By now anyone paying attention to the “Occupy Wall Street” protests and its various local offshoots across the country has seen the hypocritical and absurd demands of a class of people who protest the greed of those who have earned their wealth by expressing their own greed for wealth they did not earn. These unwashed masses come with their smartphones and high-end cameras to document this “movement” that is meant to bring attention to an unjust economic divide or whatever their demand du jour is.
National Review points out an interesting decision of the Occupy “movement” to organize a protest in Detriot, Michigan, a city that has enjoyed the fruits of liberal programs for years.
Detroit, Grand Circus Park — Detroit would seem an odd place for the Occupy movement. After, all, it has already received everything the 99 Percenters are demanding.
Want redistribution of wealth? For 40-odd years, Detroit has gotten tens of billions of dollars in welfare assistance, from the Great Society of Lyndon Johnson’s administration to Barack Obama’s Strong Cities Initiative.
Want good-paying jobs? Michigan is the notorious home of the Big Three automakers, who paid their workers a best-in-the-U.S. wage of $40 an hour — far above the average U.S. manufacturing wage of $15 an hour, resulting in blue-collar workers who often earned six-figure incomes.
Want socialized medicine? Canada is right across the river from Detroit, offering a single-payer, government-run health system.
And yet on Friday, some 500 demonstrators from across Michigan descended on downtown Detroit to protest conditions here. They gathered at the Spirit of Detroit statue at the base of Woodward Avenue. They marched up Detroit’s main street past the gleaming new corporate headquarters of Quicken Loans and Compuware, past a sea of empty storefronts, past the corporate-sponsored sports complexes, to their destination: Grand Circus Park. They held signs reading “Make capitalism extinct” and “The People are too big to fail” and “Eat the rich” while chanting “Good jobs now!” and “Tax the rich!” and “F— the GOP!”
Unwittingly, however, they were protesting a Democratic-run city that represents the failure of their agenda.
You got to appreciate the irony.
Blogs For Victory 
There are lots of good paying jobs in North Dakota right now. I wonder why many of these people aren’t headed there.
Below is a must read. Great article.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204002304576628673446417268.html
It is a great article, Cluster. Here’s a guy that is on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me, and I agree with most of what he says.
Definitely hard to argue with him.
There are lots of good paying jobs in North Dakota right now. I wonder why many of these people aren’t headed there.
Just a wild guess, but I’d bet that most are not headed to ND because, although they profess to want jobs, they don’t want jobs that involve, you know — WORK.
Exactly. What they want in a “job” is good pay, health care benefits, vacation, sick pay, and retirement. Work, is the last thing they are looking for.
N. dakota?
hell send them to N.Korea, they would love it there.
I had just finished reading the lengthy AP account of the protests when Matt’s post popped up — good timing.
I’ve been amazed at the vacuousness and economic illiteracy of the protesters I’ve seen interviewed on TV. If they’re indicative of the product that our public schools and institutions of higher learning are turning out, the next couple generations of Americans are in deep poop.
The following is from the AP article this morning:
I don’t totally disagree with some of what’s being protested, but I doubt that 10% of the protesters have a grasp on just exactly what it is they’re protesting or what changes they’d like to see affected. Most are simply useful idiots who really don’t have a clue.
These protests are a natural result of progressive liberalism. The democrats have been sowing civil discord, and under educating our kids for decades, so what in the hell did they expect? I also find it amusing that these union workers are protesting corporations and wall street. Who do they think pays the union wages? And where do they suppose their union pensions are invested in?
Below is another great article and story you will never see in the media:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2011/10/15/unlike-wis-and-ohio-illinois-democrat-deadbeat-state-gets-little-media-a
Unions themselves are nothing but big corporations.
They do little to help the regular employee.
They do help the drunks, deadbeats, loafers keep their employment.
In the end they do everything they can to screw one out of the pension they promised.
A mafia infested gang of thugs and commies that useful idiot drones fall for.
cluster
Deadbeat state: Ill. owes billions in unpaid bills
al-Ubombas socialist paradise.
Psssssssst
Mort…….
‘It’s as if he doesn’t like people,” says real-estate mogul and New York Daily News owner Mortimer Zuckerman of the president of the United States. Barack Obama doesn’t seem to care for individuals
ESPECIALLY if you are a Joooooooooo
a muslin thang doncha know.
Thousands protest banks, corporate greed in marches…
NBCNEWS’s Sharpton: ‘If you won’t get jobs bill done in suite, we will get done in street!’
Obama campaign seeks to capitalize on ‘Occupy’ mayhem…
Nazi, Communist Parties Throw Their Support Behind Occupy Wall Street…
Occupy Portland Protesters Sing ‘F*** the USA’… Sean Penn: Tea Party the ‘Get the N-Word Out of White House Party’…
NOTE to Al………DO IT and reap the whirlwind
This Is Not About Obama, This Is About My Mama!’: Al Sharpton Leads ‘Jobs and Justice’ March in DC
Politics
“If you can’t get the jobs bill done in the suites, then we will get the jobs bill done in the streets.”
Paging, JER
Obama Will Use Anti-Wall Street Anger Against GOP in ‘Central Tenet’ of 2012 Campaign
“We intend to make it one of the central elements of the campaign next year.”
=====================================================
Has ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Been Sucked Into a Global Socialist Movement?
“We demand the democratization of the economic system…the guarantee of an unconditional access to income…and the effective and free access to social rights and common wealth.”
Nazi, Communist Parties Throw Their Support Behind Occupy Wall Street…
I read that yesterday — surprise, surprise.
Obama Will Use Anti-Wall Street Anger Against GOP in ‘Central Tenet’ of 2012 Campaign
“We intend to make it one of the central elements of the campaign next year.”
Talk about a strategy with unintended consequences. BHOzo has been a substantially bigger beneficiary of Wall Street money than ANY GOP candidate.
