ERDoc Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 As we have been having a few very interesting non-EMS discussions (which haven't ended in name calling), I figured I'd throw out this article I came across on CNN.com http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/26/news/economy/occupy_wall_street_backlash/?npt=NP1&hpt=hp_t2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
systemet Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 As we have been having a few very interesting non-EMS discussions (which haven't ended in name calling), I figured I'd throw out this article I came across on CNN.com http://money.cnn.com...t=NP1&hpt=hp_t2 I'm not sure if I understand all the motivations behind the "occupy" movement, but I think this article presents a false dichotomy. It seems to suggest that either you're one of the 53% of Americans that pay federal income tax, or you're a member of an "Occupy!" group. My impression (albeit from afar), has been that there are plenty of people who pay federal income tax that are dissatisfied with the current situation, and have been protesting. It seems like one of the many (and often confusing) issues has been that some of the richest Americans aren't contributing income tax, due to various tax loopholes. I have respect for anyone who manages to educate themselves and move out of poverty. I think when you've done that, it's tempting to feel like "you did it yourself", and as if no one else had a hand in your success. I don't think that's really often the case. And even if it is, and you manage to succeed, does it mean that the system doesn't need changing? Or that it's fair? I have a hard time, as an outsider, hearing about discussions on the federal deficits and national debt where one side is drawing a line in the sand and saying "no new taxes", even to the ultra-wealthy. Choosing to have low taxes, is choosing not to take in revenue. It's still ultimately spending. Instead of spending on schools, or the military, or health care, it's general spending on the population of people with taxable incomes. It seems like any approach to deficit management that focuses on either taxation, or social programs, is overly simplistic and doomed to failure. I'd also question the 53% number. It seems hard to believe that 53% of eligible Americans are paying federal income tax if the current unemployment rate is 9%. I suspect that these numbers are being counted differently, and that it's not that 38% of Americans are employed but somehow committing tax evasion. I wonder if the 53% number being reported include people who pay income tax, but get a net tax rebate? Or children, retirees, chronically disabled, and people in general who aren't included in unemployment figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WelshMedic Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 As we have been having a few very interesting non-EMS discussions (which haven't ended in name calling), I figured I'd throw out this article I came across on CNN.com http://money.cnn.com...t=NP1&hpt=hp_t2 There are a number of topics that are strictly US related and, therefore, I dont feel qualified to comment. The Occupy movement is not one of those as it's fast becoming a global phenomenon. My take on the subject: In essence, the Occupy movement is a great initiative. However, it's just that. We are not going to change or better the world by sitting in tents. We will do it by getting up off our a$$es and doing something about it. I think the guy in the article makes a good point, your life is your own responsibility. That's not to say that the banks didn't take huge risks in the past, putting people's welfare in jeopardy. However, those same people took out, amongst other things, those sub-prime mortgages themselves. I the knowledge that if just one thing went wrong, then they would have to default. They signed to that effect, they should have thought about the consequences before putting pen to paper. My mortgage is half the market value of my property. I would hate to have to do it, but even in this deep financial crisis, selling my house would not land me in debt. Oh, by the way, my mortgage is the only form of debt I have. Of course there are heart-wrenching examples of poverty and suffering by hard-working people, and that is very very sad. But they accumulated debt themselves, and now they are suffering the consequences. It's about time we realized that the consumer orientated, materialisitic, credit card society we live in is broken. If you can't pay for it, you can't have it. Coming back to the Occupy movement, the statement has been made. It's now time to get the economy going again and not dwell on past mistakes. WM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Man, I like this a lot... https://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=2604455794371&set=a.1814320481482.105650.1344170271&type=1&theater I can't figure out how to post the pic directly here... Dwayne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WelshMedic Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 The link doesn't work, mate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPINFV Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 I'm not sure if I understand all the motivations behind the "occupy" movement, but I think this article presents a false dichotomy. It seems to suggest that either you're one of the 53% of Americans that pay federal income tax, or you're a member of an "Occupy!" group. No more a false dichotomy than the "either you support the occupy movement, or you're a member of the 1%." The Occupy movement doesn't speak for me, and I'm not a member of the 1%. That doesn't stop the Occupy movement from claiming to speak for the 1%. It seems like one of the many (and often confusing) issues has been that some of the richest Americans aren't contributing income tax, due to various tax loopholes. It's not just the rich that take deductions... err.. "loopholes." Oh, wait, it's only a loophole when the other guy does it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingemt2011 Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Don't laugh as I go all hoover on u, but it is rumored that the ocutards are being funded by the american communist party, but heard on FOX so use a grain of salt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HERBIE1 Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 As we have been having a few very interesting non-EMS discussions (which haven't ended in name calling), I figured I'd throw out this article I came across on CNN.com http://money.cnn.com...t=NP1&hpt=hp_t2 Well, it's obviously a play on the 99% claim of the OWS folks. I agree that this is a false choice being presented by this group-either you support them , or are among the 1% "elite" or support them. This guy is right- everyone SHOULD pay something- even if it's a nominal amount. What many folks don't realize that folks who receive government assistance actually can received a tax refund. In other words, they spend government money that they did not earn, AND can receive a tax refund on the same money the government gave them to spend. That's about as twisted and perverse as can be. And we wonder why the system here is so screwed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
systemet Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 No more a false dichotomy than the "either you support the occupy movement, or you're a member of the 1%." The Occupy movement doesn't speak for me, and I'm not a member of the 1%. That doesn't stop the Occupy movement from claiming to speak for the 1%. Sounds like maybe I'm not familiar enough with the "occupy" movement to be commenting here. I would agree that if they're claiming to represent 99% of the population, and that anyone who disagrees is part of the 1%, then it's also fallacious. Maybe that's the point, and I missed it. It's not just the rich that take deductions... err.. "loopholes." Oh, wait, it's only a loophole when the other guy does it! Agreed. But there's also a world of difference in my mind between someone making minimum wage, supporting kids, who gets a net tax rebate, and someone worth a couple of million not paying tax. I'm pretty left wing. I don't mind paying taxes to provide social services. I like having them there when I need them. I don't think this mentality is as common in the states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPINFV Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 OWS claims to be representing the 99%. The problem is that by it's very structure, there are no specific demands besides 'eliminate corporate greed,' hence why there's three or four crack pot lists of "demands" floating around. However, by the very nature of the fact that they are claiming to represent the 99%, anyone who disagrees is defacto a member of the 1%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts