. So well, in fact, that the reduction in taxes they enjoyed as a result of yelling "lower taxes" over the last 30 years is one of the main contributors to increasing their share of the country's total income at the expense of the rest of us.

Because I'm a high income earner I pay nearly 50% in taxes (in Canada). A median income earner pays roughly 30-35%. Let's say a my pre-tax income is around $300k. After paying 50% tax, my after tax salary is 150k. The median income earner who makes 50k takes home around $35k after paying his or her 30% in taxes. So it doesn't matter. The 1%'s wealth will always grow faster than the 99%'s wealth. Even if you tax my income at 80% (!!) my after tax income is $60,000, still nearly double the median income earner's after-tax income. No matter what the tax rate is--50%, 60%, even 80%--the 99%'s wealth will still slow at a snail's pace when compared to the 1%'s wealth. Taxes just govern the pace at which the gap grows.

So you can tax me all you want. If I'm in the top 1% or better yet the top 0.50%, then my millions and millions still stay my millions and millions while the 99% continues to struggle.

The key question is: what do we do with the increased tax collection. And I haven't heard any new or innovative ideas from the Occupy movement.

 

[alstein]

Because I'm a high income earner I pay nearly 50% in taxes (in Canada). A median income earner pays roughly 30-35%. Let's say a my pre-tax income is around $300k. After paying 50% tax, my after tax salary is 150k. The median income earner who makes 50k takes home around $35k after paying his or her 30% in taxes. So it doesn't matter. The 1%'s wealth will always grow faster than the 99%'s wealth. Even if you tax my income at 80% (!!) my after tax income is $60,000, still nearly double the median income earner's after-tax income. No matter what the tax rate is--50%, 60%, even 80%--the 99%'s wealth will still slow at a snail's pace when compared to the 1%'s wealth. Taxes just govern the pace at which the gap grows.

So you can tax me all you want. If I'm in the top 1% or better yet the top 0.50%, then my millions and millions still stay my millions and millions while the 99% continues to struggle.

The key question is: what do we do with the increased tax collection. And I haven't heard any new or innovative ideas from the Occupy movement.

One solution: pay down the deficit a bit. You don't need any better ideas as long as you have that.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Because I'm a high income earner I pay nearly 50% in taxes (in Canada). A median income earner pays roughly 30-35%. Let's say a my pre-tax income is around $300k. After paying 50% tax, my after tax salary is 150k. The median income earner who makes 50k takes home around $35k after paying his or her 30% in taxes. So it doesn't matter. The 1%'s wealth will always grow faster than the 99%'s wealth. Even if you tax my income at 80% (!!) my after tax income is $60,000, still nearly double the median income earner's after-tax income. No matter what the tax rate is--50%, 60%, even 80%--the 99%'s wealth will still slow at a snail's pace when compared to the 1%'s wealth. Taxes just govern the pace at which the gap grows.

So you can tax me all you want. If I'm in the top 1% or better yet the top 0.50%, then my millions and millions still stay my millions and millions while the 99% continues to struggle.

The key question is: what do we do with the increased tax collection. And I haven't heard any new or innovative ideas from the Occupy movement.

here's mine; infrastructure investment, public transportation, AFFORDABLE schooling, complte revamp of the public education system, the list goes on but these are absolutely fundamental. Oh some decent healthcare ALA Germany (mix of private and public)




hey @emptyvessel what do you think about fractional reserve banking as the primary means of perpetuating wealth inequality? this was told to me and i was wondering your opinion on it

 

[Divvy]

Because I'm a high income earner I pay nearly 50% in taxes (in Canada). A median income earner pays roughly 30-35%. Let's say a my pre-tax income is around $300k. After paying 50% tax, my after tax salary is 150k. The median income earner who makes 50k takes home around $35k after paying his or her 30% in taxes. So it doesn't matter. The 1%'s wealth will always grow faster than the 99%'s wealth. Even if you tax my income at 80% (!!) my after tax income is $60,000, still nearly double the median income earner's after-tax income. No matter what the tax rate is--50%, 60%, even 80%--the 99%'s wealth will still slow at a snail's pace when compared to the 1%'s wealth. Taxes just govern the pace at which the gap grows.

So you can tax me all you want. If I'm in the top 1% or better yet the top 0.50%, then my millions and millions still stay my millions and millions while the 99% continues to struggle.

The key question is: what do we do with the increased tax collection. And I haven't heard any new or innovative ideas from the Occupy movement.

What the hell. The US debt is nearing 15 trillion, went through that idiotic debt crisis, and you don't think there are any ideas on what to do with the money?

Even here in Canada, our debt is 570 billion.

 

[bjb]

Unrelated: The man who blocked John Lewis speaks.

Forgive me as I'm not familiar with general assembly's, but what is the logic behind repeating everything that's been said over and over again?

 

[UltimaPooh]

hey @emptyvessel what do you think about fractional reserve banking as the primary means of perpetuating wealth inequality? this was told to me and i was wondering your opinion on it

Obviously no emptyvessel here but I think it's fine as a business practice it just needs to be regulated at 50% or something instead of the 10% it currently is.

 

[ronito]

Because I'm a high income earner I pay nearly 50% in taxes (in Canada). A median income earner pays roughly 30-35%. Let's say a my pre-tax income is around $300k. After paying 50% tax, my after tax salary is 150k. The median income earner who makes 50k takes home around $35k after paying his or her 30% in taxes. So it doesn't matter. The 1%'s wealth will always grow faster than the 99%'s wealth. Even if you tax my income at 80% (!!) my after tax income is $60,000, still nearly double the median income earner's after-tax income. No matter what the tax rate is--50%, 60%, even 80%--the 99%'s wealth will still slow at a snail's pace when compared to the 1%'s wealth. Taxes just govern the pace at which the gap grows.

So you can tax me all you want. If I'm in the top 1% or better yet the top 0.50%, then my millions and millions still stay my millions and millions while the 99% continues to struggle.

The key question is: what do we do with the increased tax collection. And I haven't heard any new or innovative ideas from the Occupy movement.

And for your 50% you get healthcare. That's one idea. Or hey, there's the deficit hanging around too. Or hey, let's put it back into education. Or hey, what about infrastructure? Or hey...

 

[Vicetrailia]

So what exactly is the 53%?

 

[RSTEIN]

What the hell. The US debt is nearing 15 trillion, went through that idiotic debt crisis, and you don't think there are any ideas on what to do with the money?

Even here in Canada, our debt is 570 billion.

Paying down the debt is not an idea specific to the Occupy movement. I don't think you're seeing thousands and thousands take to the streets because they want the debt paid down.

 

[UltimaPooh]

So what exactly is the 53%?

The 53% who pay income taxes.

And for your 50% you get healthcare. That's one idea. Or hey, there's the deficit hanging around too. Or hey, let's put it back into education. Or hey, what about infrastructure? Or hey...

Not to mention he's not actually getting taxed 50% in a progressive tax system.

 

[richiek]

Forgive me as I'm not familiar with general assembly's, but what is the logic behind repeating everything that's been said over and over again?

Supposedly, the cops won't allow the protesters to have mics or megaphones, so this is low tech way of having people be heard.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I remember reading a report a few years ago that Canada's 1% actually pays less (as a percentage) than their lower income groups.

Found it: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/commentary/putting-fairness-back-canada’s-tax-system

 

[M3Freak]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCRnkamitVk&feature=player_embedded

Friend posted this on his wall. I liked.

Fucking amazing.