Why this massive mobilisation against these not-yet-fully-articulated, unarmed, inchoate people? After all, protesters against the war in Iraq, Tea Party rallies and others have all proceeded without this coordinated crackdown. Is it really the camping? As I write, two hundred young people, with sleeping bags, suitcases and even folding chairs, are still camping out all night and day outside of NBC on public sidewalks under the benevolent eye of an NYPD cop awaiting Saturday Night Live tickets, so surely the camping is not the issue. I was still deeply puzzled as to why OWS, this hapless, hopeful band, would call out a violent federal response.
That is, until I found out what it was that OWS actually wanted.
The mainstream media was declaring continually "OWS has no message". Frustrated, I simply asked them. I began soliciting online "What is it you want?" answers from Occupy. In the first 15 minutes, I received 100 answers. These were truly eye-opening
More of a reflection on the American consumer public than Time, I think.Bread and circus.
More of a reflection on the American consumer public than Time, I think.
Not quite as see on TV...Now it is getting silly...shutting down the port of Oakland? Why? So the 99%-ers there will be denied both the right and ability to work...
We are the front-line workers who haul container rigs full of imported and exported goods to and from the docks and warehouses every day.
We have been elected by committees of our co-workers at the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Seattle, Tacoma, New York and New Jersey to tell our collective story. We have accepted the honor to speak up for our brothers and sisters about our working conditions despite the risk of retaliation we face. One of us is a mother, the rest of us fathers. Between the five of us we have 11children and one more baby on the way. We have a combined 46 years of experience driving cargo from our shores for America’s stores.
We are inspired that a non-violent democratic movement that insists on basic economic fairness is capturing the hearts and minds of so many working people. Thank you “99 Percenters” for hearing our call for justice. We are humbled and overwhelmed by recent attention. Normally we are invisible.
(continues)
so the white population of baltimore shrinks a little.....Well they kicked everyone from Occupy Baltimore out this morning. I don't think anyone will actually notice.
Agreed. We want bread and circus, they happily give it to us. IMO it is the complacency and ignorance of the American people that allow the "1%" to pretty much control everything. The most focused message of the occupy movement seems to be internet memes and not any real suggestions on how to solve the problem we face. It seems like a no brainier that a constitutional amendment to undo the 'corporate citizen' SC decision. But before you think about it realize that the Packers are still undefeated and something or another is going on with that fat-ass Kardashian chick. Hey look, something shiny...More of a reflection on the American consumer public than Time, I think.
Thats what I get for watching Euro vision...
Bricks work better.to the violent faction of Occupy Oakland: go cry me a river
huh? he paid $6.2M for 2010 (@13.9%, expected to be 15.4% for 2011). i wonder what are the unadvertised costs of CPAs & such to get his rate that low. IOW, he may be paying what appears to be a low rate, but i'm sure he's handing out the cheddar to other-than-gov't recipients. shall we now hate on all the players in the game? shall we reserve judgment for any who spends frivolously, or hoard their cash?Unless of course you are content with the fact that Romney paid half what you did in taxes last year. If that's the case, you sir are a fool.
I love how you guys are willing to pretend that giving money to the Mormon church is the same as paying taxes. Taxes go to support priorities that are determined by our representatives. Donations to the Mormons go to support freaky white private buildings, proselytizing in 3rd world countries, fighting gay marriage in California and a huge investment portfolio. Furthermore, since these donations are tax deductible, they result in less taxes paid and an increase in the debt. Fvck that.huh? he paid $6.2M for 2010 (@13.9%, expected to be 15.4% for 2011). i wonder what are the unadvertised costs of CPAs & such to get his rate that low. IOW, he may be paying what appears to be a low rate, but i'm sure he's handing out the cheddar to other-than-gov't recipients. shall we now hate on all the players in the game? shall we reserve judgment for any who spends frivolously, or hoard their cash?
and i love how you guys are willing to pretend that money not going to taxes is the same as giving it to the mormon churchI love how you guys are willing to pretend that giving money to the Mormon church is the same as paying taxes.
and i don't 100% agree w/ how our tax dollars are spent.Taxes go to support priorities that are determined by our representatives. Donations to the Mormons go to support freaky white private buildings, proselytizing in 3rd world countries, fighting gay marriage in California and a huge investment portfolio.
no, spending results in an increased debtFurthermore, since these donations are tax deductible, they result in less taxes paid and an increase in the debt.
you're saying that a reasonable person would opt to pay taxes rather than keep it? what "reason" is this based upon?There is one more thing to consider. What Romney is doing doesn't fall into normal deductions that any reasonable person would take. He takes advantage of arcane loop holes such as the carried interest credit and equity pools.
actually, that's the definition of fair: "here are the [tax] rules; don't break them"Just because it is legal doesn't mean he is paying his fair share.
Bottom line right there!!actually, that's the definition of fair: "here are the [tax] rules; don't break them"
I thought we were talking about mitt romneynext, if you [at least mostly] agree w/ that, then where's all the hate come from when they get successful enough to break out nationally?
Money "tithed" to the church is tax deductible, allowing you to pay a lower overall tax burden. If the money wasn't given to the church, Mitt'd have to pay whatever his marginal tax rate on income was on that amount.and i love how you guys are willing to pretend that money not going to taxes is the same as giving it to the mormon church
You realize that debt is made up of two components, tax revenue taken in vs revenue spent, right?no, spending results in an increased debt
Not really. Unfair is a group of rich people lobbying (bribing) their congressmen to give them tax loopholes to allow them to pay a lower effective tax rate. Might be legal, but certainly not fair...actually, that's the definition of fair: "here are the [tax] rules; don't break them"
is it too obvious to point out the rules are identical for all charitable deductions, not just for magical undergarment textile fronts?Money "tithed" to the church is tax deductible, allowing you to pay a lower overall tax burden. If the money wasn't given to the church, Mitt'd have to pay whatever his marginal tax rate on income was on that amount.
correct; my attempt at pithiness was clumsy.You realize that debt is made up of two components, tax revenue taken in vs revenue spent, right?
fair is the golden ruleNot really. Unfair is a group of rich people lobbying (bribing) their congressmen to give them tax loopholes to allow them to pay a lower effective tax rate. Might be legal, but certainly not fair...
If the money wasn't given to the church, Mitt'd found some other place to donate it.Money "tithed" to the church is tax deductible, allowing you to pay a lower overall tax burden. If the money wasn't given to the church, Mitt'd have to pay whatever his marginal tax rate on income was on that amount.
Not collecting taxes is exactly the same as spending as far as the debt is concerned.no, spending results in an increased debt