41 replies to this topic

[arbman]

99% don't want to pay taxes to make the bankers richer or fund another Solyndra. It just doesn't matter whether it is Republican or Democrat leadership, 99% is set up to feed the 1%, the taxes 99% pay goes into this black hole called govt. It never comes back to 99%, it just disappears now and the govt leaves behind this pile of crap called national debt for the children of 99%. Not sure, maybe 99% figured all out, it was about time... Roger, perhaps 99% fogured out that Congress only passes the laws that 1% approve of, so there is no point in talking to or protesting the govt. The govt doesn't have the authority to represent the people anymore.

Edited by arbman, 30 October 2011 - 11:58 PM.

[arbman]

1% used to put the capital, 99% would put the sweat capital, then they used to share the profits. Now 1% wants to go back to slavery by rather spending their chips on China. Congress doesn't have what it takes to stand up and tell 1% to share more for the sweat capital 99% is still trying to put in. So unrepresented, 99% is loosing their hope, 99% feels cheated by 1%... Are these so hard to understand? These are obvious to me...

[pdx5]

I have to laugh when some think the 1% are running the country. The following 1% (some of them top 0.01% ) could'nt even win elections. From the most recent 2010 elections: Gov Whitman running for governor in CA spent $142 mil of her own money & lost Sen Fiorina running for senator in CA spent $5.5 mil own money & lost Linda McMahon in CT spent $40 mil of her own money and lost Greene in FL running for senator (spent $24 mil own money) lost to Rubio. Among other notable very rich losers: Gov nelson Rockefeller ran for presidential nomination and lost. Texas rich man John Connally another loser who spent millions and lost. And the list goes on and on. May be if the tax rate on corporations was not the 2nd highest in the world, more jobs might stay here. If the most stringent regulations on industry were not choking them, may be more jobs would stay here. May be the top 1% should open a cash window on Wall Street and distribute free money to who ever wants it. But wait, even if they distributed ALL of their assets of top 1% amounting to $28.57 Trillion among the 305 million 99%, it would amount to ONE time windfall of $90,000 per person. And how long will that last? As Rogerdodger explained money has no value unless there are goods available to purchase with it. Take ALL the assets of the top 1% down to ZERO and then who will be left to produce and employ people?

[arbman]

Are you picking the historically democratic states? Beside many free trade laws were passed during Clinton era, didn't they? US manufacturing basically disappeared. The corporate taxes can go lower, but GE may not still pay any. The taxes should be as low as they should be, I have no problem with it, no bank should be bailed out, the govt projects are basically failures and became a waste of taxes. But, I don't think the regulations are any tougher than they need to be, just because China prefers to live in an industrial dump to grow doesn't mean US should follow the same path to compete. Nobody is asking for the rich to distribute their wealth, this is absurd. US could have chosen to either advance as a society to keep its middle class or destroy it, I think the decision is clear. What should we say? US capitalism basically failed, but perhaps the global capitalism succeeded...

[MikeyG]

US capitalism basically failed, but perhaps the global capitalism succeeded...

I don't think US capitalism has failed, we have become the wealthiest nation in about 200 years...

Do we have our flaws??? of course...

People risk their lives to come here because of our capitalistic system and freedom...

The alternative is a goverment controlled system and I would venture a guess that 100% of the 99% have never lived in Cuba or North Korea...

Do we have a problem we crony capitalism, yes we do, so instead of prostesting Oakland and Denver and wherever else they shoud protest in DC...

I think it's up to the people to stay informed about the goverment and to vote the bums out, instead of knocking over police motorcycles and dressing up like zombie bankers...

[Iblayz]

Thanks to the ops for leaving this thread up there and open. I saw it yesterday but never looked at it until this morning. And.... RD......an absolutely great post but I wonder if we are at the place where the MAJORITY can handle the truth.

[zman]

its not that they dont want to work for 10 per hour or whatever, they see a lot of ceo's getting huge money for failing or even making the company money...how much is enough for a ceo??? I tend to think its out of control the executive pay in this country...the boards have failed, the greedy on wall street have failed us...greed has destroyed a generation unfortunately...there is enough blame to go around, but don't be too simplistic to think its the younger generation that has to learn..