NOTE to Al………DO IT and reap the whirlwind
Liberals don’t give a rat’s ass about millions of aborted babies. Do you think they care about a few thousand misguided and ignorant kids being used as cannon fodder when the inevitable violence begins?
when you elect an innercity street agitator, marxist muslim. why would anybody be surprised by the outcome?
JR
not at all, but makes good target practice. 🙂
Neocon,
Isn’t it interesting that virtually all news accounts to date blame the violence on the police?
“Nearly 50 years after the March on Washington, our work — Dr. King’s work — is not yet complete,” President Barack Obama said at the dedication ceremony.
Well he is right about that. We are still a nation that focuses on the color of ones skin, rather than the content of their character, and Obama is the perfect example of that.
Here’s something that all liberals can support:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeuGx8PplAo
its not irony…it the fruit of envy…the wages of greed…and the flower of ignorance…this is what happens when socialism takes root…
everything we see in the occupy movement can be explained in these things…
“You got to appreciate the irony.”
I appreciate the irony of the TP now defending the people they spent so long pretending to oppose.
wankerwallace
Ummmmm stooge
TEA =
T axed
E nough
A lready
It about out of control government spending and un sustainable deficits.
WE all have jobs Moron.
dennistooge
Let’s get this straight: you believe hedge fund managers and CEOs of corporations who receive multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses, as a general rule, have earned that wealth?
Tell us how they did not?
seems the CEO’s were HIRED by the ELECTED board of directors who OFFERED the CEO a wage/benefit package.
The OWNERS of the corps, IE stockholders vote for the board.
NOW tell us WHY college profs are “earning” $600,000.00 wages plus benefits off the backs of young students and tax payers.
dennistooge
On what basis do you justify their much-higher-than average compensation?
business 101
STOCK PRICES and ROI
Gee. Getting paid for nothing? Let us see how one of the most corrupt counties (where our current President comes from) deals with this like paying multiple pensions for public workers that reach $500K per year and several others in the $484K per year range.
Then again, I did know this fat guy on a golf cart at the local park since I was a child–well over 40 years and I am sure he got the same package as these folks.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44872639/ns/us_news-life/#.TpvOurKPVhE
“…the hypocritical and absurd demands of a class of people who protest the greed of those who have earned their wealth by expressing their own greed for wealth they did not earn.”
Let’s get this straight: you believe hedge fund managers and CEOs of corporations who receive multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses, as a general rule, have earned that wealth?
Would that include CEOs at the 50 firms that laid off the most workers since the current economic crisis began, who took home 42 percent more pay in 2009 than comparable companies in the S&P 500? On what basis do you justify their much-higher-than average compensation?
After adjusting for inflation, CEO pay in 2009 more than doubled the CEO pay average for the decade of the 1990s, and ran approximately eight times the average CEO compensation for all the decades of the mid-20th century. See http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/executive_excess_2010
In light of the above, please explain why American workers, by contrast, are taking home less in real weekly wages than they took home in the 70s?
Facts like that are what’s driving the Occupy Wall Street movement. You may believe this kind of stratospheric compensation is warranted if you’ve never been one of those workers whose labor contributes to the royal lifestyle of a modern CEO. But if you or someone close to you is working as hard as they’ve ever worked but having a harder time than ever making their monthly nut, you know there’s something fundamentally wrong tilting the system.
Those at the top are neither working harder nor more virtuous or inspired than their predecessors of the 60s and 70s. They’re being rewarded disproportionately by policies that favor their accumulation of personal wealth – courtesy lobbyists and politicians whose campaigns are paid for by corporate monies that tend to accumulate ever upward. Meanwhile legal precedents are established that tend even more to favor corporate entities over workers, and the wealthy and powerful over those of lower economic status. (The recent class action suit against Walmart, the Ledbetter v Goodyear decision in 2007, the Citizens United decision and countless less publicized cases illustrate this trend).
Although fascism has a range of definitions one could make a strong argument that these decisions taken together trend toward historical fascism, in that they bring state and corporate power closer together while diminishing the power of individuals and reducing the concept of democracy to a mere simulacrum.
Calling this movement “socialist” misses the point. It doesn’t matter how unwashed the demonstrators are or aren’t – they represent a legitimate grievance against unbridled greed and the growing power of corporations over individuals, trends that are advanced by both parties in Washington but most aggressively defended by the GOP today.
Although fascism has a range of definitions one could make a strong argument that these decisions taken together trend toward historical fascism, in that they bring state and corporate power closer together while diminishing the power of individuals and reducing the concept of democracy to a mere simulacrum.
So how is this Hope and Change thing working out for you? Are you finally convinced that the Democrats have used you as a pawn?
but most aggressively defended by the GOP today.
Guss not.
While not defending the GOP, it is conservatives within the GOP that advocate a less regulated, less government burdened free market that allows more people an equal opportunity to achieve success. The over regulated, government burdened marketplace that the democrats champion result in exactly what we are seeing today. You can not legislate equal outcomes dennis.
They won’t answer you, and the next thread that pops up on the issue, they’ll go right on spouting pretty rhetoric about those that have “earned” the ability to make more in a month than many people do in their entire lives. Because somehow the free market magically gives half a crap about what people have earned or deserve, and nobody is ever born into any circumstance that affects their ability to become a rich billionaire CEO.
Please explain Condoleezza Rice, Herman Cain, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton then. Not billionaire CEOs’ all but from nothing to at least a comfortable living. Then explain how you can justify Steve Job’s use of slave labor in China to climb his mountain or is that okay because he made really cool stuff?
Why does Cory have to justify Steve Jobs’s behavior? He’s not Steve Jobs.
Because Cory implies that the rich only get rich off of the labor of the poor and misguided. Cory is a single pie person where the only way a fat man got fat is eating the thin man’s food. I am free enterprise (with some regulations) that says we can cook more pies.
Why do you feel the need to defend Cory or Steve Jobs ?
That’s a long leap from what Cory actually said. I never defended Steve Jobs. And I wasn’t defending Cory so much as pointing out the ridiculousness of bringing Steve Jobs into it randomly as if Cory has a poster of the guy on his bedroom wall.
“they’ll go right on spouting pretty rhetoric about those that have “earned” the ability to make more in a month than many people do in their entire lives”
Well, I just bought up a couple of options for question or do you find this to be too critical?
Steve Jobs actually produced a product for consumption. Bankers and investment corporation produce nothing – they move money around and shuffle paper. Do you believe they really work, as everyone here seems to think they do? They live very well and never get their hands dirty or work up a sweat – unless they are at their private golf course or spa. It does not seem equal to compare Steve Jobs to the average banker/hedge fund millionaier. He made his money the old fashion way – he earned it by his talents and intellengence. The average Wall Street millionaire? Not so much. And Steve Jobs did not contribute the the downfall of Wall Street and never had to be bailed out by the American tax payers. Big difference in my view.
I did not say it was impossible to make something of yourself if you weren’t born rich. I am saying that the system does not reward people based solely (or even primarily) on merit. Bringing up some single digit number of anecdotes does not provide evidence against what I am saying, especially when just in the domain of high profile politicians that you’ve chosen, there are indeed disproportionately many people who were born or married into money. Why don’t you explain that to me?
Also, what’s with bringing up Steve Jobs? I don’t own any Apple devices, and I don’t remember ever saying that it was okay that they use cheap Chinese workers.
Sunny again misses the irony……” they produce nothing….they move money around and shuffle paper.”
Hmmmmm…. sounds like your average liberal politician…. namely every liberal looter and the obAMATEUR!!! You have your hero presenting economic and financial gimmicks to “pay for” his schemes that have been tried before and failed.
And yet you cannot see the irony in that phrase you wrote.
What is more ironic is that she tells another poster that he lacks reading comprehension skills….. This from a woman who regurgitates talking points, who is proven wrong time and again and who comes back and regurgitates the same nonsense all over again…. That too sounds like the obAMATEUR repeating the same exact things and expecting a different result.
Amazing and pathetic.
Again sunny misses the point: “investment corporation produces nothing”.
So when the obAMATEUR and the federal government act like an investment corporation (you can say Solyndra can’t you?) they are producing nothing?!? They (obAMATEUR and the liberals) took $500 billion from the tax payers.
Yet, you defend the obAMATEUR and the looting liberals to the end!!!
All forms of comprehension fly over your head.
so what dennistooge…it doesnt matter how much they made…its really none of your business…i dont see you advertising that you made more than you earned last year…nor will you return money from your salary to your employer…for hours that you only did half the job…or none at all…
if you want to complain about so and so corp…dont buy thier cars….union wages drove up the price of cars tenfold in 30 years…your wages didnt follow that tract did it?
buy you still drive that car eh stooge…in theory the socialist drive for universal community property sounds great…till you find out that a bunch of fat slobs that refuse to work hard to feed thier family is all thats behind this mess…and mental midgets on crank withsilver sppons and welfare checks stuck up thier beeehinds…
get real dennis…the US Constitution only established that you are free to pursue happiness…it did NOT guarantee you any right to redistribute other peoples wealth through the perversion of the government…now go out and get a job and justify your existence…or feed your own damn family…and shut up
“Calling this movement “socialist” misses the point. ”
Out in the real world, yes. Here, no.
They’re very freaked out by this movement, and they can’t come to grips with the fact that it’s legit and has legit grievances, so they’re just giving their usual knee-jerk reactions–“It’s dirty hippies! It’s socialist! It’s Nazi! [that one is hilarious–Leo really brought the stupid crazy.]” And that’s the whole point. Of course, it fails miserably out in the real world, but here inside the bubble, they need to reassure themselves.
“Calling this movement “socialist” misses the point. ”
Out in the real world, yes. Here, no.
Since, in interview after interview, protesters have called for destroying capitalism, just what exactly could you call this movement?
I’m a 53 percenter:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/53-percenters-standing-up-for-those-who-dont-whine/
Cluster, you mistakenly assume that I pinned any hope for significant change on any political party or candidate.
I do observe how things work. However unlike many of you here my convictions and conscience aren’t derived from political traditions or schools of thought, which is why your attempts to pigeonhole me always fail. You’re operating from a much too narrow frame of reference.
Those were a lot of words that said nothing, weren’t they dennis? You obviously blame the GOP, so don’t try and run from that, and if you would quit being so partisan, you’d realize that conservatives also rail against big corporate and big government corruption. The difference is that conservatives are rational enough not to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Let’s make it simple for you, cluster. “So how is this Hope and Change thing working out for you? Are you finally convinced that the Democrats have used you as a pawn?”
No. They never had me to use for anything. I long ago registered as a Democrat purely out of a wish to participate in the primary. I voted for Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate, in the election of 2004 and could easily switch to independent status. I probably would never register as a Republican, as too many things in their values today conflict irreconcilably with the plain teachings of Christ in the Gospels.
My civic choices aren’t generally driven by partisan loyalty, although in a given election I could make an exception for strategic reasons. I generally try to reference principles that transcend politics altogether. I’m sorry if that’s too abstract for you to understand.
dennis,
You’re hardly difficult to understand, in fact you are transparent most of the time. I loved this line:
I probably would never register as a Republican, as too many things in their values today conflict irreconcilably with the plain teachings of Christ in the Gospels.
Well then it’s a good thing the democrats embrace such teachings, right?
dennistooge
, as too many things in their values today conflict irreconcilably with the plain teachings of Christ in the Gospels.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha……
things like?
abortion
drugs
sodomy
theft
sloth
envy
OHHHHH YEAH denny boy a wolf in sheeps clothing indeed.
Cluster sums it up pretty well…..
Cluster, there are classes at your local community college that teach reading comprehension. Try it – then maybe the won’t be “a lot words that said nothing.”
However unlike many of you here my convictions and conscience aren’t derived from political traditions or schools of thought,
Or any kind of thought for that matter.
LOL
And your mom is fat.
Could you go back to pretending at least that you have something rational to add to the conversation rather than stooping to direct, personal insults?
which is why your attempts to pigeonhole me always fail.
You’re hardly difficult to pigeonhole, Dennis. You’re the quintessential kook.
Thanks spook. I take that as about the highest compliment the typical B4V booster is capable of giving me.
stop lying stooge…your thoughts are nothing new…you suck on the hind tit of communists and thats more than obvious…
you pinned your hope to lies…and that doesnt need political parties or candidates…lies only need fools to believe them…the rest comes naturaly
Cluster, you still don’t get plain language. I’m neither a booster of Democrat or Republican ideology. My guiding principles don’t derive from any political party.
Spook, I also note the conspicuous absence of any substantive response to my longer post above regarding the realities driving the Occupy Wall Street movement.
James 5 in the New Testament reads: “Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter…” James 5.
That’s the Bible talking, not Wall Street protesters. The passage is attributed by many scholars to James, the brother of Jesus Christ.
I’d be the last person to advocate for merging religion and politics. However, as a guiding principle for my personal civic choices, New Testament Christianity offers more consistency and clarity than any ideology I’ve found. Most of the things in neocon’s list above aren’t addressed by Jesus in the Gospels. However the accumulation of material wealth is addressed again and again by Jesus, more than almost any other topic.
It’s kooky, I know – but for that reason alone it’s worth paying attention to the matter.
Once again it is a sad day in America when it appears that we will have to dismiss an entire generation of useful minions in order to regain our standing in the world as the last and only true refuge of the possibilities of mankind. The “Days of Rage” and “Occupy Wall St.” folks are useful idiots to the anarchist and others simply because of years of indoctrination in lieu of education. For starters, they should try to realize that this is a representative Republic and not a democracy but it would be simple to demonstrate the difference as Mao, Lenin, and others have done by slaughtering them all where they stand and claim it was the “will of the majority” or for the “good of the people.”
Then you have those claiming the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) party is failing while the 99%-ers are the new trend which is ironic because the TEA party has just started with one of the largest upsets in voting history while most of the 99% (just WTF does that really mean?) most likely do not know where their polling place is—let alone understand the process. It really should be the 53%-ers—you know those that pay taxes and support these slackers, at least the ones not being paid via the public dole (unions) to be there. Please have them single file out of the area returning everything that Wall Street has afforded them and they would be standing there butt naked matching their intelligence.
Even though I am very different than GMB being a fiscally Conservative, Constitutionally-bent Libertarian—in a lot of respects we see things the same. It will take generations to correct the errors that started under President Wilson but have accelerated over the past 60 years—about the same amount of time these whiners are complaining about. Then you have folks like Dennis rip off some long screed about the evils of crony capitalism like it is a new phenomenon when some of us have been fighting it for years both at the ballot box (best we could) and otherwise. Become a shareholder and participate in who becomes the next CEO and how much they are compensated, start a business (if you can survive the regulations) and show the world what a compassionate CEO takes as compensation, do something other than whine or quote.
I do not have enough time, or patience to literally list just how ignorant or plain stupid these folks (OWS / 99-ers) are but it would be a great day if they would glim a little insight and join the battle to right this ship of a nation. However, I would have to venture that is not their goal. They know not what they are seeking or more plainly—be careful what you wish for ~ you might just get it. It appears to be their full intent to not follow JFK in “a rising tide lifts all boats” but rather hope enough anchorage will sink America into the realm of Democracy and 3rd world standards.
What we have today, as Hamlet did for Shakespeare “Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy” we are saddled with this generation’s infants and malfeasants—this generation’s court jesters.
“It appears to be their full intent to not follow JFK in “a rising tide lifts all boats””
Instead of Kennedy’s solutions these “occupiers”, the leftist looters in Washington and the useful idiot drones only want to give each “boater” a bucket to bailout their sinking ship. Of course, they want the leftist looters to decide who gets the bigger buckets at the cost of others getting the smaller bucket.
In the end, of course, all boats will eventually sink. These looters, moochers and drones will allow it to happen.
Pay /federal income tax/, not “taxes”. When are you guys going to stop misquoting that statistic? And how come every time I point out that the same 1% of people playing 40% of the taxes in this country also have 40% of the wealth in this country, everybody just ignores me?
Not ignoring you Cory-just dismissing your misguided view. Okay, payroll, sales and other taxes do apply but the return from items like EITC, housing credits including Section 8, Child tax credits, ad. nauseium makes your feeble point even mooter than Moochelle with her extravagant expenditures. Figure it out for yourself–there are only 2 kinds of people in this current environment; those that pay (53%) and those that take.
Please do not start with the socialists crap about police and teachers–there is something else you need to do first. Grow up, move out of Mommie’s basement, get a real job, pay a few bills and then come back and tell us how fair everything is.
What makes you think Cory doesn’t have a job? I realize that personally insulting someone is easier than actually engaging him or her intellectually, but come on.
Regarding the takers versus payers: When you look at one year of tax data, particularly during a recession, you’re not getting the whole picture of a population’s tax burden. People live through varying situations and income levels throughout life. Many people end life with very little income and, therefore, pay very little in federal income taxes. You can see from the Tax Policy Center’s own website that 44% of the non-payers are elderly.
http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/2011/07/27/why-do-people-pay-no-federal-income-tax-2/
When you consider that people’s incomes fluctuate, in some professions more than others, it’s not surprising that some people won’t be paying taxes during a recession. If someone works for years as a construction worker, dutifully paying taxes, then can’t find work and has no taxable income for 2 – 3 years (since 2008) and, thus, no tax burden for a couple years, is that person a taker or a payer? Perhaps the situation is a little more complex than you suggest.
