Am I the only one who doesn't get the "Occupy Wallstreet" movements

[Geoff_M]

But they still pay payroll taxes and sales taxes and car registration taxes and....

Make sure you back government transfer payments and refundable tax credits out of that equation.

 

[JDUCKY]

Make sure you back government transfer payments and refundable tax credits out of that equation.

which certainly do help someone making about $20k-30k/year but only after they file their taxes. Doesn't help them pay the monthly expenses.

seriously...I wonder why certain mindsets are so condescending toward people that don't make a lot of money. I'm quite certain radio talking heads and TV pundits have a lot to do with it, esp. in the spreading of stereotypes re: those who do receive welfare. I mean, after all, life is just GRAND living on $20k-30k per year! Esp. when someone loses a good job and can't get a new one making the same money or had a medical setback or permanent condition affect their earning ability.

I mean, to be sitting back and letting the checks roll in while lounging about in a massive 750 sq. ft. apartment on the "wrong side of the tracks". Oh, I dream of such a life!

But yet those same mindsets don't bat an eye when some billionaire pays no taxes or a global corporation pays no taxes or some exec of a failing company walks away with millions in severance, to the detriment of the company's bond and stockholders or some white-collar criminal gets a slap-on-the-wrist fine and no jail time for embezzling millions (will be interesting to see what happens to Corzine and his MF Global activities).

 

[Geoff_M]

seriously...I wonder why certain mindsets are so condescending toward people that don't make a lot of money.

I'm not... but moburg was expressly talking about income taxes. If you want to move the goalposts then let's move them.

But yet those same mindsets don't bat an eye when some billionaire pays no taxes or a global corporation pays no taxes or some exec of a failing company walks away with millions in severance, to the detriment of the company's bond and stockholders or some white-collar criminal gets a slap-on-the-wrist fine and no jail time for embezzling millions.

Can you please name some American billionaires that pay "no taxes"? Here's another problem I have... The "Occupy Parks (and occasionally cause small riots)" supporters do have some legitimate beefs, and I think even most of the movement's critics will agree with that statement. But it's hard to have a meaningful discussion about those concerns because so often they are then wrapped in layers of hyperbole, outright falsehoods, misinterpretations, or overlooking certain other facts. These threads are chock full of such examples.

 

[moburg]

which certainly do help someone making about $20k-30k/year but only after they file their taxes. Doesn't help them pay the monthly expenses.

seriously...I wonder why certain mindsets are so condescending toward people that don't make a lot of money. I'm quite certain radio talking heads and TV pundits have a lot to do with it, esp. in the spreading of stereotypes re: those who do receive welfare. I mean, after all, life is just GRAND living on $20k-30k per year! Esp. when someone loses a good job and can't get a new one making the same money or had a medical setback or permanent condition affect their earning ability.

I mean, to be sitting back and letting the checks roll in while lounging about in a massive 750 sq. ft. apartment on the "wrong side of the tracks". Oh, I dream of such a life!

But yet those same mindsets don't bat an eye when some billionaire pays no taxes or a global corporation pays no taxes or some exec of a failing company walks away with millions in severance, to the detriment of the company's bond and stockholders or some white-collar criminal gets a slap-on-the-wrist fine and no jail time for embezzling millions (will be interesting to see what happens to Corzine and his MF Global activities).

Not sure what "certain mindset" you think it is that simply points out that the bottom 47% in fact pay no income taxes.

When talking about "fair share" it is certainly relevant to point out that nearly half pay nothing.

 

[JDUCKY]

Can you please name some American billionaires that pay "no taxes"?

I was being rhetorical but Warren Buffet is quote as saying he paid less in taxes than his secretary.

Here's another problem I have... The "Occupy Parks (and occasionally cause small riots)" supporters do have some legitimate beefs, and I think even most of the movement's critics will agree with that statement. But it's hard to have a meaningful discussion about those concerns because so often they are then wrapped in layers of hyperbole, outright falsehoods, misinterpretations, or overlooking certain other facts. These threads are chock full of such examples.

I agree wholeheartedly.

That's why I avoid TV news at all costs. Don't watch Fox, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, XYZ, nor PDQ. 30-second soundbites cannot adequately convey any real meaning of any news event.

I prefer reading first-hand accounts, watching videos of events and figuring out the importance myself or reading in-depth articles one can find at certain news sites (csmonitor.com, bbc) and following financial/economic news from zerohedge, thedailyreckoning, marketwatch, bloomberg.

Taking all of that in one can get a general idea of everything involved with an event.

Trouble is, most people prefer to have that 30-second soundbite. Boom...problem solved...now they have all the answers.

 

[CandyMandy]

Actually, considering that the Tea Party isn't actually protesting right now I hear about them a lot. With all the budget debates, political speculation, the primaries, the Tea Party is mentioned about whether they approve, who they'll back, etc. They are mentioned as a political wing to be addressed. Good, bad, or otherwise they have attained some amount of respect.

The OWS tried to start out that way and gained some political notice. However, the OWS news is no longer about a group of people protesting political unfairness it's now about starting bonfires in the street, breaking glass in storefronts, shutting down businesses and ports, sexual assaults and rioting. It's degenerated into no more than a group of low-life thugs.

Yes, it is interesting to look at all the Youtube videos of the "peaceful protesters", such as the ones in Oakland that are shown holding signs with shield grips on the back and are organized in ranks that are straight out of a Roman Legionnaire movie.

One does not do this unless you’re spoiling for a fight.

Further, this country wasn’t founded by a rabble of protesters who ate gourmet food, wore Halloween masks and went to the bathroom on the sidewalks.

It was founded under the auspices of many of the richest men in a British colony who pledged their fortunes, their honor and their very lives to end a tyrannical reign where they had no representation in government.

The country and constitution those patriots gave their blood to create are why the Occupy people have the right to protest and have their grievances heard. But it does not give them the right to create squalid camps in public spaces and deny the use of that space to the general public.

 

[JDUCKY]

Not sure what "certain mindset" you think it is that simply points out that the bottom 47% in fact pay no income taxes.

When talking about "fair share" it is certainly relevant to point out that nearly half pay nothing.

except that they don't "pay nothing"

Anyone getting a paycheck (W-2) will have payroll taxes deducted (Medicare, Social Security) They will still have Federal (and most likely State and possibly City/County) taxes withheld. Granted they'll get their Federal withholding back as a refund but not until after they file their tax return the following year.

Anyone making over $110,000/yr stops paying the Social Security tax on any portion over that. That's an automatic raise for someone already making well over the median annual salary. Is that a "fair share"?

They also pay sales tax, gas tax, car registration tax, etc. All of which amount to a greater percentage of their income than someone making over $110,000/yr (to pick the salary used above).

A regressive tax structure (like Cain's 9-9-9) puts a much larger tax burden on the poor and middle classes.

This country was in a huge boom in the 40s-60s when the top marginal tax rate was 90% and still did well through most of the 90s when the top marginal tax rate (and capital gains tax rate) was higher than it is now.

The US tax structure has regressed, esp. over the last 30 years to where "the rich" (let's use the OWS 1% for purposes of this discussion) have been able to vastly grow their wealth while lower and middle income Americans have suffered and have seen their "real wages" drop against the rate of inflation.
http://247wallst.com/2011/10/10/the-recovery-has-done-nothing-to-help-wages/
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bruce-bittles-real-wages-now-negative-for-year-2011-10-10

 

["Got Disney"]

Rapes,thefts,threats,urination on businesses,running small businesses into the ground, drugs,riots,damaging businesses, sleeping in tents and protesting where people are affraid to walk by to go to work or purchase from small businesses....need I really go on....

We have a fundraiser going on here in SanDiego to help get money for the small cart businesses that had to shut down due to protesters urinating on their carts and throwing blood onto the van of one of the cart owners and threatening patrons as they would walk by to purchase from them...they said it smalls like urine all over the place because of the peeing on the ground and trees...garbage and tents blocking the side walks....

And they compare this to the tea party....

The tea party had American flags,are patriotic and caused no riots,no rapes,no thefts, no sleeping in tents having sex and doing drugs....

The thing is is that the 99% really could have done some good....but instead
they they became a joke...there were protesters in SD being interviewed crying because stating that this is nothing but a joke and are leaving...it's dangerous to be here any more
Than the Oakland mayor calls for a day off work on Wed to protest...yet the cops that are off that day are called into work and Told they will wear riot gear.....so not only will businesses loose money because they will have to close....but so will the employers that have no desire to protest....

Also those that won't close won't have all their employees to serve the company...and what about those that won't protest but will take the day off just because the mayorsaid they could....

How anyone can support what this has become is beyond me....the good people need to change their strategy and move off away from these others and protest in a different way...take some cues from how the tea party actually changed something....and change something....the way they are going is not doing that...

Also I did not mention that the cops have also found many sex offenders in the pack...maybe they are the ones committing the rapes....

 

[JDUCKY]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";43142265]Rapes,thefts,threats,urination on businesses,running small businesses into the ground, drugs,riots,damaging businesses, sleeping in tents and protesting where people are affraid to walk by to go to work or purchase from small businesses....need I really go on....[/quote]

Pretty disgusting behavior by some there for sure.

We have a fundraiser going on here in SanDiego to help get money for the small cart businesses that had to shut down due to protesters urinating on their carts and throwing blood onto the van of one of the cart owners and threatening patrons as they would walk by to purchase from them...they said it smalls like urine all over the place because of the peeing on the ground and trees...garbage and tents blocking the side walks....

Some of those involved with the local movement there are helping out with that fundraiser...they're not all disgusting pigs.

And they compare this to the tea party....

The tea party had American flags,are patriotic and caused no riots,no rapes,no thefts, no sleeping in tents having sex and doing drugs....

Because those were organized well in advance and didn't last more than a few hours, much less several weeks. Fox and AM radio talk show hosts were advertising the big tea party rallies for months in advance. They were very well organized events (just lacking in participation at many sites). But, again, they weren't meant to be lasting "occupations"

The thing is is that the 99% really could have done some good....but instead
they they became a joke...there were protesters in SD being interviewed crying because stating that this is nothing but a joke and are leaving...it's dangerous to be here any more
Than the Oakland mayor calls for a day off work on Wed to protest...yet the cops that are off that day are called into work and Told they will wear riot gear.....so not only will businesses loose money because they will have to close....but so will the employers that have no desire to protest....

Also those that won't close won't have all their employees to serve the company...and what about those that won't protest but will take the day off just because the mayorsaid they could....

How anyone can support what this has become is beyond me....the good people need to change their strategy and move off away from these others and protest in a different way...take some cues from how the tea party actually changed something....and change something....the way they are going is not doing that...

Also I did not mention that the cops have also found many sex offenders in the pack...maybe they are the ones committing the rapes....

Because these things have continued for weeks, it opens the area to unsavory elements, shall we say, that can hide in anonymity amongst the numbers. Some events were trying to self-police but they're getting too big to be able to handle that safely. And, of course, the news channels will lead with the bad news (if it bleeds, it leads).

But, something needs to be done to clean up the acts in many locations.

 

[Geoff_M]

I was being rhetorical but Warren Buffet is quote as saying he paid less in taxes than his secretary.

Buffet has said that his effective rate in recent years is ~15%. That's a little more than zero. Buffet is also an extreme case. How many Americans derive their income from the ownership of $52B in stocks and bonds? He isn't taxed primarily on ordinary income. FactCheck.org has a pretty good take down on the "Buffet & his secretary" mythology... but it's still part of the OWS canon and cry that "the rich don't pay their fair share!"

 

[Acklander]

Because these things have continued for weeks, it opens the area to unsavory elements, shall we say, that can hide in anonymity amongst the numbers. Some events were trying to self-police but they're getting too big to be able to handle that safely. And, of course, the news channels will lead with the bad news (if it bleeds, it leads).