[pdx5]

Are you picking the historically democratic states? Beside many free trade laws were passed during Clinton era, didn't they? US manufacturing basically disappeared. The corporate taxes can go lower, but GE may not still pay any. The taxes should be as low as they should be, I have no problem with it, no bank should be bailed out, the govt projects are basically failures and became a waste of taxes. But, I don't think the regulations are any tougher than they need to be, just because China prefers to live in an industrial dump to grow doesn't mean US should follow the same path to compete. Nobody is asking for the rich to distribute their wealth, this is absurd. US could have chosen to either advance as a society to keep its middle class or destroy it, I think the decision is clear. What should we say? US capitalism basically failed, but perhaps the global capitalism succeeded...

Not picking just democratic states...just some recent examples from top of my head of super rich
who ran for election and lost. Free trade is fine only if it is fair trade.
The only way outfits like GE would not escape taxes is to tax sales instead of profits.
US corporate policy punishes the more productive by taxing profits, and rewards the less productive
with tax loss carryovers. Taxing corporate sales OTOH equalizes the playing field for the most productive. Those are the type which are likely to grow and hire more people.

I absolutely agree tax payer bailouts of any corporation is wrong and amounts to crony capitalism,
which is not real capitalism. Under real capitalism you have the privilege to fail.

Regulations- it is not the environmental regulations which is the main problem, it is the paperwork
required which most small businesses can not afford. When I worked for a government contractor,
we had to fill out 7 pages of documents to dig a 4 foot deep ditch to prove we had taken all safety
precautions. I have personally visited other countries where industrial pollution is simply horrible.
I am of course not going to encourage that here. So long as they are making increasingly more
difficult for small businesses to operate, expect middle class to diminish. Most small business owners
are the backbone of middle class.

Edited by pdx5, 31 October 2011 - 02:09 PM.

[pdx5]

its not that they dont want to work for 10 per hour or whatever, they see a lot of ceo's getting huge money for failing or even making the company money...how much is enough for a ceo??? I tend to think its out of control the executive pay in this country...the boards have failed, the greedy on wall street have failed us...greed has destroyed a generation unfortunately...there is enough blame to go around, but don't be too simplistic to think its the younger generation that has to learn..

On that issue of CEO pay, is where US capitalism has gone wrong. Our payouts are much higher
than other countries, especially Japan & Germany. It is very difficult to control because the board of
directors are usually friendly to the executives. Yes, the board is elected by stock holders but with
millions of stock holders voting independently, it is rare any one nominated ever loses. I would not
be averse to passing a law which would set a maximum ratio between the minimum paid employee
compared to the highest paid employee. If minimum wage in a corporation is $20,000 annually,
then by using a maximum factor of let's say 50 would limit CEO pay at $1 million, annually. Before
the CEO can get a raise, he would have to raise all wages proportionally, which will require that the
company makes a profit. If the company has a loss, no one gets a raise, including the CEO.

[CRUISENAL]

PDX,

Great posts!

Amen to that idea, but what's the chance that will ever happen?

It should happen, and maybe over time as this whole system comes to a head, we will see some change in that direction. But I suspect is is several years off. Alan

its not that they dont want to work for 10 per hour or whatever, they see a lot of ceo's getting huge money for failing or even making the company money...how much is enough for a ceo??? I tend to think its out of control the executive pay in this country...the boards have failed, the greedy on wall street have failed us...greed has destroyed a generation unfortunately...there is enough blame to go around, but don't be too simplistic to think its the younger generation that has to learn..

On that issue of CEO pay, is where US capitalism has gone wrong. Our payouts are much higher
than other countries, especially Japan & Germany. It is very difficult to control because the board of
directors are usually friendly to the executives. Yes, the board is elected by stock holders but with
millions of stock holders voting independently, it is rare any one nominated ever loses. I would not
be averse to passing a law which would set a maximum ratio between the minimum paid employee
compared to the highest paid employee. If minimum wage in a corporation is $20,000 annually,
then by using a maximum factor of let's say 50 would limit CEO pay at $1 million, annually. Before
the CEO can get a raise, he would have to raise all wages proportionally, which will require that the
company makes a profit. If the company has a loss, no one gets a raise, including the CEO.