If you really want to play the game of blaming people for not paying, you’re going to have to accumulate data of individuals over a lifetime of work, not just take a snapshot during a recession and claim it represents all time.
David,
I typed “get a real job” not that he held no job so please pay attention–it was not intended as an insult. In addition I am not looking at any one year of tax data but relying on my experience of working since I was 13 (I am now 51) without a break or time off. Even in this economy, I have several prospects after being “laid off” from my previous company while also looking at starting one or two new enterprises if the restrictions and regulations were not so severe (3 local, 3 state, and 2 federal agencies for one pork & beef not open to the public B-B-Q enterprise).
I have been paying since I can remember and it never appears to stop as they ask for more and more every year. Why are you apparently dead set against balancing the budget, reining in spending and giving a little relief to those of us that have never had any. I have held every job available including being a “honey dipper” when there were no openings in my chosen profession.
A matter of perspective but a critical one nonetheless.
(Just as a by and by — I paid more in taxes than my current roommate made in gross income over the last three years. Not boasting but trying to pass on the fact that us “evil Conservatives” help people out daily unlike your perceptions.)
“Once again it is a sad day in America when it appears that we will have to dismiss an entire generation of useful minions in order to regain our standing in the world as the last and only true refuge of the possibilities of mankind. ”
It is sad, but the Tea Party does have be dismissed all the same, just like you said.
“And how come every time I point out that the same 1% of people playing 40% of the taxes in this country also have 40% of the wealth in this country, everybody just ignores me?”
Because they don’t know how to deal with facts, Cory; they deal almost exclusively in myths that emotionally resonate with them. It’s very unfortunate.
Spook, I also note the conspicuous absence of any substantive response to my longer post above regarding the realities driving the Occupy Wall Street movement.
Dennis, what you cite as “the realities” driving the OWS movement are, in fact, not reality at all. The reality is that a lot of ignorant, ill-educated, mostly young people are being incited to protest against something they don’t even understand by people and groups whose ultimate goal is to dismantle capitalism and destroy freedom.
You and I simply don’t look at things through the same lens. You look at people who have made a lot of money and see evil. Perhaps some of them are; it’s not for me to pass judgement on someone I don’t know by virtue of how much money they make. I’m not angry or envious because someone has more than I do. If every millionaire and billionaire suddenly became penniless tomorrow, it wouldn’t affect my life one bit. If they all gave their riches to the poor, within a decade the rich would be rich again, and the poor would be poor again.
There goes denny and cory again with the mindless talking points…..
The Occupy Wall Street children are upset with .. well .. Wall Street. They are also upset with politicians being “bought” by Wall Street and dictating elections (as denny and cory so readily and dutifully regurgitated).
So let’s take a look at the type of politician that the Occupy Wall Street children are protesting …
The politician who has received more money from Wall Street than any other over the past 20 years.
The politician who has received more money from Bank of American than any other candidate dating back to 1991.
The politician who racked up $8.9 million from 56 bundlers in the securities and investment industry.
The politician who had 20% of total campaign funds coming directly from Wall Street.
The politician who, in one election, racked up $15.8 million from executives at Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, UBS AG, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley.
Oh wait, that politician would be Barack Obama.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/10/obama-attacks-banks-while-raking-in-wall-street-dough/
Denny and cory, you either need some ACCURATE talking points or you need to educate yourself about your own party and pResident. He is the very person you lambast here day in and day out and sadly, you don’t even know it.
Pathetic.
Note: this was an answer to a post in another thread, but the above response so readily and accurately fits, it can be applied to any drone who mindlessly regurgitates the dumb down talking points, that denny and cory are all too eager to do so.
My favorite part of your copypasta is how it is utterly unrelated to anything that was said in this thread. If you’re not careful, I’ll start copying and pasting articles from Epicurious and pretending like I’ve added something to the discussion.
“… and pretending like I’ve added something to the discussion.”
Don’t get carried away there cory. You have yet to add anything to the discussion. BTW, that was MY post originally used in response to another drone as the note says – do try to keep up. Denny does regurgitate the mindless talking point that the GOP defends Wall Street and you post responses in support of denny assertions. Apparently this is above your ability to comprehend the written word.
The post accurately reflects denny’s and yours ability to regurgitate talking points and the party line. That is the whole point. You are a drone that mindlessly follows the orders of a “queen”.
Unfortunately for you, denny and the other drones there is nothing that can be done to cure you of the affliction.
It is not my fault that you cannot contribute to a discussion with independent thought.
OWS
corkys buds
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Gallery/18.htm
The CEO’s who managed these corrupt and compromised government organizations, were almost always left wing Democrat insiders like Jamie Gorelick (Hillary supporter) and Harold Raines (Obama supporter). When they retired from their executive duties at Freddie they received tens of millions in payouts, and they left behind heavily indebted carcasses that continue to rot uncontrollably even today, three years after the mortgage-induced financial crisis of 2008.
It is this hopelessly corrupt form of corporate cronyism, abetted by government that OWS should be clamoring to dismantle, not capitalism. And their rightful targets are mostly democrats reigning in the Capitol Building and in the White House, not the Wall Street bankers residing in upper eastside Manhattan townhouses.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/_a_lesson_about_crony_capitalism_for_the_ows_crowd.html
That’s cute. Here’s the problem, though. You copied and pasted a response to a post that nobody here made. It’s really easy to pretend I tow the party line when you are responding to posts I didn’t make.
When are you going to address the points actually brought up in dennis’s post, like the skyrocketing wages for CEOs in companies that are laying off workers? Did you even bother reading anything beyond what was required to identify our positions as vaguely liberal before responding?