But, something needs to be done to clean up the acts in many locations.

I know theyre working on that in new York. The problem they had there is the police were sending the homeless to the occupation, which caused some issues. From what I understand is the homeless element (who were just there because the police told them they could get a free meal, and place to sleep) are on one side of the park, and the occupation is on the other side. I guess both sides consider it a fair compromise.

 

[CandyMandy]

I know theyre working on that in new York. The problem they had there is the police were sending the homeless to the occupation, which caused some issues. From what I understand is the homeless element (who were just there because the police told them they could get a free meal, and place to sleep) .

This is not true and what is posted above is just a fabricated talking point that is being broadcast by OWS sympathizers. The Police Commissioners office in NYC has specifically denied any "steering" of homeless people or vagrants to Zuccotti park. The riff raff is finding the squalid free for all down there by themselves and are hanging there because the OWS rabble doesn't have the discipline to reject them.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

I'm curious, what do YOU think is the "true meaning" of the march vs. the "bandwagon"?

Because I'm pretty offended that the OWSers claim to represent me and the behavior, signs and language say otherwise.

Those that are joining the band wagon are those that are just in the protest for the sake of a protest. They see people protesting and have no clue why, but join (yes, there are some that do that). There are some who see a crowd/mob and join in. There are also some criminals who are mingling in and doing things that they should not be. They are not really there to support the real cause. There are also people there who think the cause is about welfare.. and a free hand out, which it is not. That is what I mean joining in on the band wagon. The true meaning.. Corporate greed, changes in the way the government is handling our money, changes in the way the large corporations get bailed out with our tax $$$ yet we the tax payer's get shafted. WE are held accountable for every dime and large corporations are not. Large insurance company's can dictate who get coverage and who does not (home as well as health, you get one illness or one storm in your State and they want to drop you) Large Oil Company's can dictate what price they want us to pay claiming shortages for oil. Funny how the price fluctuates if there is a storm heading near the Gulf or a Holiday is approaching. They are allowed to get away with this as their profits rise (yet they claim they aren't). How large company's try to become a monopoly... ie: cable companies, phone companies so they can raise rates and we have no choice but to adhere to their rates.... We have students attending Universities who are coming out and not getting jobs, they have loans that cannot be paid off right away... we have people laid off who cannot find work. Our economy stinks.. the housing market stinks.. The middle class is fading away; we will soon be rich and poor only. Social Security is fading away... do I need to continue what OWS is about or have I said enough?

 

[moburg]

I was being rhetorical but Warren Buffet is quote as saying he paid less in taxes than his secretary.

Actually, he said he paid a lower percentage than his secretary, but he is talking apples and oranges, and he knows it. He was deliberately misleading. If he took an equal amount in salary from his business rather than capital gains then he would most certainly pay a higher percentage than his secretary. But he chooses instead to take stock and pay capital gains taxes instead, and I bet he does that for the very reason of paying a lower tax percentage. Kinda hypocritical if you ask me.

 

[KBoopaloo]

Today Occupy Boston planned to have a march past historic sites along the Freedom Trail, stopping at the site of the Massacre to make some points. It was scheduled to start at 2:00 pm. It was delayed an hour because a Ben and Jerry's truck showed up at the camp at that time handing out free ice cream.

Goofy stuff like this is why I think a lot of people are having a hard time taking them seriously, even when you might agree with a lot of their purported issues (which I do.)

 

[moburg]

Because those were organized well in advance and didn't last more than a few hours, much less several weeks. Fox and AM radio talk show hosts were advertising the big tea party rallies for months in advance. They were very well organized events (just lacking in participation at many sites). But, again, they weren't meant to be lasting "occupations

OWS was organized well in advance too. The call went out from Adbusters in mid July, the same time Occupywallst.org was registered.

But I'm not sure why you would think an advanced organized event would not be violent, but a supposed spontaneous event or longer lasting event would be inherently violent. Its not the organization. Its the organized. And the organized, the people at OWS, are becoming increasingly more violent.

