| silverboner |
Oct 20, 11 at 3:46pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
Log in to remove this sponsored message quote Halo_AsassinI completely understand what you MEANT, but you seem to think that what you said is relevant or meaningful, and I was just pointing out, that such is irrelevant. Its THEIR wealth. Why does it matter that the wealth in America is spread as it is? Did we do something more to earn a larger share? Are your or I, or others some how entitled to their wealth or wealth at all? Yes, the rich people in this country are rich, and they own way more then they need. But more likely they earned it through investments. Now if you want to talk about individual cases, and individual corruption, and how some specific rich guy cheated, swindles or was involved in dirty business to earn his money, then we talk about wealth and who should get what. But simply because rich people are rich, doesn't mean squat, we are not entitled to their money, and quite frankly neither is the government. ------------------- Evil necessitates God. Do you know what is so important about the number 447,225,917,218,507,401,284,016mg/cc??? Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Jeterocks |
Oct 20, 11 at 4:16pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote Halo_AsassinI'm a senior in college who is majoring in Financial Market Regulation and have interned at a private regulator over the summer. I can tell you that the European model gives European banks even more freedom than we do here. They don't even examine a majority of banks on a yearly basis. The United States model isn't perfect, but we are never going to have a perfect regulatory system. Dodd-Frank is imposing a huge number of regulatory changes. It's the biggest burden on banks since the implementation of Sarbanes-Oxley. More people should be focused on how that is changing the way banks operate and do business because maybe they would realize the government is currently doing a ton to pull back the free reign of US banks. This OWS thing is a load of bs by uninformed people who don't understand what they are protesting. They just see people making large sums of money while they aren't. Stop asking for handouts and start working for yourself. -------------------  | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| AnonymousGuy |
Oct 20, 11 at 4:57pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
It seems to me that the Occupy movement is just another angry hipster youth cause in which nobody is entirely sure what they're protesting for/against, nobody has a clue what to actually do about it (whatever it is), but everyone's damned sure that they're not going to be the only one of their friends to not support it.
It boils down to my biggest criticism of myself when I was in high school. I was full of anger and disillusionment and unpatriotism. Because I was young and immature I acted out in pointless and ineffective ways. I constantly lashed out against the government, authority, society, ect. But all of my anger was pointlessly misdirected because at the end of the day I had no *bleep*ing clue what I was talking about. ------------------- Stoop kid's afraid to leave his stoop. | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Halo_Asassin |
Oct 20, 11 at 8:56pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote silverboner The distribution of wealth matters because a concentration of power is bad for everyone but the powerful, and we need to stop it. We're not entitled to their wealth, but honestly neither are they. Nobody works hard enough to make tens of millions per year. And frankly, I think we should be entitled to a few things. I think that if someone has no food, the government should give them some help. If someone is dying from a curable illness, the government should help. And who should pay for that? The people who can afford to. But honestly this isn't that related to OWS. Their main priority is to hold the banks and Wall Street accountable for crashing Wall Street and to get money out of politics. -------------------  | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| silverboner |
Oct 20, 11 at 9:46pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
But wealth doesn't automatically mean political power...if that was true, the shouldn't republicans have all the power, since they are the old rich assholes that have money?
And I think if you earn the money, either through investment or sweat and blood, you are entitled to it. CEOs are responsible for entire corporations, and all the employees. That is a lot of responsibility, and such should be compensated. But I don't know how you can claim they are not entitled to it after working for it. Your idea of entitlement is without merit. Nobody is entitled to food and I would argue healthcare on top of that. That means someone OWES someone else food. And there is no basis for that. What did the poor do to earn food, or to deserve this entitlement? Simply existing means someone else owes them something? There is no rational basis for this position. Its a nice idea if you are broke and someone else has money, but its entirely dependent on IF someone else has something to give. Its likely to be the case, but it FAILS miserably if we have total economic meltdown and nobody has got anything. Further, the government isn't entitled to TAKE money. It has to take something away from someone to be able to give it away to someone else, and the government is not entitled, its not owed anything, it functions for the people, ALL the people, not just the poor. The rich man, like the poor man, should be able to live free from a government that takes their property and distributes it. I am all for government help, but no way can I come to believe we are ENTITLED to help. ------------------- Evil necessitates God. Do you know what is so important about the number 447,225,917,218,507,401,284,016mg/cc??? Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Halo_Asassin |
Oct 21, 11 at 2:23am ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote silverbonerOkay. So you're think government should help the poor. But the poor aren't entitled to help. I'm not sure I understand you, but I agree with you, I think? And yes, money does translate to political power. Money translates to power in general. If you want to make someone else do something, you can if you have enough money. If you want to influence an election, you can make a secret donation to a PAC that you know supports your candidate. Do this enough and you can be sure you'll win. Even better, donate huge amounts to both candidates, so that you can then threaten the incumbent with pulling their funding unless they do everything you say. ------------------- | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Crusad3r |
Oct 21, 11 at 5:01am ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
Halo_Asassin I can't even begin to point out where you're wrong.