And the whole towing the party line thing is amusing, except that it really should only take reading a handful of the posts I’ve made here to recognize that I don’t speak uniformly positively about Obama, much less any entire party. I know accusing everybody of being a bunch of followers or whatever is the cool thing to do, but you should at least let me know whom I am supposed to be blindly following so I can figure out what views you are pretending I have.
I will dumb it down for you. Should I type slowly so you will be able to understand? I was released from a company as part of a work force reduction (WFR) because the company did not turn a large enough profit while the management (all the little “C’s”) are safely living a great life of luxury; however, when I signed the original contract to start work there or the other agreements on departure did I see anything that said my salary would be tied to a percentage of the salary of anyone else. Neither that or my retention.
As a stockholder in the same company, I applaud the move, even though it cost me my job, because the stock has seen a rebound in the recent past. I vote at shareholder meetings every year and help decide the course for the company but I am sure this eludes your simple mind and premise. Hint: I vote for the CEO, etc.–I elected the man that fired me.
Life is a bitch and I do not or will not complain because it was not “fair.” I got my shot and did very well as I see it–not as some dick like you or anyone else determines it to be. With consideration the the very poor in this country live better than the Kings & Queens of less than several hundred years ago–you might want to check your premises. That, and if you are out with the OWS crowd–take a shower.
“Apparently this is above your ability to comprehend the written word.”
Speaking of inability to comprehend the written word, have you learned what the word “everything” means yet? How about the word “may”–got that one figured out?
“denny’s and yours ability to regurgitate talking points and the party line…”
Reading comprehension here is pretty close to zero. Ciao, folks – been nice and all that.
AMF stooge.
Since you have decided to depart–could you do us a favor and take Cory with you for eternity? Be real nice for those of us that try to have a conversation.
cory whines: “Here’s the problem, though. You copied and pasted a response to a post that nobody here made.”
Uh, try again, drone. Denny’s post regurgitates the talking point how the GOP is in the back pockets of corporations and CEOs. You really need to repeat elementary reading comprehension.
denny whines: “Reading comprehension here is pretty close to zero. Ciao, folks – been nice and all that.”
Now that you are leaving, the reading comprehension “score” will vastly improve. Again, we cannot expect drones such as yourself to have the ability to comprehend and think for oneself.
He posted one line, at the very end, about how both parties are guilty of increasing corporate power, but the GOP moreso. The rest of his post had nothing to do with that, and even that one sentence isn’t exactly saying what your post was arguing against.
So, denny did make the post just like I said! Apparently, you had to have someone point that out to you since you denied it time and again.
Then you again deny that denny ever said such a thing…..
Truly amazing…. you can’t think for yourself even when it is as plain as the nose on your face.
Give it up drone. You have been crushed in an oh so simple argument….all too easy. Thanks for playing. Now, go back to the dailykos, the democraticunderground or hell’s newspaper. There you won’t stand out like a sore thumb when you make boneheaded comments and regurgitate talking point lies.
So long.
Yes you managed to address a point that was almost, but not quite, the point Dennis made in one sentence at the end of his fairly long post. Go ahead an congratulate yourself on “crushing” your opposition. Maybe next time you can graduate to addressing one of his actual peripheral points, and by this time in 2021, you’ll be ready to have adult discussions where you are able to read and comprehend whole posts at a time.
I also have never read a single article from any of the publications you just mentioned, so if you are still trying to nail down whose “drone” I am, you’ll need to keep trying.
Still beating that dead horse of an argument you have there cory?
So what is it this time? Oh, he did make the point but not really?
Wow. Can you weasel around that argument any more?
Denny made an accusation. An accusation that drones make all the time and I answered it. It is not my fault you don’t like the answer and cannot disprove it and you cannot simply ignore it. It is also not required to address every single point in his post. I just addressed the same old mindless talking points you drones love to regurgitate.
After all, obAMATEUR does not have a record to run on and it is necessary for him to attack corporations and continue to play the class warfare card. Which again brings us to the Wall Street Occupiers. They are upset with politicians (Republican of course) and their relationships to corporations and the influence from corporations.
And I pointed out who has received the most cash from corporations, Wall Street and the banks and the occupiers are ignoring that fact just like you mindless drones.
Again, thanks for playing, you lost again. You demonstrate once again that you cannot have an adult conversation…. you must be an adult to do so. Sadly, for you, you are not qualified (physically maybe).
Since you still haven’t gotten it, let me clarify for you. The point he made in one throwaway comment was not that the GOP takes in more donations than the Democratic Party. It was that GOP policy encourages consolidation of power in corporations. There are, of course, reasons that these two statements could be related, but they are not synonymous, and disproving one (giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you even did that) does not disprove the other.
So to put it into the easy, black and white terms that you keep trying to use, it isn’t that he “made the point but not really”, it is that he didn’t make the point at all, and you’re still arguing against a post nobody ever made.
Really, though, I don’t even know why I’m bothering at this point with somebody who has to declare repeatedly that they “won” and then thinks that they are having an adult conversation.
No cory, you have not gotten it after several tries.
Perhaps with the talent for spin and revision you could get a job with obAMATEUR’s press office!
No matter how you try to minimize it, you can’t dig your way out of the hole you have created for yourself.
“Really, though, I don’t even know why I’m bothering at this point..”
Simple, your pride it hurt for getting caught in an oh so obvious way and you are in damage control mode, which is why you would fit in at obAMATEUR’s office of propaganda.
And how come every time I point out that the same 1% of people playing 40% of the taxes in this country also have 40% of the wealth in this country, everybody just ignores me? – cory
That’s because we recognize irrational jealousy when we see it. Wealth is not a static concept nor is it a quantifiable concept. Two concepts that liberals can either not wrap their minds around, or choose not to because it doesn’t fit the narrative.
I don’t understand Cory’s dilemma. People who control 40% of the wealth pay 40% of the taxes. Is there something unfair about that?
Ahh, you think you are clever, but I’m not the one who keeps bringing up that the top 1% pay nearly 40% of federal income taxes like it is some sort of travesty, it is the conservatives.
It’s also not hard to figure out that if the top isn’t paying a disproportionate amount in taxes, and the bottom (whether it is a bum on the street or an elderly person who no longer takes in new income) pays close to nothing at all, it is the people in the middle that are getting stuck paying more as a percentage of their income than they can save.
As a relative newcomer here, it seems to me that Dennis, Cory and David should be out there working to elect legislators who will cap corporate executive compensation instead of wasting their time blogging. Never mind that capping personal income isn’t in the Constitution. That certainly hasn’t bothered liberals before.
BTW, I’ve joined the ranks of the employed again. Well, self-employed, that is. I started a landscaping business out of my garage. Actually, I started out mowing lawns late this summer, and people started asking me if I could do other things, like trim shrubs, plant flowers, plow snow, etc.. I’m using personal equipment that I already had, so start-up costs were minimal.
thats…innovation….from the ground up….literally…
welcome to the ranks of the self employed…of course, no elected rep will ever lift a finger for us…but thats ok…freedom is wonderful
JS03,
Freedom is a beautiful thing. And the cool thing about it is that I’ve haven’t encountered much in the way of prohibitive government regulations so far. I’ve already concluded that the secret is to stay small enough that you’re essentially under the government’s radar.
Good Luck (but hard work is the real secret) to you Sir. Until I get my hip replacement surgeries later this year I found it necessary to hire a company that sounds quite a bit like yours and I am quite pleased that they do an excellent job.
Sad part is here in N.Carolina if you want to go from lawn cutting to landscaping–you need to get a license and meet a ton of requirements which make the choice for me to hire a landscaper prohibitive at the moment but then again–I am no John Edwards with the ability or need for $400 haircuts or $500 lawn reviews.
Keep your head down and work hard–I have a few friends that have done quite well in that industry.
Leonard
congrats, now you will get to see the beast of government up close and personal.
you greeeeedy corporate bastad you….LOL 🙂 (welcome aboard)
In response to Mr. L’Farte, who seems to think I believe there should be some sort of legislation to cap executive pay. Once again you’re stuck inside a mental box.
The idea of legislating pay caps is absurd, unless you’re talking about government jobs. What I believe there should be is something resembling a moral conscience on the part of executives and boards of directors. People who set policies for corporations should have consciences, since corporations themselves (although they are given the rights of persons by law) have no moral conscience.
Outside limits on compensation ratios should be voluntary and encouraged by full disclosure. (Thanks to the Dodd-Frank reform act public companies now are required to disclose the pay ratio between their CEO and median employees. This is a good thing.) People at the bottom of the scale who work faithfully for any company should be compensated fairly and treated with dignity rather than as a disposable commodity.
There’s nothing wrong with executive pay being multiples that of workers; however, hundreds of times is impossible to justify morally when full-time workers are without adequate health care and otherwise unable to provide for their own basic needs. If median worker pay in any company is low, top executives’ pay should be commensurately downscale. Full disclosure and worker morale should be strong incentives to keep the ratio realistic.
I’ve always maintained that you can’t legislate morality. Mark has consistently disagreed with me, saying laws by definition must legislate morality. However I believe a certain moral accountability is inherent in our political choices, which is why I cannot support any party that justifies unbridled greed at the expense of the poorest and most powerless in our society. It goes against the grain of the moral teachings I’ve long believed in.
WAIT !
STOP the MUSIC !!!!!
I thought you sang your B4V swan song dennistooge?
moved on, to move on.org
huffed away, to huffpo
dashed to, DU
like split
left
zoomed
ran.
Heeeeees Baaaaaack……ROTFLMAO
no fun at Loons R-US ?
dennistooge
BS
which is why I cannot support any party that justifies unbridled greed at the expense of the poorest and most powerless in our society. It goes against the grain of the moral teachings I’ve long believed in.
No dummy,
when some are blessed beyond their wildest dreams they are then able to pass that along to many many many others through employment, charity, foundations, tithing, hospitals, institutions etc
NOT to a huge never ending expanding bloated thieving government stealing ones wealth to give to illegal trespassers, crack heads, ho’s, and welfare queens, and whoever THEY deem “deserves” it.
what do you do dennydummy?
I’s say some low level job where da man keeps ya down.
dummdummdenny
People who set policies for corporations should have consciences, since corporations themselves (although they are given the rights of persons by law) have no moral conscience.
They have a LEGAL, MORAL, DUTY to the stock holders and the stock holders ONLY.
Dont like it?
dont buy stock.
in fact dont buy anything, make EVERYTHING YOURSELF.
and I mean EVERYTHING>>>>>>
Hmmmmmm
did U mail yours in yet denny??
Let’s forget about the debt for the moment.
U.S. spends 3.6 trillion a year.
112 million taxpayers
3.6 t / 112m = 321,428
That means every taxpayer only needs to give 321,428 each to balance the spending.
I personally don’t have a problem with this. Quit your bitch’in and mail your check..
Taxed Enough Already
denny doesn’t get it as usual: “The idea of legislating pay caps is absurd”
But trying to do it through excessive and unbalanced taxation is okay?
I feel like I’ve said this to you before, but the top marginal tax rates in the 1950s were above 90%. That’s effectively capping corporate executive compensation (as long as you don’t give people loopholes to dance through) and there weren’t exactly any courts that ruled it unconstitutional at the time. You should crack open a history book before claiming that something we did 60 years ago is impossible.
corky
so how many of the 46% of Americans who now pay NO federal income tax, paid none 60 years ago?
did 53% of Americans pay LESS than 3% of all taxes then?
were there 30 MILLION illegal trespassers? sucking 200 BILLION $$$$$$$$ a year
what percent of the budget was entitlements and WELFARE??
physician heal thy self Moron.
here is what one man said……..