Considering who is lining up behind the movement and throwing their support to OWS, I am not at all surprised at the escalating violence. You know that old saying... show me your friends and I'll show you your future. Very appropriate here.

 

[dngnb8]

I agree wholeheartedly.

That's why I avoid TV news at all costs. Don't watch Fox, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, XYZ, nor PDQ.

Fox and AM radio talk show hosts were advertising the big tea party rallies for months in advance.

I'm curious, if you avoid the news at all costs, how did you know they were advertising months in advance?

Sorry Ducky, your whole debate is the "we're less evil then they are".

 

[Geoff_M]

Anyone making over $110,000/yr stops paying the Social Security tax on any portion over that. That's an automatic raise for someone already making well over the median annual salary. Is that a "fair share"?

Want to do something like means test SS payments on the back-end of the process to make up for that? I think that's a discussion we can have.

This country was in a huge boom in the 40s-60s when the top marginal tax rate was 90% and still did well through most of the 90s when the top marginal tax rate (and capital gains tax rate) was higher than it is now.

You really can't just take a look at the top marginal rate in a vacuum. Take a look at these CBO charts that track effective tax rates from 1979 (top rate was 70%) to now (top rate 35%). Look at the Average Individual Income Tax Rates for what the infamous Top 1% paid for those bookend years: 21.8% vs. 19.0%. That's not a 50% drop. Even if you look at the household averages for all federal taxes paid the drop is only 20% for that same group. This also points to one other things, if you're looking for a cause in the income disparity people are upset about... I don't think you can say the smoking gun is changes in the tax codes.

The US tax structure has regressed, esp. over the last 30 years to where "the rich" (let's use the OWS 1% for purposes of this discussion) have been able to vastly grow their wealth while lower and middle income Americans have suffered and have seen their "real wages" drop against the rate of inflation.

If you look again at the CBO chart above, you'll see that we still very much have a progressive tax system as the average rates have declined across all income groups. As for the notion that middle income "real wage" have dropped against inflation over the last 30 years, let me turn again to the CBO and cite the 1979-2007 income/taxes report that triggered all of these news stories: (bolding mine)

From 1979 to 2007, real (inflation-adjusted) average household income, measured after government transfers and federal taxes, grew by 62 percent. During that period, the evolution of the nation’s economy and the tax and spending policies of the federal government and state and local governments had varying effects on households at different points in the income distribution: Income after transfers and federal taxes (denoted as after-tax income in this study) for households at the higher end of the income scale rose much more rapidly than income for households in the middle and at the lower end of the income scale. In particular:

- For the 1 percent of the population with the highest income, average real after-tax household income grew by 275 percent between 1979 and 2007.

- For others in the 20 percent of the population with the highest income (those in the 81st through 99th percentiles), average real after-tax household income grew by 65 percent over that period, much faster than it did for the remaining 80 percent of the population, but not nearly as fast as for the top 1 percent.

- For the 60 percent of the population in the middle of the income scale (the 21st through 80th percentiles), the growth in average real after-tax household income was just under 40 percent.

- For the 20 percent of the population with the lowest income, average real after-tax household income was about 18 percent higher in 2007 than it had been in 1979.

Per the CBO, the real inflation-adjusted after-tax household incomes rose for all levels over the last 29 years.

 

[rhino78]