Money doesn't mean shit. The value of money is arbitary, and is dictated by the financial markets. Money doesn't translate into power. It's the other way around. If money translates into power, then hollywood celebrities must be the most powerful people in the world. Hell, even Charlie Sheen should a powerful guy. Here's a newsflash: They're not. Those who have all those money have found ways to make it. Whether through questionable methods or through legitimate investment, they have made that money, and it's theirs to keep. No one has the right to take it away except the government through taxes. The government only has this authority if the government continues to protect its citizens (see Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes). If I take from the government (such as roads, health, education etc.), then I'm expected to give something back in the form of taxes. Besides that money going to the government, no one has ANY right to my money unless I specifically say so, or else it's theft. Just supporting 1 candidate in the polls does nothing. The power in the US rests in the entirety of the Congress as well as the White house (split roughly 50/50). Just going by your Neo profile, you're 16, and probably not too familiar with how politics works, so I'll leave it at that. -------------------  Maplestory Forum | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| mark40 |
Oct 21, 11 at 5:27am ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
Their slogan of the "99%" is a very catchy one, albeit rather misleading. Their protest against the capitalist system is also very interesting.
| |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Halo_Asassin |
Oct 21, 11 at 11:54am ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote Crusad3r ------------------- | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Crusad3r |
Oct 21, 11 at 2:28pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
Halo_Asassin Blah blah blah founding fathers blah blah blah. I'm not American mate. I couldn't care less what your founding fathers' philosophies were. It's been over 200 years since America achieved independence. Times have changed, as has the economy.
The 'rich' already pay the vast majority of income taxes in your country (96% of income tax paid by the top 50% apparently). You're now wanting them to pay EVEN MORE. How is this fair? How is that ethical? How is that not theft? You're telling them to pay MORE for services they DON'T USE. How is that not a handout? Your insinuation that politicians are bought is complete and utter bullshit. If that really is the case in America, then I suggest you move out asap, cause if votes were bought, then it's no longer a democracy. I highly doubt this is the case. Votes are won/lost based on politicians' performances in debates and speeches on their campaign trails. They accept donations for their campaigns in order to fund advertising, but that will never EVER replace the debates in terms of swaying people's opinions. That's why the debates get so much coverage, even overseas. Even the thought that votes could be bought is preposterous. Elections are overseen by strict independent regulators (or at least they should be). I'm dismissive of your arguments based on your age because you haven't started paying taxes yet, and thus have very little idea of how taxes work. Your arguments are also terribly naive and idealistic. Idealism is all good and that (idealism keeps politics evolving), but it doesn't work in the real world. ------------------- Maplestory Forum | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Bri |
Oct 21, 11 at 3:13pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote silverbonerNothing. But if you're educated - as many of the protesters are, you want us as a nation to be able to move the country forward. They're demonized as lazy liberal college grads who aren't good for anything...but they evidently aren't being given even a chance, or else, this protest might be a bit more muted, or hell, may not even be in progress. On the other hand, I believe Koloth mentioned their choice of majors certainly didn't help some of them. A history major really has no room to stand on in the movement if all he or she is after is a job that requires certain skills and training. I completely agree...but the movement encompasses more than just jobs, anyway. quote Crusad3rLol'd hard. So we should do away with the U.S. Constitution (the embodiment of what the fathers wanted) to better reflect the fact that instead of the people, the government wants to pucker up and kiss corporate ass? Epic argument. Let's go to the Smithsonian and burn that 224 year old piece of yellow paper. quoteUtilitarian view vs. capitalism at its finest. Some feel that it would be a sacrifice for the better good, others an infringement on the money they earned. Oh, and there are statistics that support both sides of the tax tale. Only thing that tells me is we need to clean up the tax code and perhaps make it progressive. No way a person who makes 6 million a year should be paying the same amount as someone making 60,000. That's just stupid, and I think the argument a lot of you are trying to make. quoteA true democracy would mean that I'd be in the Chamber and debating this with every American citizen and have an equal vote. Obviously, this is impossible. America began as a republic, and is quickly heading towards an oligarchy - the 