In the 1940’s, my Father made approximately $125 dollars a month, we lived well. There was no minimum wage law.
My first job as an adult in the 1950’s was for $275.00 a month and I lived okay. By 1959, I was making $700.00 a month, married, one child, new home, car, furniture and still able to save money. In 1949, the minimum wage was raised from 40 cents an hour to 75 cents an hour.
Minimum wages only covered certain occupations, not all of them. For a history of their development, see:
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/coverage.…
It was raised to $1.00 per hr in 1955 and to $1.25 by 1963.
By the 1960’s, my salary was $900.00 per month, the average salary then was half that amount or less. As a manager of nearly 200 people, my salary increased to $1000 a month in 1965, it put me on top of the world.
The average social security benefit in the early 1960’s was under $100.00 per month. People did not have Medicare until the middle 1960’s.
corky
Who is Not Paying Taxes?
http://visualizingeconomics.com/2010/02/05/who-is-not-paying-taxes/
I feel like I’ve said this to you before,
I believe you have, Cory, and you’ve also been asked on more than one occasion questions like how many individuals paid 90% of their income in income taxes, and what was the actual average collected rate of taxes during that period? I can’t recall that you’ve ever answered either question, I suspect because you realize how intellectually dishonest and disingenuous your premise is.
Cory,
There was a discussion a year or so ago at Free Republic, IIRC, about the top marginal rate in the 1950’s (maxed out at 92%). I save one of the readers comments just in case I ever got in the same discussion again.
“I feel like I’ve said this to you before..”
Ahhhh, the curse of being a mindless drone, regurgitating dumbed down talking points day in and day out.
Pathetic.
Yes, yes, the effective salary cap actually made people not bother trying to get salaries that would start getting taxed at above 90%, but wasn’t that the whole point of the discussion? For point of reference, the top marginal tax bracket started at $200,000, which if you adjust for inflation is something like $1.7 million. The question you should really be asking is how many people would be affected today if we enacted the tax at an inflation-adjusted rate. It doesn’t seem like such a token bracket anymore, does it?
And yes, we are talking about marginal rates. Nobody ever paid 90% or more of their income as taxes, because that’s not how a progressive income tax works.
I also like how the argument keeps changing as to why the 50s and 60s don’t count. Before it was that they weren’t actually good, or that GDP growth was because of government spending for the Korean War (nevermind that government spending was still a lower percentage of GDP than it was during Reagan’s administration, which is what Spook tried to compare it to), and now it is because they were magical and full of cheap labor and free kittens. Only then neocon copies and pastes in some numbers that directly contradict that concept (Try running the numbers he posted through an inflation calculator and see what you come up with. Apparently minimum wage was effectively almost the same in 1956 as it is now, according to his numbers.).
Cory,
If you honestly think that the “rich” people in 1950’s ACTUALLY paid 90% of their income in taxes, then we really have nothing to discuss anymore.
“ACTUALLY paid 90% of their income in taxes”
He said “top marginal rate,” cluster. Do you know how marginal rates work?
walleye
Theft, we all know how that works.
How about YOU paying 90% or STFU
Wallace, that’s one of the few times you’ve actually made a valid point. Welcome to the blind pig society.
My question above to Cory should have been, do you know how many individuals the 90% top marginal rate actually applied to back in the 50’s?
I know you don’t understand how marginal rates work, neocon; you’re stupid. But cluster isn’t stupid, yet here he is, whiffing on how marginal rates work, then angrily trying to blame his lack of comprehension on “liberals.”
You should get better control of your emotions, cluster.
Cluster,
Great minds think alike.
I guess it is a good thing that I neither think that nor have posted anything that would lead any rational individual to believe I think that, then?
Cluster, of course he does, that is what his handlers told him and his fellow drones to mindlessly regurgitate.
It’s like obAMATEUR reading from a teleprompter. They see it and they regurgitate it.
Yes, clearly I said “marginal” instead of “aggregate” because I actually meant “aggregate” because somebody someplace told me that’s what to say. Or something. Again, it is really easy to claim that I mindless repeat other peoples’ words when you are the one putting those words in my mouth.
And thank you for complimenting my shoes (as long as you’re making up my half of the conversation, I guess I’ll go ahead and make up yours, too).
Don’t you get it, Cory? You didn’t say what you said; you said what they say you said, and don’t you day say otherwise!
Gee wally, yours and Cory’s mindless regurgitation of dumbed down talking points was a dead giveaway.
Wallace or bodie, or whoever the f**k you are today,
I actually think cory, and many liberals believe that people did pay upwards of 90% of their income in taxes. Why else would they keep posting the same drivel time after time?
Yuuuuup
Marginal tax rates have been all over the lot in the last 50 years: from 90 percent in the 1950s to 28 percent in the late 1980s to 39.6 percent in the 1990s to 35 percent today. Even with all the volatility in the top tax rate, the effective tax rate for the top 1 percent of earners has barely budged, Laffer says.
What’s more, as tax rates have come down, the share paid by the rich has gone up. In 1981, when the top tax rate was 70 percent (50 percent on earned income), the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for 17.6 percent of the income tax, or 1.5 percent of gross domestic product, according to Laffer. In 2006, with a top rate of 35 percent, the richest 1 percent paid 40 percent of the income tax, equal to 3.2 percent of GDP.
“All rates were cut a lot, but no other group saw an increase in the GDP share of taxes paid,” Laffer says.
The bottom 50 percent paid only 3 percent of the federal income tax in 2006.
cluster
seems the PEE Baggers all think a like.
‘The Next Big Step’: Occupy Chicago Gives Rousing Welcome to Communist Party U.S.A.
“We will be with this movement.”
PEE Baggers = Commies?
seems so; AND donks.