Those that are joining the band wagon are those that are just in the protest for the sake of a protest. They see people protesting and have no clue why, but join (yes, there are some that do that). There are some who see a crowd/mob and join in. There are also some criminals who are mingling in and doing things that they should not be. They are not really there to support the real cause. There are also people there who think the cause is about welfare.. and a free hand out, which it is not. That is what I mean joining in on the band wagon. The true meaning.. Corporate greed, changes in the way the government is handling our money, changes in the way the large corporations get bailed out with our tax $$$ yet we the tax payer's get shafted. WE are held accountable for every dime and large corporations are not. Large insurance company's can dictate who get coverage and who does not (home as well as health, you get one illness or one storm in your State and they want to drop you) Large Oil Company's can dictate what price they want us to pay claiming shortages for oil. Funny how the price fluctuates if there is a storm heading near the Gulf or a Holiday is approaching. They are allowed to get away with this as their profits rise (yet they claim they aren't). How large company's try to become a monopoly... ie: cable companies, phone companies so they can raise rates and we have no choice but to adhere to their rates.... We have students attending Universities who are coming out and not getting jobs, they have loans that cannot be paid off right away... we have people laid off who cannot find work. Our economy stinks.. the housing market stinks.. The middle class is fading away; we will soon be rich and poor only. Social Security is fading away... do I need to continue what OWS is about or have I said enough?

I think some of the OWS protests are good, however they miss the mark too much and are too hypocritical for me to support. Corporate greed is not the problem. Government is the problem. Crony capitalism is the real problem and too many OWS protesters don't mind CC if it benefits comapnies they deem worthy. It has to be all or nothing. The government shouldn't be giving corporate subsidies to ANYONE.

I was talking to 2 people who were protesting and they couldn't understand why the Solyndra scandal should be a big deal. After all, if it is to support "green" technology than they don't mind the government lending a hand. How about the lightbulb thing? GE reaps the benefits of that boondoggle and they pay no taxes!! The government should not help any company. I don't want want the government trying to pick winners and losers. And when companies get in trouble, let them fail. How else can you keep them honest. Complaining about Wall Street banks taking money that was given is foolish. Blame the people who gave them your money.

As for student loans, it's nonsense like that that will kill support for this movement. No one makes you take out huge loans. They are inherently a risk. My wife got a college education with almost no loans at all by going to a cheap college. If you don't have money to go to the best schools go where you can afford it. If you choose to gamble on taking huge loans, that's on you.

These are the kind of demands that make protesters look childish. The 1% didn't make you take a loan. Companies don't haveto give you a job. They are private companies. I'll never understand why people get angry at the salaries of private company CEO's. The company can pay whatever they want. If you don't like it, don't buy their products. Otherwise, focus your energy where it belongs, getting rid of the politicians who gave our money away and got nothing (for us) in return.

 

[Anne34]

I think some of the OWS protests are good, however they miss the mark too much and are too hypocritical for me to support. Corporate greed is not the problem. Government is the problem. Crony capitalism is the real problem and too many OWS protesters don't mind CC if it benefits comapnies they deem worthy. It has to be all or nothing. The government shouldn't be giving corporate subsidies to ANYONE.

I was talking to 2 people who were protesting and they couldn't understand why the Solyndra scandal should be a big deal. After all, if it is to support "green" technology than they don't mind the government lending a hand. How about the lightbulb thing? GE reaps the benefits of that boondoggle and they pay no taxes!! The government should not help any company. I don't want want the government trying to pick winners and losers. And when companies get in trouble, let them fail. How else can you keep them honest. Complaining about Wall Street banks taking money that was given is foolish. Blame the people who gave them your money.

As for student loans, it's nonsense like that that will kill support for this movement. No one makes you take out huge loans. They are inherently a risk. My wife got a college education with almost no loans at all by going to a cheap college. If you don't have money to go to the best schools go where you can afford it. If you choose to gamble on taking huge loans, that's on you.

These are the kind of demands that make protesters look childish. The 1% didn't make you take a loan. Companies don't haveto give you a job. They are private companies. I'll never understand why people get angry at the salaries of private company CEO's. The company can pay whatever they want. If you don't like it, don't buy their products. Otherwise, focus your energy where it belongs, getting rid of the politicians who gave our money away and got nothing (for us) in return.

OMG-- finally a voice of reason! I've kept out of this discussion because most of the posts were so far off one way or the other, but finally a person who has things in perspective! This post and the one above finally make sense.

Tax the companies not the people more. Don't worry about the top 1% except to take away their earned income credit. Get rid of all the free money to corporations