1% quoteThe problem with the debates is that everyone on stage lies out of their ass. Half of the crap they claim is manipulated stats, and the other half are promises they can't carry out once in office because of a polarized and selfish Congress. Plus, not all candidates from all parties are included. Debates are also carried by media conglomerates that are directly influenced by its owner (See: Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, CNN, etc)...so while votes aren't outright bought, they can certainly be unfairly influenced. Granted, it's up to voters to do their homework on every candidate, but these people aren't making it any easier on them. quoteNot all idealistic leaders work (Gaddafi), but Brazil and Da Silva...very much so. A bit of optimism could work wonders in Congress. Halo_Asassin may be 16 but he has an uncanny understanding of how dirty it really is in Washington. A bit heavy on the entitlement there, but he's been more on point than most people in the thread. -------------------  TCW | Everybody gon' respect the shooter...but the one in front of the gun lives forever. | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| silverboner |
Oct 21, 11 at 4:20pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote BriHow can you be owed if you did nothing for it? Wanting better job opportunities is not the same as being entitled to them. Certainly protesting is one way to get better job opportunities, and you could argue that they earn them through protests, but entitled because they went to college or because they want a better job? Nope. quote Halo_AsassinCorrect. We SHOULD help people in need. A nation is only as strong as its weakest class. A government is for all people. But to extend that help to the point that people are entitled to it, no matter what they do, no matter what they have done, as though they deserve and are owed government assistance is a very very very bad way to run a country. Not all help is equal, and some help can actually harm and cause more problems. That is why its better to teach someone to fish, rather then hand them the fish. Government should help people get on their feet, but it cannot and should not be carrying the weight of the poor through entitlements and free food etc etc. We will fall as a country if we start believing that we are owed goods and services. quote Halo_AsassinOnly if that is how you spend it. Simply being rich, doesn't mean you have political power, it just means you could have such power. You seem to be demonizing the 45%, as though they all spend their money on politicians and political power. I find that generalization or implied generalization faulty. ------------------- Evil necessitates God. Do you know what is so important about the number 447,225,917,218,507,401,284,016mg/cc??? Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| thewatermeloncult |
Oct 21, 11 at 8:27pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
I was for the occupy movement but i read some of these points and by the time i got to the bottom of the page to reply i'm not sure.
| |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Halo_Asassin |
Oct 21, 11 at 8:56pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
quote silverbonerOkay, I won't disagree with you in that maybe some of the poor truly don't deserve help. The thing is though, that it may well be more costly to filter them out rather than just provide blanket coverage. But I don't think I've got any major disagreements with you. quote Crusad3rOkay. That argument is SO flawed. The rich don't pay 96% of taxes. The top 50% does. In fact, the rich, at least those who got rich off of investments, likely pay less than the average American as a percentage of their total income. This is because America's capital gains tax is only 15% which is ludicrously low considering that the minimum payroll tax is 15% and it increases the more you make. So I guess I think we should raise the capital gains tax which will likely hit the rich the hardest, and that's fine because, at least in America, they haven't taken any hits since the recession began. quote Crusad3rVotes aren't bought. As I said, they're heavily influenced by political advertising. And, as Bri has said, debates aren't nearly as influential as they might have used to be because the corporate-owned mainstream media that holds these debates rarely calls politicians out when they blatantly lie. ------------------- | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| Fatal Error |
Oct 21, 11 at 9:08pm ^
re: The Occupy ____ Movement
|
|
Don't make it so obvious how little you actually know about economics, Halo Assassin. There comes a time when it's best to just quiet yourself, and for you that passed a few pages ago. Short term capital gains tax is the same as the income tax rate, and long term capital gains have lower tax rates to make long term investments feasible in the first place. Raise that too high and say goodbye to long term investments altogether (oh and, by the way, it is set to revert to 20% next year anyways).
Seriously, do some real, concrete research and actually think about what you are saying before just throwing out random ideas. -------------------  So what's the use of knowing the truth if no one's gonna believe you? | |
| quote quick quote edit quick edit del posts in thread report | |
| [All dates in (PST) time] | Threads List « Next Newest Next Oldest » |
